Reviews

Could not manage to watch all of the first season. Started skipping ahead in fourth episode, then went to end of sixth episode.

I like the actors, both the main actors and supporting, but, OMG, it could have been two episodes shorter each season.

Two primary objections which were, unfortunately, present throughout.

Tedious would be the most accurate description I can think of. All this drawn-out suspense. I see this more and more, milking it way beyond reason.

I don't understand why writers and directors do that, I really don't understand why viewers like it.

The other thing is the timeline jumping around: WHY?

I hope they got Food Network people to produce this because if this reflects the PBS current gestalt, what PBS thinks makes for worthwhile viewing and entertainment, woe is us.

The noise, the contrived comments and "dialogue" are simply embarrassing. They have taken the appeal of simplicity and turned it into simple-minded.

It has been difficult to see what PBS has become. First it was the Newshour, then strange dramas and what they now call Masterpiece Theater; heck, the odd NOVA shows which may as well be The History Channel or The Discovery Channel. I figured they thought they had to change with the times and initially I was sympathetic. And, maybe they have increased their viewer numbers, maybe they are getting more MONEY - likely, given the commercials now.

They have taken the concept of dumbing-down to new heights.

But when I saw a clip advertising this cooking show, what they apparently think will draw in their audience, "If I'm not cooking for you I don't love you.", I realized they have completed their transition. And it no longer includes me.

It is so mind-boggling to me.

I liked both of the first two seasons, especially the first, but the second was still in keeping with what I feel was a subtle, i.e., nuanced, approach to international politics, domestic politics, differences in cultures and societies.

Within no time at all, into the beginning of the third season the propoganda nonsense hit the dialogue and the story.

In fact, this is the second time I have watched this series. And the first two seasons were good enough that I managed to forget how bad the third season is. I will continue to watch - I think - and maybe I'll get a sense this time of why they decided to dumb-down.

Was it new writers? Producers? Pressure from 'above'? What a shame.

I was pleasantly surprised.

I was not sure at first, it had been awhile since I watched the first episode, so perhaps I was not initially impressed. That it was based on a story by Len Deighton may have put me off initially.

Into the second episode, I became interested. Yes it is not a new story: but there are no new stories, so that didn't really bother me.

I thought the cast was very good, and I don't know why people complain about the diction; I had no trouble understanding the dialogue.

And, the dialogue was pretty good, they didn't waste words which is one of my main complaints, especially about anything political. They also didn't waste time with phony suspense, nor violence.

Altogether I thought it was a good production and I wish they had gone on.

Everything about this series is a relief.

A relief because I am not watching while wondering why they cast this person, why the writing is questionable, why the dialog doesn't make sense, etc., etc.

It is quick, it is timely, it is hilarious - yet, in its own way, serious.

I am a fan of espionage and intelligence stories, unfortunately I find most to be a bit too common in their grasp of the politics. It has been awhile since I finished the third season, and there may have been a few references to Cold War politics, anti-Russia stuff, that were a bit naive, but I guess they have to appeal to everyone. Whatever they were, they weren't so bad that I can recall what they were.

The production hits the mark on every level as far as I am concerned. It keeps me interested, it doesn't overdo suspense with gimmicks, and, it makes me laugh outloud.

The theme song: goes without saying.

The reviews clearly reveal different tastes among viewers. Massively different.

When I saw the review stating that Season One was lightweight ... well, I agreed. As I continued to read that review, the viewer was happily surprised to find Season Two more complex and more to the viewer's liking. Astonishment barely describes my reaction.

I was also drawn by Julian Fellowes' involvement, and I did like Downton Abbey which had complexities of character and plot, including awareness of timely social and political matters, and benefitted from the cast. Although, it must be said that before Downton there were some very good period drama productions that did not cater to a a more dumbed-down and Americanized audience. In other words, as much as I like Fellowes, I'm not sure I would consider Downon the standard.

The first season of Belgravia was simpler (I'm avoiding using the term simple-minded) and did benefit from casting. The second season: the only word I can use to describe the production value, cast, acting, and the story (granted I am only a few minutes into the second episode, but I fear I won't make it much further) is inane.

I fully expected to like this.

The actors, particularly the main actors. I like them both.

Awfully long and drawn out vignettes - to what purpose? I was sure it would improve: not the acting which was fine, again, especially Capaldi and Jumbo, but also the supporting cast was good.

When there was dialogue it was generally okay, even some good exchanges and lines.

But for some reason, somebody wanted everything drawn out. It was annoying during the early episodes, just got worse. Admittedly, I do not like gimmicks for suspense: lengthy pauses, etc., and I like special effects (like the slow motion) even less.

I ended up not seeing the end. By the last 30-35 minutes I was impatient, by the last 15 minutes, I gave up. So I still don't know whay "it" happened.

A shame.

I came here to write a review, asking what happened?

I really like this show, but over the last episode or so I've started to feel like I am watching a Lifetime soap opera.

The fact that they address not only cultural but political complexities is what kept me watching from the first show. Well, that and the writing and, of course, the acting. It helps that I like the actors. And, even though I tend not to be into identity-anything, I like that there are many women: and not being one 'type'.

But, seriously?

Even the music has changed, and now seems to enhance the mushiness.

Yet looking at the other reviews, I see that I am the outlier.

Oh, well. I just hope the edge and the focus will return.

The production quality is abysmal.

I just don't understand what is happening with British television. Have they somehow decided to join the race to the bottom with American television?

It is difficult to separate the production quality from the acting and the actors; not to mention the writing and dialogue.

The errors are blatant and it is not as if the story is are compelling enough to compensate for sloppy production.

There are several actors I usually like, Joanna Lumley, Richard Armitrage, and of course, Adeel Akhtar. And, they are why I gave this three tries.

There have been several other British series over the last few years that have been of similar quality. It is distressing to an old television hound like me.

I will. Wait. For. My full review. Will. Try. To. Get. Close to 600 as. Their. Arbitrary standard. For how they. Determine. If. A. review. Is worthy.

But, wanted to express. My great. Relief. That. They, so far, seem. To. Be using. The same theme song.

Why. Is. That. Important?

Because. It sets. The. Mood..

I. Looked. At. Some reviews: I. Am. Not expecting it to. Be. "the. Same. Shetland". That's okay.

I have. Never. Been. Crazy about Ashley. Jensen but I love Tosh, Alison. O'Donnell so I am really glad. She. Is still here. I. hope. She will. Be. Central. She is so. Good. At. Understatement.

First episode was difficult, I made it through and by second episode it seemed they might salvage it.

The plot was more than a bit fantastical, but with sophisticated dialogue and character development, and, good acting, that is tolerable and sometimes irrelevant to me.

This is the second British series I've recently watched (the other was Happy Valley) that seems to celebrate duplicity. I neither expect, nor do I want, all characters to be true and upstanding, etc., etc. I don't even care if there is not one character I find appealing.

But making heroines out of self-centered bullies is annoying and cheap. And that is at its best, because beyond that, it is boring.

I hoped the first episodes of this new season, Season 26, were outliers. Despite having been increasingly put-off over the last several seasons, I guess I did not want to see it as a trend. Or see myself as desperate to watch this stuff.

The headline for the review I just read, "What Happened?" could not be more apt - unless one was to be downright nasty.

I found the attraction of Silent Witness to be not just the effort at rigorous science, but also the efforts to show the importance of rigorous ethics. Romance, inter-department politics, broader politics, drama, suspense, and, yes, diversity, were always involved but they were not used as gimmicks nor were they typically embellished by gimmicks - I think what another reviewer referred to as cliches and soap opera style storytelling. What another reviewer called "lazy rubbish".

I live in the US and stopped watching most American / Hollywood television and movie productions years ago. I have noticed over the last few years that too many of the British, and French and even Scandinavian productions have taken to cheap and lazy production efforts: whether it is writing, plots, themes, dialogue. After all, there is always Lifetime or Hallmark which I consider only marginally worse than the US MSM network shows..

I do not agree that it must be past its natural lifespan. Exercise rigor in writing - please.

It is disappointing.

I think it is brilliant. Yes, brilliant.

From the casting to the writing to the acting.

The production quality, the dialogue, the camp. It is both sweet and hilarious, fun and touching; and, despite some other comments, it is intelligent.

King Louis is simply perfect, which I hesitate to say because I think all the actors are noteworthy in their roles. And that includes those making guest appearances.

I do not know the book well enough to compare, and whether or not it is faithful to the original is irrelevant - IMO.

I am watching the series for the third time and I am sure I will return again.

The acting is painfully convincing. The deliberate (at least I assume it is deliberate) and contrasting portraits of a duplicitous but socially-acceptable character with a manipulative criminal is interesting. I've known both types and it is chilling how one maintains the facade, helped by generally - though not always - not breaking the law. Both have their obsessions, but, again, one is socially acceptable and one is not. One stops her cruelty short of murder, the other does not. Granted, that is an important distinction, though in personal relationships, cruelty is cruelty regardless of whether or not a "crime" has been committed.

This dynamic only becomes more extreme as the series continues.

I wonder who conceived this theme. It is effective if difficult to watch.

I hope the rest of this final season is not THIS bad.

Oh, and speaking of bad: this is one of those forums that requires quantity, quality being incidental I guess.

Let's see: 426, oops 421, oh, I mean 399 ... I think the Lynley series has always been a bit shaky, and the series is generally too schmalzy for my taste, but nonetheless somehow compelling.

I never read the books, so I don't know if it is inherent in the novels or something that was done as part of the production.

I don't know what happened in this episode, but I almost stopped several times. It is an embarrassment and I imagine all involved must have felt the same.

There seems to be a lack of precision that I used to expect. In the past apparent inconsistencies, typically plot issues, but also sometimes errors in behaviors (eg.: something done that one knows makes no sense) would be addressed as the story continued. Now it is as if they think the viewer is too stupid to notice.

Whether it is plot, theme, or dialogue, just throwing in unanswered questions or strange exchanges as if that automatically makes things more interesting I think is a mistake.

Complexity is essential, but it looks to be less a matter of complexity and more a matter of carelessness or sloppiness.

I'll start with two excerpts from another review by "altereggo123:

The subtlety is lost, political correctness takes over.

Season 3 also replaces careful plotting with gimmicks

And to add my two bits to those comments: oh goodie:action, action,action - boooring; younger characters - fine except there is no there there, the political correctness includes having bought into Russia bashing ..., and whatever happened to speaking clearly, heaven forbid speaking grammatically?

The real killers are the loss of subtlety and the use of utterly common gimmicks as if that can replace plot and theme, not to mention dialogue. As in intelligent dialogue.

What a shame.

I just watched this series again. And, because the first two seasons were pretty good, I had forgotten what a fiasco season 3 is. Hilarious in some ways: like talking about NordStream - not by name, of course - and laying the ground work for US innocence in Ukraine.

What I wish, is that someone would write one of these that isn't just parroting the party-line, corporate MSM, and the very tired propaganda we've been living with for decades.

These things always have implausbile events, interactions, etc., and this one does. But the fact that someone working on this thing did not know that a person with a severely injured hand would not let it hang is just too distracting.

Initially it seemed awkward and contrived, but looking at it without considering Call My Agent, I think it is working quite well. One of the characters looks like she is trying to be an actress in Twenty-Twelve, and it is almost embarrassing, but I do not think they are replicas of the French production, and I am enjoying it. Especially if they continue to relax.

I hope there is more. I ended up really liking it.

Apparently I need another one-hundred characters. Part of the reason I liked this show is that there was not a bunch of extraneous stuff, unnecessary gimmicks relative to relationships and action.

Now I hope that is 150 characters.

I think Outhwaite is okay and it is a difficult position to fill.

It's the tone that bothers me: saccharine and what I call "gimmicky".

But "lithium addict"? Really?

I've only just started the series. So much seems good, but they could use some subtlety: they have made the dialogue and characters so extreme. I just hope it improves.

The reviewers who suggested waiting were right. It is definitely light, but I do not think the writing or the acting are bad and I will continue to watch. There are times when light sweetness is a necessary respite.

Every time I think they're pulling out of the silliness, they dive back in. It's a shame.