| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| blackfootblood |
Posted - January 23 2008 : 6:14:52 PM
I just came across a magazine article about a new upcoming mini series on HBO coming this March. Thought I would bring it to your attention. It takes place during the Revolutionary War and it is base on some interesting new facts that might make you think a bit differently toward the conflict and those times. Worth a look into, here's the site: www.johnadams08.com
Here's a video clip: HBO Films: John Adams: Long Lead Tease!
The full URL to the above clip is located here:
http://www.hbo.com/index.shtml?aggregator=raf&title=HBO%20Films%3A%20John%20Adams%3A%20Long%20Lead%20Tease&movie=/av/events/johnadams/john_adams_112§ion=films&num=1194301878547&tunein=
|
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Irishgirl |
Posted - September 22 2008 : 09:14:58 AM
Well Congratulations to all involved in this brilliant mini-series. For those who don't know it took home 8 Emmys last night.
Best Mini-series
Best Actor........Paul Giamatti
Best Actress......Laura Linney
Supporting Actor..Tom Wilkinson
Best Casting
Cinematography
Best Costumes
Best Prosthetic Make-up
Laura Linney really deserved her Emmy as did Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti
 |
| Bookworm |
Posted - August 17 2008 : 2:36:29 PM
I've watched the entire series and have been trying to organize my thoughts, as I had decidedly mixed reactions. Here goes:
The biggest positive, IMHO, was the realistic way the colonial era was portrayed. Abigail picks up a rifle from above or near the front door, not (thank God!) over the fireplace. The interiors of residences, even those of prosperous people, are relatively spare (not cluttered with five or ten of everything, as in the renovated homes that appear in Early American Life). A blanket hangs over a door to keep out the cold. Etc. Anyone who looks back to this era through rose-colored glasses, seeing it as a simpler, happier, more serene time, should contemplate traveling through snow and blowing winds on horseback, or having a mastectomy without anesthetic, or being inoculated against smallpox with pus from a dying victim, or BEING that dying victim.
Or, God forbid, being tarred, feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail. I agree, WW, that was a difficult scene to watch. Could anyone have survived such treatment? It must have resulted in third-degree burns over most of the body. Violence in movies rarely bothers me, but this was different -- because the mob took such gleeful pleasure in their cruelty, maybe? I'm glad the series was honest enough not to pretend that our Revolution was conducted entirely by high-minded philosophers and brave lads with muskets.
Laura Linney was wonderful as Abigail. I liked especially the forthright way she would notify John that a character flaw ("Vanity!") was getting in the way of his better judgment. Tom Wilkinson was also wonderful as Ben Franklin, but that almost seems like an easy role, perhaps because Franklin revealed so much of himself (no pun intended) in print and seems the most modern of the Founders. Stephen Dillane's portrayal of Jefferson was interesting --at first I thought, "Jefferson wasn't like that," then realized that I have no clue what Jefferson was like, so that portrayal was perfectly valid. Perhaps he revealed less of himself than any of the others, and so we can't form a clear mental image of him. (Joseph Ellis wrote a book about him entitled "American Sphinx.")
Now for the bad news: I have to agree with Fitz that Paul Giamatti was miscast as John Adams. He is a very good actor (in "The Illusionist" and "Sideways," for example), and in the scenes where Adams' strengths are on display, such as the Boston Massacre trial, he did a very fine job. Where Adams' faults are being emphasized, however, something was missing, and he seemed almost laughable. I don't know how to describe what was missing except with that overused word "gravitas." As an illustration, consider how different Adams would have seemed if portrayed by my first choice for the role, Russell Crowe. Nothing, no emotion or quality of character, would ever be missing. Even when he was being shown as petulant or vain or whatever, Adams' seriousness of purpose and depth of character would always have been there, and would keep the portrayal from descending into caricature. In this regard, I thought the portrayal of Adams in "The Adams Chronicles" (whoever that was) was better.
As others have said, I thought that David Morse's portrayal of Washington was right for the older Washington but not for the younger. Morse as the Washington of 1775 didn't strike me as a great leader of men, which everyone agrees Washington was.
Two final notes on fashion:
1) It was such a relief to leave behind the garish, cluttered, over-the-top magnificence of France for the cool, understated colors and designs of colonial and federal America!
2) Men should never have abandoned tricorns. Nothing since has looked as good.
|
| Fitzhugh Williams |
Posted - August 16 2008 : 11:51:03 PM
If I remember correctly, the French of which you speak are the Republican French, the scum of the Paris sewers, who murdered their king and replaced him with a tyranical despot. They murdered God's regent on earth and installed in his place men who know not God. We serve His Most Christan Majesty, King Louis XV.
|
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - August 16 2008 : 10:05:06 PM
No doubt.
Those French... they really are something else, aren't they? Tsk, tsk, tsk....... |
| richfed |
Posted - August 16 2008 : 09:22:09 AM
I am afraid that you are correct, Miss Wilderness -- I think it has to do with the production's portrayal of the French, in episode 3, I think it was. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - August 11 2008 : 08:27:40 AM
Guess we'll never convince him, Rich.  |
| Fitzhugh Williams |
Posted - August 10 2008 : 11:39:24 PM
Yes, WW, I too felt emotion when the series was over. Relief. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - August 10 2008 : 7:47:39 PM
Well, I too finished watching the entire series last night. No, I didn't do it all in one day... it took several. And I am still trying to catch my breath and my thoughts and my emotions.
I agree with pretty much everything Rich and Red have said. I, too, was overcome with emotion as the series came near the end. I felt John Adams' pain and disappointment as he left the office of President, absolutely certain that he would be totally forgotten in the history of the nation he worked so hard to help create. How I hated to see "my Dear Friend" Abigail die! I have come to admire this remarkable woman even more than I did before. I truly believe that in today's world, she would make an immediate and important mark in history, even more than she did 225 years ago.
I really have very few quibbles with the authenticity thing. OK, so Abigail wore a couple of strange and non-existent garments in a couple of scenes. In the inoculation scene, she stripped down to her stays and shift, but her shift was sleeveless. There was no such thing, but that's a very minor point. All in all, the costuming was absolutely spot-on. Oh, those French gowns! Ooo-la-la! And as time passed, the clothing styles changed appropriately. Very well done!
The portrayals. I thought they were all magnificent, too, Rich, except for one. I do still have a problem with the way David Morse as Washington was made up. When he was only 44, he looked 64. But, when he was the President, his age looked about right. I felt that David Morse's portrayal was a bit wooden, and lacked personality. Washington had a personality. He was charming, loved to dance, and was a good conversationalist in social situations. I also didn't care for the way he spoke. Of course, we don't know how Washington sounded, and I have read that he was very soft-spoken, except when he was angry and he shouted and swore. But, I didn't care for the rough, harsh sound of Morse's voice. Nit-picking? Yes, but this is my Hero we are talking about here! All in all, I was disappointed with this characterization.
Fitz, you mentioned that you didn't care for the way the Founding Fathers were portrayed and presented. Having watched it now, I must disagree, except about Washington. But, I thought Stephan Dillane as Thomas Jefferson was fantastic, and I thought that Tom Wilkinson's portrayal of Ben Franklin was absolute genius.
As I was watching this series, like you, Rich, I was so completely and utterly drawn in to it. I felt like I was there. When I watched the tar and feathering scene, I gasped right out loud. I had read of this horrible practice, of course, but watching the indignity of being stripped totally naked in front of a crowd and watching the pain on the man's face as the hot tar was poured over his body... I was greatly affected. I loved the little details that were thrown in, that many people may not have caught: yes, Abigail really did hang laundry in the unfinished rooms of the White House.
Yes, it was a glorious time. I marvel in disbelief every time I think about that time in our history, and about the men and women who were involved in creating and shaping our country. It just blows my mind. But, you know... as I was watching this, I kept thinking: we have practically made these men into gods! But, they were just... men... just human beings who had normal personalities. They fought amongst themselves, they created and loved their families, they had friendships that lasted for lifetimes, but they were just.... men.
Ah, but what men they were! |
| richfed |
Posted - August 10 2008 : 2:52:40 PM
After watching - finally - the last 2 episodes of this wonderfully crafted telling of an almost magical period in our collective histories, I give this production an unadulterated THUMBS UP!!
To anyone who might quibble with any of its inaccuracies, consider just enjoying its very many accuracies! And, positives! What a cast, what a score, what a bevy of superb sets [some real!] and costumes, portrayals of characters we have come to know as super-humans as mere mortals, realism, humor, sadness ... such a story!
I thought that Washington, Jefferson, Franklin,and Adams ... Hamilton, too, were made to look remarkably similar to the real things. Uncanny, at times, almost.
Parts IV & V - outstanding! It all becomes too much to bear for this viewer. As the characters age - and die - the emotional attachment one develops after viewing for so many hours makes it hard not to shed a tear. Compelling drama. Again, such wonderfully done little snippets of history we do see - one, the removal of a cancerous breast, is particularly gut-wrenching. We saw it all, from the Boston Massacre, to Continental Congresses, to readings of the Declaration, to Inaugurations and Presidencies --- we saw the crises of everyday life, successes, failures, farming, love, friendships, and rivalries. Just tremendous work all the way around.
I think that the best praise I could give John Adams would be that it felt more like I was reading a good book than watching a movie. It made me want to get to know this friend - these friends, the Founding Fathers - even more.
What a glorious time. Washington, first President of a country that arose as a direct result of his little ambush on some Frenchmen in the Pennsylvania wilderness decades earlier ... Adams and Jefferson dying on the very same day, July 4th, the 50th anniversary of the Declaration ...
Humbling ... all of it.
I think John Adams would be proud and satisfied - redeemed, even - that he was remembered after all these years in such a way.
PS - I had never heard of Laura Linney before. My son was over the other day looking over the DVD case, and said, "Oh! Laura Linney! She reminds me of Madeleine Stowe." After watching the "Making of ..." feature included on the DVD, I agree - except for the blue eyes. Maybe, it's the dimples? In any event, she is a very gifted actress. |
| blackfootblood |
Posted - August 07 2008 : 4:52:25 PM
quote:
First, I think there need to be more subtitled dates at the bottom of the screen. The time is (for me) often hard to gauge, especially since none of the characters seems to age except John and Abigail and Thomas Jefferson. The Adams children stay the same age until Episode 5 when suddenly they're all grown up. Washington looks way too old at the beginning of the series and doesn't age any beyond his initial appearance. Especially by Episodes 4 and 5 I was having a hard time keeping up with the elapsed time and I had to look up John Adams on Wikipedia (to my chagrin  ) to learn that his second trip to Europe lasted nine years. More subtitled dates would have been great!
I do agree, Red. I was quite lost some of the time because they didn't keep ya posted on what year it was. If they did, I would have caught on faster. |
| RedFraggle |
Posted - August 07 2008 : 3:49:47 PM
quote:
Originally posted by richfed
A night or two after I posted the above "review", I watched Part 3. I was a bit disappointed in that segment - not sure why - but I thought that I perhaps had given my accolades too soon.... Again, Laura Linney is unconditionally perfect, IMHO, in this role. A show stealer. It's like I cannot wait for her next scene. Her portrayal of the real Abigail's compassion, strength, and wisdom are an inspiration.
Sometimes, when watching intimate conversation between the Founding Fathers, I feel like I am there. Like a fly on the wall. Very emotional. The banter is often incredible.
I haven't watched the last two episodes yet, but I have to agree with what you said, Rich! I really liked Episodes 1 and 2, but 3 left me feeling a little disappointed. Episodes 4 and 5 also dragged a little, I think, but were overall very good. Laura Linney's Abigail is a scene stealer, and I too really like the banter between the Founding Fathers. I do have just a couple of complaints, though.
First, I think there need to be more subtitled dates at the bottom of the screen. The time is (for me) often hard to gauge, especially since none of the characters seems to age except John and Abigail and Thomas Jefferson. The Adams children stay the same age until Episode 5 when suddenly they're all grown up. Washington looks way too old at the beginning of the series and doesn't age any beyond his initial appearance. Especially by Episodes 4 and 5 I was having a hard time keeping up with the elapsed time and I had to look up John Adams on Wikipedia (to my chagrin ) to learn that his second trip to Europe lasted nine years. More subtitled dates would have been great!
Also--and I know we've already talked about this on the board--but I just don't like the way Washington is portrayed. He looks way too old to begin with, and the extra padding in his face and jowls gives him an expression that looks perpetually (for lack of a better word) constipated. I also have a hard time believing that Washington was that soft spoken. His few bouts of yelling with Jefferson in Episodes 4 and 5 made me like him better, but then he went back to being barely audible again. I had to keep asking my husband, "What did he say?"
The portrayal of John Adams I do like, though. His passion and convictions in the first few episodes were quite admirable, I thought. The series definitely doesn't gloss over his more unlikeable characteristics---moodiness, petulance, vanity, etc.---but I find that it just makes him seem more human. After all, even the most admirable people have some unadmirable qualities. I found myself liking Adams as a person less in Episodes 3-5 than I did in 1-2 as his flaws (especially in his actions as a father) became more evident, yet I felt uplifted by his winning the presidential election.
I have to wait for Netflix to deliver the last disc before I can watch the last two episodes, but I am looking forward to them, even if I have a few quibbles with the way certain aspects of the show were done.  Overall I like it quite a lot. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - August 03 2008 : 11:33:29 AM
Oooooooo..... you are making me want to go right to my DVD player, Rich! The anticipation is nearly too much.
Oh, I read all the comments that came through on the various Yahoo lists regarding the clothing, so I am prepared. From what I have read, however, most are spot on, with only a couple of questionable garments being shown. Never fear, I will definitely let you know my thoughts on that. |
| richfed |
Posted - August 03 2008 : 10:36:16 AM
A night or two after I posted the above "review", I watched Part 3. I was a bit disappointed in that segment - not sure why - but I thought that I perhaps had given my accolades too soon. Having now watched Parts 4 and 5, I stand by my original feelings ...
Wow! OK, so I'm no expert on costuming, etc., but the sets and costumes have a most impressive appearance. As a woman reenactor, Joyce, you are going to either LOVE this or have to tear it apart. Lots of women's dress in this ...
Again, Laura Linney is unconditionally perfect, IMHO, in this role. A show stealer. It's like I cannot wait for her next scene. Her portrayal of the real Abigail's compassion, strength, and wisdom are an inspiration.
Sometimes, when watching intimate conversation between the Founding Fathers, I feel like I am there. Like a fly on the wall. Very emotional. The banter is often incredible.
There are some simply awesome scenes in this film. Washington's inauguration, for one. The hot air balloon scene ... on and on.
I am looking forward to viewing the climactic two final episodes, yet, I don't want it to end ... |
| Diana |
Posted - July 28 2008 : 6:20:00 PM
Hi All:
You be aware that they recently released the PBS mini-series THE ADAMS CHRONICLES which came out in the 1970s. You could make your comparisons between the two.
Also, I recommend to you JOHN ADAMS AND THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION written by Catherine Drinker Bowen.
Diana |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - July 28 2008 : 12:38:17 PM
OK. That did it. Now, I have simply got to start watching it. No more excuses. Sachem has spoken! |
| richfed |
Posted - July 27 2008 : 6:37:06 PM
Though the History Channel does still have some good programming, I have to agree with you, Fitz, in that much, if not most, of it is little more than "reality" television coupled with theoretical mush. I often think it should change its name to the Speculation Channel.
However, after watching the first two episodes of "John Adams," I see little resemblance to that mode of re-inventing history. I really like this production thus far. Not too thrilled with David Morse as George Washington, but I like the balance of the cast. Perhaps more than any other, I like Laura Linney as Abigail Adams. She is absolutely, stunningly elegant in the role.
Soundtrack is superb, slow building emotional power in the acts, Paul Giamatti a surprisingly good Adams ... hear, hear!! More, More!
A jolly good shew! |
| Fitzhugh Williams |
Posted - July 21 2008 : 09:58:38 AM
When I look at these portrayals I ask myself how could anyone have been positively influenced by any of them. How could any of them attracted a following. How could they have influenced world opinion. I am not sure why the producers of this series chose to make it in the way they did. It seems like the standard "History Channel" mentality. Take what has been taught as history for the last 200 years, then turn it on its head and say "Look!!! This is what really happened and you saw it here first!!!" And the unwashed masses say "Wow". |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - July 21 2008 : 06:18:33 AM
Oh, I will... for sure! I will be especially critical of the portrayal of my hero! There is already one major strike against that, as discussed earlier. I don't like the choice of actor and the way he was made up.
'Twill be interesting. Stay tuned... |
| Fitzhugh Williams |
Posted - July 21 2008 : 12:09:19 AM
Also look at the way Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson were portrayed. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - July 20 2008 : 3:12:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Fitzhugh Williams
The real John Adams was a politician, ambassador, statesman, revolutionary, and a man who obviously inspired others. In the series he comes off as an angry little troll.
Before I say anything else, please let me reiterate that I am a major fan of John Adams. He was absolutely everything you said in your first statement above, Fitz, and much more. Since I haven't watched the series yet, I can't speak to whether or not I agree with your assessment of the portrayal.
However, from everything I have read about John, he was very much like an angry little troll much of the time. In fact, I think that is a very good description of him! Every account of him that I have read, so far, indicates that he could be and was short-tempered, irritable, irritating, sharp-tongued, and belligerent. Quite a list for making one unpopular, eh? Add to that the fact that he was self-conscious about his short stature, especially when he was near George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. He had a stern, almost cross-looking, countenance, which contrasted greatly to the handsome and serene faces of both Washington and Jefferson. He carried a chip on his shoulder all of his life, felt that people thought less of him because he was the son of a Massachusetts dirt farmer, rather than a wealthy Virginia landowner, and he was extremely sensitive to criticism.
Makes one wonder why a beautiful, intelligent woman like Abigail would love him so very much, doesn't it? Of course, the fact that they were apart for long periods of time throughout most of their marriage may account for that.
It is the opinion of some modern medical researchers that John Adams may have had episodes of manic-depressive behavior. One historian commented once that John Adams should have been on Prozac. Ben Franklin wrote in a letter to the Secretary of Foreign Affairs in Congress that, Adams "is always an honest man, often a wise man, but sometimes, and in some things, absolutely out of his senses."
Fascinating, isn't it? An incredible man... |
| blackfootblood |
Posted - July 20 2008 : 2:07:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Fitzhugh Williams
In the series he comes off as an angry little troll. I hate it!
I do agree with you Fitz. They made him seem very angry and unlikable at times. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't but for him to hold so many positions and titles, people had to like something about him. But all in all, I still liked the series!! Very much! |
| Fitzhugh Williams |
Posted - July 20 2008 : 10:55:12 AM
I struggled through all the series but missed one episode. I happened to see it was on again (and everything else that night was bad) so I tried to watch it. I almost made it, but decided to go for a sandwich instead. It is an exercise in miss-casting. The real John Adams was a politician, ambassador, statesman, revolutionary, and a man who obviously inspired others. In the series he comes off as an angry little troll. I hate it! |
| RedFraggle |
Posted - July 19 2008 : 9:51:50 PM
Ooh! I'm adding this to my Netflix queue. I almost forgot about it. Thanks for the reminder, everyone. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - July 19 2008 : 8:21:44 PM
Same here. I've sorta been waiting to find a large block of free time so that I can watch the entire series at once. I know that once I start it, I won't want to stop!
Plus, there is that fun "an-ti-ci-pa-tion" factor. I know I am really going to enjoy this one. I am a major fan of John and Abigail. |
| richfed |
Posted - July 19 2008 : 2:28:11 PM
I have it, but haven't watched it yet. I will, I will!!!! |
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
