Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2019 17:33:52 GMT
The Name of the Rose 9pm, BBC Two A 14th-century rural Italian monastery might not seem like the most riveting setting for one of the best-selling novels of all time but Umberto Eco’s 1983 thriller is a slow-burning, engrossing tale of murder and the power of belief. Starring Rupert Everett as megalomaniac inquisitor Bernard Gui and John Turturro as noble friar William of Baskerville, this lavish adaptation is an intricate, engaging introduction to Eco’s world of religious corruption.
I really liked the film, so I'll definitely give this a go.
|
|
|
Post by Miranda on Oct 11, 2019 17:48:32 GMT
I was just looking for a thread on this as I thought I'd seen one a couple of weeks ago. Must have been mentioned somewhere else.
I'll give this a watch.
|
|
|
Post by yankee on Oct 11, 2019 17:59:29 GMT
I watched it when it aired here. Being a mini-series they were able to draw the story out a lot more than they did in the film.
John Turturro is quite good. Beautifully filmed and great sets and scenery. Frankly though I found it boring. A muddled mess.
Usually I am very good with slow moving series that take their time to develop characters and plot (True Detective being a great example).
I enjoyed the film but I was disappointed by this.
One of the things that made it particularly confusing for me was that, when talking to each other, characters often mentioned other characters (both major and minor characters) who were not present and many had very similar sounding Italian names and/or titles and I often had no idea who they were discussing.
And given that most of the dialog is often delivered in a whisper (being that they are in an Abbey after all) that didn't help.
But anyway, give it a go and hopefully you will enjoy it more.
|
|
|
Post by goodhelenstar on Oct 11, 2019 18:03:02 GMT
I will too but with misgivings. I enjoyed the film but thought it was a pale shadow of the book (as films of books so often are, tbh) and Sean Connery was miscast as William, who is a kind of mediaeval Sherlock Holmes – ascetic, vain, clever, flawed. I did think though that the film really captured the bleakness of mediaeval lives and the fact that men often became monks for rather mundane reasons rather than a religious calling – at least that way they would be fed and watered, and a religious community was often just as corrupt as life outside the monastery walls.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2019 18:03:47 GMT
It is in eight episodes. I'm wondering if I'll record it to watch later, or just watch it on iPlayer, tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by linseed on Oct 11, 2019 18:36:50 GMT
I shall definitely watch it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2019 18:41:02 GMT
I sort of agree about Sean Connery. He didn't put me off the film, though. One thing this has done, though, is encourage me to get out the book which I have on my tablet; yet another book to bring out because of something on TV.
|
|
|
Post by yankee on Oct 11, 2019 18:47:39 GMT
I'm sure that people who read the book will have a lot easier time following the narrative of the story than I did as a casual viewer. There are a lot of intertwined stories going on all at once; changes in the church, politics, the debates at Abbey and of course the murders. A LOT of characters to sort through. Another thing that didn't help for me was the series was shown in 4 two-hour episodes. And each episode was broadcast a week apart. Even with recaps to start each episode, the week off between airings meant having to try and refamiliarize myself with the complex, convoluted plot. It might be one of those series where its better to binge watch the whole thing over a couple of evenings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2019 20:05:42 GMT
I've set it to record, and I'll watch the first episode later. Don't think I'll wait to binge though, I'm curious to see what they make of it, and I don't have the patience to wait.
|
|
|
Post by linseed on Oct 11, 2019 21:26:28 GMT
I so wanted to like this.i was fading in and out of consciousness, I’m not sure how much I saw and how much I dreamed
|
|
|
Post by goodhelenstar on Oct 12, 2019 10:25:16 GMT
Rather poor review in the Grauniad: www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/oct/11/the-name-of-the-rose-review-john-turturro-umberto-eco. The reviewer thought there were too many monks! Well, there would be, really, wouldn't there, in a monastery? I liked this first episode. I didn't particularly like the opening with Adso being encouraged by his father to get his kit off, but suppose it was there to show us the environment he grew up in and was escaping from by becoming a novice monk. Once the story got going it was recognisable from the book, and I thought the CGI was better than it normally is – I'm looking forward to seeing how they present the library. They got across the restricted lives of the monks very well, poverty of the local community, and growing sense of fear when the second body appeared. James Cosmo made me smile – a combination of his Bank of Scotland ad and Big Ger from the Rebus novels. He has an air of menace that is perfect for the role, though apparently in real life he's a great giggler and causes a lot of retakes because of corpsing! I don't suppose we'll see much of Tchéky Karyo (the Pope), unfortunately. Rupert Everett is shaping up to be a real b*****d as Bernard Gui. Other cast members whom I didn't know all seemed to me to be right for their roles, particularly the abbot. I'll definitely stick with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 11:40:49 GMT
I liked it. Definitely better than the film. I don't understand Lucy Mangan's review. It starts off really badly with her complaints of a monk soup. She needs to read the book. Overall her review is seriously snarky. Another of her big complaints is that the monks and the peasant classes seem not have bright colourful clothing. It looks as though she is going out of her way not to like it. A bit like her review of Chernobyl really.
I'm definitely going to continue to watch.
|
|
|
Post by marion on Oct 12, 2019 11:42:34 GMT
I seem to remember enjoying the book but not the film. I have recorded this to watch later, after all the gymnastics coverage is over and I have cleared some backlog! I hope it isnt too slow though.
|
|
|
Post by kabuki on Oct 12, 2019 16:27:35 GMT
I still like the film and will give this series a go.
|
|
|
Post by geometryman on Oct 12, 2019 21:41:31 GMT
There were things to like about it, but I was somewhat confused about which monk was which, even with the dialogue helpfully introducing each one. It did jump around quite a lot to start with before settling into the death investigation, and I found it quite hard to get into. I think this may be one of those (rare) series where it actually helps to have read the book (which I haven't). I'll continue with the next episode, but I'm less enthusiastic than some here.
|
|