Season 42 - The Mystery of Edwin Drood (2012)
For years I put off watching The Mystery of Edwin Drood because I wanted to read the unfinished manuscript by Dickens in order to read Dan Simmons's Drood. Then when this movie came out, because even if they call it a miniseries, only two hour-long episodes only equals a movie, I still hadn't gotten around to my previous goals so I thought I'd wait. Well, seeing as it's now way over a decade later and I still haven't gotten around to reading, well, either of the aforementioned books, I figured it was time to watch this adaptation. Plus, I was going through severe Freddie Fox withdrawal. Who would have thought I'd ever like anyone other than Tom Hiddleston playing Loki!?! And now that Freddie's really the only socially acceptable male Fox, how could I not give into the craving? Which sadly this didn't quite assuage. In fact, if you really need a Freddie Fox fix Year of the Rabbit episode three, "Gangs," is perfection. There is of course the first few seasons of Slow Horses, but, things don't end up so well for him there.... Back to Dickens! There are many problems with this "miniseries," the most glaring of which is how forgettable it is. I just watched this and I am struggling to recall anything that happened. The problem was this should have been minimally a three-part adaptation. It's just too short to get the full panoply of Dickensian characters. This is exacerbated by the fact that the entire first episode is basically Matthew Rhys in a drugged fug, making anything happening too hard to comprehend even for Hunter S. Thompson. Which, if they had stretched this to three episodes would have been mitigated. Because the angry dissociation of the first episode would have been just part of our tale not half of it. Well, more than half of it because it's not like John Jasper is giving up the drugs anytime soon. And yes, I think if Dickens had survived Wilkie Collins would have possibly had a valid case for libel. But the saving grace of this series is David Dawson as Bazzard. David Dawson who just happens to play Joseph Merrick, "The Elephant Man," in the aforementioned episode of Year of the Rabbit, "Gangs." Seriously, go watch that episode. It might be one of the funniest things you'll ever watch in your entire life. While here David Dawson brings the Dickensian vibe this series was so sorely missing in its first half. He is the clerk to Edwin Drood's fiance's guardian. And given this is Dickens, that's actually a concise relationship. Usually they are all convoluted and full of secrecy. He basically gets stuck into all the mysteries and secrets and just solves everything. I'm sad that he couldn't solve the problem of this show, but there's only so much one character can do. Especially if he's given only one episode to do it in.
The Christmas Guest by Peter Swanson
Affinity by Sarah Waters
Here's the thing. I am the target audience for The Artful Dodger. Period piece set in Australia which continues the chronicles of Charles Dickens with beloved named stars and I only heard about it by accident. This is a crime against humanity. And by humanity, I mean it's a crime against me in particular. Thankfully things worked out. This past holiday season I rewatched David Thewlis in the magnificent 2015 adaptation of An Inspector Calls. Which got me to thinking, what else has David Thewlis been up to lately? And I saw he was playing Fagin in a show called The Artful Dodger with Thomas Brodie-Sangster and oddly Tim Minchin, who is the composer and lyricist for the Broadway musical Matilda, which made me cry for hours and hours. Damn you Minchin! I instantly went, I must watch this show immediately. Which lead me to learning that my PS3 no longer supports Hulu and therefore I'd have to find a time to watch it when I wasn't on the treadmill. At about the time I finally started watching it was when Disney+ and Hulu merged and out of nowhere everyone was talking about this show. A show which had premiered almost half a year earlier. I mean it's not like the weird Suits success years after it ended, but The Artful Dodger took awhile to find it's audience. People were binging it as fast as they could. Twitter, and yes, I will always call it that, was twittering about how this show deserved a larger audience and several seasons. That The Artful Dodger isn't just a show to binge and forget, it was a show to binge and to never recover from. While I agree that more seasons would fill me with glee, I don't think I'm as fanatical was the other viewers. I enjoyed it. I thought it was a wonderful concept and a fresh twist on the Charles Dickens classic, Oliver Twist, with Dodger finding a new life as a surgeon in Australia and running into Fagin who has been transported there and is up to his old tricks, as well as some wonderful jokes at the expense of Oliver being thrown in. But despite the stellar casting this felt like a kind of in between show. It was in between being a kind of cheap 
The British do love their holiday ghost stories, so it only makes sense that they took that tradition to the television. Starting in 1971 they started adapting ghost stories written by M.R. James for the holiday season starring acting luminaries such as Robert Hardy, Clive Swift, Peter Vaughan, Barbara Ewing, Lalla Ward, Denholm Elliott, and Peter Bowles. They even adapted a Charles Dickens tale before foolheartedly deciding to create their own original content. Two abysmal stories, "Stigma" and "The Ice House," seemed to put the nail in the coffin of this series. But it was so beloved, with fans clamoring for remastered releases and Blu-ray sets, that that wasn't the end. The show returned in 2005 going back to it's origins by adapting an M.R. James story, "A View from a Hill." Once again they brought in the top names in acting, starting with Pip Torrens, Greg Wise, John Hurt, and many others. After his adaptation of 'The Tractate Middoth" in 2013 Mark Gatiss took over the show delivering it once again on a yearly schedule starting with an original episode in 2018. Thankfully Simon Callow was able to make "The Dead Room" work whereas Peter Bowles had let "Stigma" flounder. But I think that wasn't just down to acting, I really do think it was the material. And Mark Gatiss, bless his heart, just somehow is able to embody a bygone era whereas the writers in the seventies had other ideas. Bad ideas. Incestous flora ideas. And seriously, what was with the blood just oozing out of that poor lady's pores? Aside from that one original episode all the episodes in what we shall call the revival for lack of a better word have been adapted from the work of M.R. James. Except for this past year's. This past year's was adapted from "Lot No. 249" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. This episode has it all, Kit Harington being a stuffy and incredulous nonbeliever of the supernatural, Freddie Fox being a fey and dangerous man who with longer hair unnervingly looks like his sister, and a man who may or may not be Sherlock Holmes played by John Heffernan, a man who should have definitely said no to that horrid Dracula adaptation by Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, and in the coup de grace, a mummy who will deliver your coup de grace. This episode might just be my favorite among the revival episodes. Well, I do love a good haunting by mummy, and Conan Doyle, like the episode adapted from Dickens, seems to work a little better than the stories by M.R. James. I'm not saying there aren't genius episodes adapted from his work, they're just a little more nebulous, a little more open ended. Sometimes, even when dealing with the supernatural, you want a definitive ending, but if you're M.R. James how about some creepy kids wandering off eerily playing the hurdy-gurdy? You think I jest? Just watch "Lost Hearts" and I'll be over here laughing while you're unable to sleep. Sadly it looks like this tradition might be coming to an end due to budgetary concerns. While I only caught the revival episodes the last two years and was finally able to see the original run this year I think this fate is a shame. It's a tradition that survived whatever "The Ice House" was and I want it to continue for many many years to come. It's not like we're going to run out of material now is it? There's always a ghost story to tell for Christmas.
Baring A Christmas Carol, Great Expectations is probably Charles Dickens most adapted story. Pip growing up and becoming disillusioned with the world has played out time and time again. And I have never really liked a single one of them. Pip, whether played by actors I love like Ioan Gruffudd or those I respect like Michael York, has always struck me as a prissy prig. He's holier than thou and thinks he has some divine right to the life he's been given. In my opinion the world would have been a lot better off without Pip in it. So how did Steven Knight trick me into watching another adaptation other than being Steven Knight? Matt Berry. That's right folks, I watched this entire adaptation just to see Matt Berry's backside. I didn't know I'd get to see his backside, it was just an amusing bonus. Though even if I hadn't tuned in for Matt Berry I would have been sad to have missed this adaptation because it is the best "adaptation" of Great Expectations ever. The quotes are there because while much was made in the press about Matt Berry's backside being supported by the text, the truth of the matter is Steven Knight kind of threw the text out the window. Of the three "stages" of Pip's life the first one is the only one to actually remain true in this telling, after that it's a free for all. And I for one am here for it! Miss Havisham obviously holding a quartet captive in her house since her wedding day so she can have mood music wherever she wants? While I'm only positing that that is how they're there, I am so here for this that I can't tell you how much I loved it. The fact that Miss Havisham gets to live AND give Pip a parting shot worthy of any eighties action star? Oh yes, more of this, this is the Miss Havisham of Jasper Fforde! Lord Larys leaving the Red Keep to disgustingly sniff snuff? I didn't know Matthew Needham was so comically gifted! But above all what makes this entire adaptation work is that Steven Knight was obviously sick of waiting around on Tom Hardy to make season two of Taboo, AKA the best television series that has ever been created, and decided to make his version of Great Expectations into Taboo 2.0. This is literally Taboo minus Tim Hardy with a veneer of Dickens and Matt Berry. In fact, can someone check to see if Jaggers is wearing Tom Hardy's coat from Taboo? Because I have my suspicions. And specking of Jaggers, he really is the star of this adaptation, and that's saying something because David Suchet has also played this role. Jaggers brings to the fore all the issues that Steven Knight finds the 19th century plagued with that he obsessively explores; slavery, inequality, maritime law, and revenge. This might ostensibly be Pip's story, but Jaggers is the star. But the biggest question at the end of the day is how does Steven Knight make maritime law interesting? Because I assure you he does.
First impressions are important. Yes, you could get an inaccurate impression but only time will tell. My first impression of The Confessions of Frannie Langton sadly bore out. Because a show that starts with the year in a big large font, 1826 if you were interested, and then follows it up with all the characters wearing Empire waisted dresses, well, that's such a glaring inaccuracy that I just couldn't look beyond it. Every second a character was on screen I was aware that the costuming was entirely wrong. What's more there were flashbacks and they were wearing the same clothes! Fashion changes. You could make the argument that Frannie herself was poor so she would still be in older fashions, that doesn't apply to ANYONE ELSE. The Empire silhouette ended six years before this story starts. SIX YEARS. How can a costume designer get it this wrong? It's like the time I watched a documentary on the Adnrew Davis adaptation of Sense and Sensibility and the costume designer said they purposefully changed the style to add more color. And I'm still pissed about those costumes all these years later. That and David Morrissey's bad wig. But it's not like I'd actually recommend The Confessions of Frannie Langton to anyone so I guess it can go about being historically inaccurate all it wants behind everyone's back, except that there's me here stewing, I will NEVER let this go. I really want to know what was the point of making this other than to make us angry and depressed about the world we live in as well as pissing me off about costume design? We have slavery, we have implied vivisection, we have drug addiction, we have miscarriages, we have incest, we have prostitution, we have murder, and in the end, we bury our gays. Some reviewers have pointed out that the "unapologetic" nature of the love between Frannie and Marguerite somehow makes the story rise above the fact that they both die in the end. Were they watching the same show I was? Because their relationship is toxic, Marguerite turns Frannie into an addict and then cheats on her with her own "son." Oh and I totally forgot, that Marguerite then killed herself. Yeah, I'm spoiling it for you, but as I said, you shouldn't be watching this anyway. This was only four episodes long and that was four too many. There were so many good actors just doing bad material I just couldn't bear it. I was looking back at my notes from when I was watching this and I literally only like the cat. All the other characters were grasping, mean, evil, ruinous sorts. Maybe an author the likes of Dickens could have made these people interesting, but Sara Collins, adapting her own book, couldn't. And you know what, when her book came out I was excited to read it, and then excited that it was being adapted, but a dark tale told by an unreliable narrator done by incompetents wasn't what I was looking for. This was a tale dark in nature and just dark, as in the crew obviously didn't understand that lighting was needed for the viewers to see the characters and it was glaringly obvious they had never lite a dark skinned person in their lives. So all those people out there decrying that a show about lesbians is morally reprehensible, first off, I will never agree with you, but more importantly, if you watched this you'd have legitimate reasons to complain.
Devil in Winter by Lisa Kleypas
If you've only seen the Gillian Anderson adaptation of 
The Gillian Anderson version of Bleak House first aired as I was just getting back into Masterpiece. It's not that I'd taken time out from the show per se, it's just that life, combined with school meant that several seasons of Masterpiece were seen by me after the fact when my friend Jess would tell me to rent a specific show from Netflix. Yes, this was when Netflix was still only discs you sent away for. So I'd often spend the summer vacation watching the notable shows that had aired on Masterpiece earlier in the year and had now been released on DVD. The other reason I got back into Masterpiece was perfect timing. I could never watch the eight o'clock broadcast because other family members had the television at the time and for some reason our second PBS station decided to re-air that night's episode of Masterpiece starting around midnight. That meant I could finally curl up with my cat and be assured we wouldn't be accused of co-opting the television. So I settled in to watch Bleak House. The fifteen episode miniseries actually aired as eight on Masterpiece, so for eight weeks I was there for all the twists, turns, and explosive reveals of the people connected to the Jarndyce v Jarndyce case. And I kind of found it meh. I wasn't good at following the plot from week to week and just kind of forgot about it. Until I made a list of suggested viewings for a friend of my mom's and well, Nancy was VERY mad I didn't like Bleak House. Apparently it was her favorite. Therefore I had to give it another try. And yet she wouldn't give Poldark a second try!?! Just saying... So I sat down and watched all of Bleak House over three nights and you know what? I really liked it. I knew what was going to happen more or less so I was able to take joy in the characters, which is what this adaptation is all about. SHAKE ME UP JUDY! Also, Bleak House works better, in my mind, binged. Watching it over too long a period of time doesn't work. We are no longer in the age when we had to wait months for Dickens to actually write the next chapter, so why wait? That's right, why wait? Go watch Bleak House today. All of it! 
OK, I admit it, I was hesitant at first to watch Sanditon. Why you ask? Well, that answer is twofold. Firstly, I hadn't read Jane Austen's partial manuscript in years and wanted to brush up on that and other of her unfinished writing. Secondly, well, the reviews from other Janeites was bad. I usually don't listen to the Janeites, I've often disagreed with these fanatics, and in fact been treated rather harshly by them, so I don't know why I was listening to them being shocked by sex in Austen, but there it is. Yet here's the thing I say to them; "Oh NO, sex in Austen! It's not like Willoughby knocked up a fifteen year old, oh wait..." So there. Game, set, and match. Andrew Davies for the win! It's not that I'm all for sexing up Austen, I'm for the reasonable depiction of the time period, and people had sex! This adaptation was like Austen mixed with Gaskell and Dickens but with the filming sensibilities of Gentleman Jack. Sanditon was fun and diverting, and so what if it was about a town instead of just one family, this just gave it more of a Cranford vibe. There was more flow of narrative, characters weaving in and out of each other's lives at this seaside town trying to make it versus set pieces. I felt like there was real struggle and strife. In fact I thought to myself, it had a bit of the real world horrors mixed with the frenzied fun of Austen's juvenalia. Sanditon is what the roundly praised by very much disliked by me adaptation of Austen's Love and Friendship was supposed to be. Also, while some characters, in particular our male lead, are supposed to evoke parallels to other Austen characters, ahem Darcy, it was the other more complex characters I really appreciated. In fact Esther Denham is now my new favorite Austen heroine. She's dirt poor, manipulated and manipulating, yet somehow you root for her and her redemptive arc gave me the HEA you'd expect for the leads, except they were expecting a second season and didn't get one. Yet. Rumors are that the success of Bridgerton and the loyal fanbase might just have succeeded. So oddly we have yet another unfinished (for now) Sanditon that somehow still manages to be satisfying. 
Daddy-Long-Legs by Jean Webster
There are SO MANY adaptations of A Christmas Carol it's hard to find a unique new spin to get viewers to watch yet another version. Why would I want to subject myself to another adaptation that could never compare to the humor and horror of Scrooged, which in my mind is the only version worth watching, though I will let you argue in favor of the Muppets. The answer is Steven Knight. Steven Knight created the masterpiece that is Taboo, which I'm still waiting on season two and will gladly wait for years Steven just so you know! He's more commonly known for creating Peaky Blinders and oddly enough being one of the three creators of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? So with Steven Knight at the helm and Guy Pearce staring and Andy Serkis bringing the haunting, I knew it was going to be dark and gritty, so I was instantly sold. Because, I'm sorry, the Victorian age was dark and gritty, and Dickens usually reflected that reality, except oddly enough in this, his most popular piece. So bring on the dark! Bring on the weird backstory about Scrooge being sexually abused? OK, I guess... I mean, it's nice to have some justification as to why Scrooge became who he was but there seemed to be too much riding on this revelation. To me it felt like the adaptation was saying abuse gives you a free pass to be a dick, but if possible, don't be one. So while I loved all this magic and mystery and the reason why these ghosts were called to haunt Scrooge, I felt that the backstory should have been finessed. Yet if we didn't get the backstory we wouldn't have gotten the dream sequence of Kayvan Novak, AKA Nandor from What We Do in the Shadows, as Ali Baba... now that's a tough choice to make. Let's go back to the Christmas wasteland with Marley and mull that over while Andy Serkis throws another memory on the pyre. 
Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke
That Silent Night by Tasha Alexander
Star of the East by Tasha Alexander
