War and Peace (BBC)

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

BBC's new adaptation of War and Peace starts this Sunday (Jan 3rd). Starring James Norton (Happy Valley), Lily James (Downton), Paul Dano, Jim Broadbent, Gillian Anderson, Stephen Rea and a whole heap of other people.

They filmed it entirely on location in Eastern Europe and it looks amazing. It spans about a decade, maybe more, of a spell history where Russia was constantly at war or about to go to war, and focuses on a few main characters and their struggles to just live in such a turbulent time.

I heard they were making this about a year or so ago and thought it sounded incredible. I read the book last year and was actually quite disappointed with the ending and found myself absolutely despising one of the main characters so my excitement for this adaptation has been dampened slightly. Still, it looks amazing, visually, if nothing else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-BCmUeHE5c

Harry Palmr

Stephen McRea, Gillian Anderson? I'm in

JP Liz V1

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Stephen McRea, Gillian Anderson? I'm in

James Norton I'm in

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I've just realised it's probably going to clash with the new Rebellion thing on RTÉ which also starts on Sunday night. Suppose that's what the catch up services are for.

JohnFalstaff

As always with the BBC it looks sumptuous, but I would have reservations about Andrew Davies' take on this screen version. In a recent interview he talks about how he added in incestuous sex scenes between Hélène and Anatole Kuragin that Tolstoy 'forgot'.

Now whether this was something he felt the screen adaptation needed, or whether it was at the behest of BBC execs, it does seem concocted to give Tolstoy's work a particular Game of Thrones flavour in order to attract viewers.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

As always with the BBC it looks sumptuous, but I would have reservations about Andrew Davies' take on this screen version. In a recent interview he talks about how he added in incestuous sex scenes between Hélène and Anatole Kuragin that Tolstoy 'forgot'.

Now whether this was something he felt the screen adaptation needed, or whether it was at the behest of BBC execs, it does seem concocted to give Tolstoy's work a particular Game of Thrones flavour in order to attract viewers.

I don't know. I thought it was heavily hinted at in the book, they've just decided to confirm it on TV. Neither character plays a huge role, him more so, but really it's of little consequence one way or the other.

JohnFalstaff

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I don't know. I thought it was heavily hinted at in the book, they've just decided to confirm it on TV. Neither character plays a huge role, him more so, but really it's of little consequence one way or the other.

That's sort of my point, they seem to be going out of their way to highlight this relationship, but maybe it is just to generate interest.

Either way I will still be interested in viewing the adaptation.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

That's sort of my point, they seem to be going out of their way to highlight this relationship, but maybe it is just to generate interest.

Either way I will still be interested in viewing the adaptation.

I found myself hoping if they were changing/adding things they'd change the ending too. Doubt it though.

brian_t

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Phwoar and Peace (BBC)

Fyp

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

That's sort of my point, they seem to be going out of their way to highlight this relationship, but maybe it is just to generate interest.

Technocentral

It's illegal to not cast Jim Broadbent in a historical drama.

Vic_08

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

As always with the BBC it looks sumptuous, but I would have reservations about Andrew Davies' take on this screen version. In a recent interview he talks about how he added in incestuous sex scenes between Hélène and Anatole Kuragin that Tolstoy 'forgot'.

Now whether this was something he felt the screen adaptation needed, or whether it was at the behest of BBC execs, it does seem concocted to give Tolstoy's work a particular Game of Thrones flavour in order to attract viewers.

I don't think it is fair to accuse them of copying GoT, Davies has been sexing up historical adaptations for a very long time now. Not saying that is particularly a bad thing, he is a very talented writer and his adaptations are always better than the average, sometimes better than the source material. However by far the best thing he ever produced was his self-penned 80's series A Very Peculiar Practice, absolute classic.

Heroditas

Technocentral wrote: »

It's illegal to not cast Jim Broadbent in a historical drama.

Don't worry. He's in one episode apparently!

The Rape of Lucretia

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I heard they were making this about a year or so ago and thought it sounded incredible.

BBC must still have high hopes for it, putting it out head to head with Rebellion. Bold move competing with a much closer to home the Russia serious drama exploring a major anniversary in British history.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

BBC must still have high hopes for it, putting it out head to head with Rebellion. Bold move competing with a much closer to home the Russia serious drama exploring a major anniversary in British history.

I assume you're being sarcastic there. Nobody in the UK gets RTÉ.

brian_t

If this series tweaks your interest in things Russian then you might be interested in Lucy Worsleys new series on Tsarist Russia.

Empire of the Tsars: Romanov Russia with Lucy Worsley starts on BBC 4 at 9pm on Wednesday 6th January

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

brian_t wrote: »

If this series tweaks your interest in things Russian then you might be interested in Lucy Worsleys new series on Tsarist Russia.

Empire of the Tsars: Romanov Russia with Lucy Worsley starts on BBC 4 at 9pm on Wednesday 6th January

Oooh. I love her programs.

Harry Palmr

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

BBC must still have high hopes for it, putting it out head to head with Rebellion. Bold move competing with a much closer to home the Russia serious drama exploring a major anniversary in British history.

Wha?

The Rape of Lucretia

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Wha?

Sorry, "than Russia".

lertsnim

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

BBC must still have high hopes for it, putting it out head to head with Rebellion. Bold move competing with a much closer to home the Russia serious drama exploring a major anniversary in British history.

I don't think the BBC really cares who is watching what here.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

lertsnim wrote: »

I don't think the BBC really cares who is watching what here.

They don't. It's why we got to watch The Fall a week or so before it aired on BBC and Mrs. Brown's Boys airs here first too. They pay no attention to Ireland.

razorblunt

I really dislike Paul Dano and his pursing of his lips he constantly does.
Unfortunately its a dislike that means I'll probably skip it.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

razorblunt wrote: »

I really dislike Paul Dano and his pursing of his lips he constantly does.
Unfortunately its a dislike that means I'll probably skip it.

I hated the character he plays when I read the book so that bodes well for me.

Harry Palmr

Poor Pierre! The sap!

I knew the battles scenes would be largely CGI muck but alas that doesn't make them any easier to watch.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Everyone I hated in the book were just as annoying on TV.
To be fair it's a difficult thing to adapt, there's something like 200 characters in the book and most of that first episode was trying to introduce them all.
Still... Pierre is such a gormless tool. Hate him most of all.

The Black Oil

Missed it. Is it being repeated?

eldude

I missed the 1st episode too , and it doesn't seem to be on catch up TV or youtube !!!anyone know where I can get it ???

lertsnim

eldude wrote: »

I missed the 1st episode too , and it doesn't seem to be on catch up TV or youtube !!!anyone know where I can get it ???

It's on the BBC iPlayer.

eldude

lertsnim wrote: »

It's on the BBC iPlayer.

Thanks lertsnim but BBC iPlayer isn't available in the Republic

Addle

Am loving this.
The romance of the last episode was great to watch.

I can't find it repeated anywhere unfortunately.

D9Male

It is very good TV. I think the actress playing Natasha is excellent. The set and the costumes are brilliant.

I read the book nearly 20 years ago, and was worried they would make a boll0cks of it. Mostly they have nailed it. Albeit Anatole doesn't covince.

trishasaffron

Heaving bosom drama......War & Peace by Jane Austen!!! Not a patch on the book or the Bondarchuk version.

D9Male

I think that is a bit unfair. Clearly a 6-part TV series is going to struggle to capture the complexity of one of the best books ever. But the portrayal of Helene, Pierre and Maria in particular is very good, and I think the dialogue is excellent for a show where the spectacle is clearly a big priority.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

D9Male wrote: »

I think that is a bit unfair. Clearly a 6-part TV series is going to struggle to capture the complexity of one of the best books ever. But the portrayal of Helene, Pierre and Maria in particular is very good, and I think the dialogue is excellent for a show where the spectacle is clearly a big priority.

I think it's a very accurate adaptation of the book. Unfortunately for me that's a bad thing as I hated it and nearly everyone in it. I had hoped they might come across better on screen but alas, no.

If you liked the book I'm sure this adaptation is great though.

The Rape of Lucretia

Its fantastic television making one way or the other.

Episode 3 in a phenomenal tour de force, Ep 4 almost as good. Stands with the finest of British TV series, but the lack of depth (havent read the book so hard to judge how much is being lost in the drastic cutting necessary - is it also so romantically centred ?) maybe hobbles it compared to Brideshead or P&P for example. The characters are terrific however (despite a little too much modern or colloquial 'Englishness' to some of the accents). I cant think of anything that tops it for visual excellence. Score also very good.
Cripes, but it must have cost a mint to make.

Harry Palmr

I'm enjoying it I have to say, the only thing holding it back is that naturally the BBC do not have countless millions and a Russia Army to throw at battle scenes unlike Sergie Bondarchuk in 1966/67 so they are very modest when we see them.

appledrop

I have been watching rebellion on rte so only catching up with War & Peace now. I'm 2 episodes in and I'm enjoying it but I don't love it like I usually would with BBC period dramas. I can't put my finger on what it is. Can't wait for Poldark series 2:)

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Its fantastic television making one way or the other.

Episode 3 in a phenomenal tour de force, Ep 4 almost as good. Stands with the finest of British TV series, but the lack of depth (havent read the book so hard to judge how much is being lost in the drastic cutting necessary - is its also so romantically centred ?) maybe hobbles it compared to Brideshead or P&P for example. The characters are terrific however (despite a little too much modern or colloquial 'Englishness' to some of the accents). I cant think of anything that tops it for visual excellence. Score also very good.
Cripes, but it must have cost a mint to make.

The fictional parts of the book are often interrupted with historic ramblings on the different battles, Napoleon and Alexander, the idea of destiny vs choice, how much of what happens in life that seems like one person's doing was actually set in motion years, decades, centuries before by someone else's actions etc. etc.

They've obviously cut all that out. No harm either as it got a bit boring after the first 600 pages of it.

There was way more personal stuff beyond the romantic relationships in the book too. The stuff with Pierre and the Freemasons goes way beyond what they've shown on TV. There's a whole bit where he tries to improve the lives of his serfs (which they showed) but then goes off and never bothers to see any of it's done and the guys overseeing his estates don't bother their backsides doing any of it. And while Pierre is off feeling great about himself and how good he is Andrei has done far more for his serfs but doesn't go around looking for a pat on the back for it.

Pierre really was an insufferable idiot in the book, they seem to have diluted that aspect of him down on TV, I suppose as he's supposed to be the central character.

But yes, in short, there was a lot more in the book than what they're showing on this series, a lot of the characters musing to themselves about life and war and other such things, Andrei has a whole moment with the sky at one point.

The stuff they've cut isn't really stuff that would make you go "OH MY GOD! I can't believe they cut that bit out!" but a lot of it would have given a bit more depth (or a completely different point of view) to certain characters.

There was also far more stuff with the men off at war. Budget constraints may have played a part in cutting that but again you got a slightly more rounded look at the likes of Boris, Nicolai and Andrei.

The Rape of Lucretia

jmcc wrote: »

Things not going well for the Down Town Abbey fans so a diversion is thrown into the thread?

Regards...jmcc

WTF ?

jmcc

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

WTF ?

Wrong thread.

Regards...jmcc

Harry Palmr

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

But yes, in short, there was a lot more in the book than what they're showing on this series, a lot of the characters musing to themselves about life and war and other such things, Andrei has a whole moment with the sky at one point.

Musing about life, the universe and everything makes for very poor television by and large though the 'moment with the sky' was included.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Musing about life, the universe and everything makes for very poor television by and large though the 'moment with the sky' was included.

No I agree, even in the book it's boring. They could have shaved about 400 pages, at least, off it, in my opinion.

They did put in the sky bit, briefly, but it went on for much longer in the book and he recounts it to Pierre in great detail too, and it kind of comes up again a few time, I think. It was an important moment for Andrei because it changed his entire outlook on life.

That's my point though, they haven't cut anything that was really important. They may have condensed it down to a brief moment but the important stuff is there.

For example the bit with the hunt from last Sunday's episode went on for ages in the book. It was a whole sort of peeing contest thing between Nikolai and their neighbour. It was all kind of pointless though so they've only shown it briefly and basically used it to show Nikolai doesn't like Andrei.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Not sure about how they handled that Andrei/Natasha business. I'm pretty sure in the book he wasn't so harsh on her. He left and went to war again but they seem to have rewritten that a little bit here to make Pierre look like the hero and Andrei a bit of a jerk.

Harry Palmr

They gave Borodino a decent go, the field hospital looked suitable horrific! "show me my leg!"

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Harry Palmr wrote: »

They gave Borodino a decent go, the field hospital looked suitable horrific! "show me my leg!"

It's interesting that they haven't really shown that much of the War part and much more of the Peace part.
Battles are hard to do though, I suppose, and expensive. The way they did that shot of Pierre after the explosion was pretty good though.

Interested to hear other people's opinions of Pierre? I bloody hated him in the book, thought he was possibly the most annoying character I'd ever come across and kept waiting for the rest of the characters to realise he was a giant pain in the bum. They seem to have written him slightly differently here but there's no way to have him randomly show up on a battlefield for no bloody reason getting in the way and not have him seem like a complete fool.

Harry Palmr

Well he was bumbling "excuse me" about wasn't he? Of course you could argue any commander would have decked him with a rifle butt and sent him packing tied to a horse except in the chaos maybe no one would give enough of a damn. Yes the tumbling upside-down camera was an imaginative touch.

The Rape of Lucretia

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Interested to hear other people's opinions of Pierre? I bloody hated him in the book, thought he was possibly the most annoying character I'd ever come across and kept waiting for the rest of the characters to realise he was a giant pain in the bum. They seem to have written him slightly differently here but there's no way to have him randomly show up on a battlefield for no bloody reason getting in the way and not have him seem like a complete fool.

Based only on this series, I think he is a very interesting character, and the one that would most prompt me to read the book. Accidental aristo, seduced by his easy life, fattening and a drunkard as he said tonight, but intelligent, and struggling to find some meaning, whether through his serfs, his masons, his deep love for his friends, his non event of a marriage, and so prone to spur of the moment jumps to try to gee himself on - the duel, or dashing off to the front line of the war. Paul Dano plays him very well I think, but as I say, coming at him with no preconceived view other than the roll of these episodes.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Based only on this series, I think he is a very interesting character, and the one that would most prompt me to read the book. Accidental aristo, seduced by his easy life, fattening and a drunkard as he said tonight, but intelligent, and struggling to find some meaning, whether through his serfs, his masons, his deep love for his friends, his non event of a marriage, and so prone to spur of the moment jumps to try to gee himself on - the duel, or dashing off to the front line of the war. Paul Dano plays him very well I think, but as I say, coming at him with no preconceived view other than the roll of these episodes.

In the book he comes across, to me anyway, as just this bumbling idiot who lets everyone else make his decisions for him. Someone brought him back to Russia, one guy tells him he shouldn't expect to inherit, he accepts, someone else tells him he should inherit, he accepts, someone tells him he should marry Helene, he accepts, someone tells him he should be a Freemason, he accepts etc. etc. etc. He talks and talks about doing this or doing that but never actually gets around to doing any of it but manages to convince himself that he's done it.

I don't know..... I just found him insufferable and as the book went on I realised that he's supposed to be the central character, he's the one that ties the other characters together and I think we're actually supposed to like him. I haven't been able to find any reviews of the book that hate him as much as I do so it may be a very unique opinion. I just hated everything about him.

Like I said they seem to have made him a little more self aware in the TV show and some of the bits they've cut out or trimmed down, like the Freemason business, do make him slightly less aggravating but I still find him insufferable. Pretty much the only decision he makes for himself is to take a jolly to the middle of a battlefield and just join in... I mean, COME ON, MAN!

The Rape of Lucretia

Well that was very good. Fine TV, an look forward to watching it through again, and want to read the book.

Guessing, but feel it is only a slice of the book, not just in the length which clearly it had to be, but also in breadth - the series seems like it would have more accurately been titled "Love and Loneliness", rather than War and Peace. A necessary compromise to squeeze some consistent essence out of it for 6 hours screentime, but only scratching the surface of even the subset of characters. Nevertheless, very fine.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Well that was very good. Fine TV, an look forward to watching it through again, and want to read the book.

Guessing, but feel it is only a slice of the book, not just in the length which clearly it had to be, but also in breadth - the series seems like it would have more accurately been titled "Love and Loneliness", rather than War and Peace. A necessary compromise to squeeze some consistent essence out of it for 6 hours screen time, but only scratching the surface of even the subset of characters. Nevertheless, very fine.

There are a ridiculous amount of characters in the book and there's a lot more War time in it too. They did a good job though of getting the essence of the book into 6 hours. They even expanded on Helene a little bit at the end there, that whole thing was rather vague in the book.

That said I still hated Pierre. I have genuinely never hated a fictional character more and I must say Paul Dano played him excellently because I wanted to kick his face in every time he was on screen

The Rape of Lucretia

Pierre seemed the most interesting character I thought. Complex, and the observing, thinking centre of all the rest; his own experiences, the other characters, events of the time, and the world and life in general. You pretty much feel he is Tolstoy himself, or his eyes and mind, making sense of life.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Pierre seemed the most interesting character I thought. Complex, and the observing, thinking centre of all the rest; his own experiences, the other characters, events of the time, and the world and life in general. You pretty much feel he is Tolstoy himself, or his eyes and mind, making sense of life.

I know I'm very much alone in my feelings about Pierre. I just found him unbelievably irritating. Every week he had some new outlook on life and was going to be this or that and then he'd meet someone else and be on to the next thing. Last week he randomly decided he fancies a jolly to the battlefield and then this week he's decided it's his destiny to kill Napoleon, gets distracted getting drunk, gets himself arrested as soon as he steps outside and marched off with the French and still manages to survive and end up getting a happily ever after!!

If he were alive today he's be a vegan and he'd love telling you about it.