Kylie Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 And I'll be eagerly anticipating your review! Goodness knows when we'll get to see it here. Quote
Weave Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 And I'll be eagerly anticipating your review! Goodness knows when we'll get to see it here. I think you can watch it on bbc iplayer ~ http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/ Quote
Kylie Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 I tried the link but it's for UK residents only. And I saw an Orson Welles program that looked good too! Oh well, I'll just have to wait until it shows here. Thanks anyway Quote
Weave Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 I tried the link but it's for UK residents only. And I saw an Orson Welles program that looked good too! Oh well, I'll just have to wait until it shows here. Thanks anyway Sorry Kylie, that is so annoying Quote
Raven Posted December 29, 2009 Author Posted December 29, 2009 And I'll be eagerly anticipating your review! Goodness knows when we'll get to see it here. You didn't miss anything . . . Quote
Kylie Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Oh dear In what ways was it different to the book? Or are there too many differences to list? Quote
Weave Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) Oh dear In what ways was it different to the book? Or are there too many differences to list? It was different to the book Kylie, there was certain aspects which we were changed to this day and age (obiviously mobile phones, etc). The reason why Bill was interested in Triffids was changed, the ending was totally different, It was watchable but I did not see Dougray Scott as Bill Masen, I always saw Bill Masen as driven in the book but in the show he was, to a point. I hope that makes some sense. Edited December 30, 2009 by Weave Quote
pontalba Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Oh Drat. I loved the book, and the BBC version from 1981 was true to the book as I recall. Oh well, it's a moot point as I'm in the U.S., so the question of watching it won't come up for a while I suppose. Quote
Weave Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Oh Drat. I loved the book, and the BBC version from 1981 was true to the book as I recall. Oh well, it's a moot point as I'm in the U.S., so the question of watching it won't come up for a while I suppose. I liked the BBC version from 1981 too pontalba Quote
Stephanie2008 Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 I Sky+ both episode so will watch them sometime over the next week Quote
Mia Posted January 2, 2010 Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) I haven't read the book, so I can't compare it to that, but it was pretty poor. I hated Dougray Scott as the lead - he's got one of those low, monotone voices and I couldn't tell what he was saying half the time. Eddie Izzard - I can't stand him anyway. I couldn't understand why someone didn't just shoot him. At least he got his comeuppance eventually. The Triffids themselves were of the sub-Dr Who effects circa1960s type, pathetic rubber things that were laughable. I'd have thought that in this day and age of CGI etc they could have done something better. What did I like about it? Er... The two sweet gun-wielding girls made me laugh and probably had more bravery than anyone else, but they probably weren't in the book anyway. The second episode was better than the first (not difficult), but all in all it was pretty dire. I expected so much more. Edited January 2, 2010 by Mia Some spoilers put in for those who haven't seen it yet. Quote
SueK Posted January 5, 2010 Posted January 5, 2010 Quite agree, I thought this was a bad adaptation. Shame on BBC yet again for failing to come up with the goods at Christmas, as previously stated, 39 Steps last year was just awful - I mean fancy having the climax in Scotland when it was supposed to be on the South Coast:motz: I think ITV drama did better with the Poirot episodes. Quote
Kell Posted January 5, 2010 Posted January 5, 2010 I was rather disappointed - didn't like Dougray Scott in the lead (but then, I'm not a fan of his anyway). Didn't think much of "Jo" either - she was a bit namby-pamby to be honest. Eddie Izzard though - I love him as a bad guy. Jason Priestly didn't get enough screen time so we never really got to know his character at all, which was a shame, because I think he's a pretty decent actor. Actually, despite him being American, I think I wold have preferred him in the lead! Quote
~Andrea~ Posted January 8, 2010 Posted January 8, 2010 I quite liked it, although it wasn't completely true to the book. I would have preferred the opening scenes to be that of the book, where he just wakes up in hospital, much more suspenseful. I thought Eddie Izzard was great. It was enjoyable enough, not earth shattering, but fairly decent. Quote
Raven Posted January 25, 2010 Author Posted January 25, 2010 I finally got around to watching part two of this last night. Oh dear . . . What a dreadful waste of time and money. Quote
Nicola Booth Posted January 25, 2010 Posted January 25, 2010 I must be in the minority then cos I really enjoyed this two part drama. Didn't catch it over Christmas as we had visitors so had recorded it and this enabled us to watch it back to back. Also really enjoyed the 39 Steps last Christmas and have since seen film. Thought they were quite close. It was the film with Kenneth More. Quote
Raven Posted January 25, 2010 Author Posted January 25, 2010 Also really enjoyed the 39 Steps last Christmas and have since seen film. Thought they were quite close. It was the film with Kenneth More. As much as I like Kenneth Moore, that version is very much the weaker of the three films that exist. Try to get hold of a copy of the original Hitchcock version, it really is miles better! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.