BBC/HBO's Parade's End (Tom Stoppard's lit adaptation--"new D Abbey")

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 7:42am

For some reason the fact that Ford Madox Ford's Parade's End series of novels was being adapted as a BBC/HBO co-production (in five episodes), completely passed me by, until I saw a British friend rave about the first two episodes on Facebook.

I can see why, cynically, people could think that the BBC is adapting it as their own sort of answer to Downton Abbey (in fact, I found this New Yorker blog post from a few months back that rather presumptiously says that, while he hadn't seen any of the adaptation yet, he suspects from the novels it could be much better than Downton http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/03/the-better-downton-abbey.html ).

Anyway, I downloaded and watched back to back both of the episodes that have so far aired, tonight. (Two have aired in the UK, there's no release date for HBO yet as they say their programming is too full--I always wonder if these networks realize how easy it is to view shows from overseas if they don't air around the same time in the US). I'm already pretty obsessed--I think it deserves to be thought of completely differently from Downton, which has some different pleasures, butinevitably the comparison will come up in every review, I'm sure.

Tom Stoppard did the adaptation, which is great (I'd only read one of the four novels in the series, a long time back for class, but he does seem to have raised the sex factor from what I remember). And the cast is really a great list of UK theatre (and film) actors headed by Benedict Cumberbatch and Rebecca Hall, but including Rupert Everett, Janet McTeer, Roger Allam and Miranda Richardson.

Has anyone else been following it? I admit, I found the pilot at first kinda confusing, with all the jumps around in time, and names, but got wrapped up in it pretty quickly--and don't want to wait another week for the third episode...

[Addison D.]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 9:57am

Given the enthusiastic response to Downton's first season, I would have found it strange if there were NOT at least a handful of well-mannered period-costume dramas put into the works. We just have to hope that each new offering has some vital raison d'etre to distinguish it from those that have come before.

'Parade's End' certainly holds promise as an asset to confer interest and distinction, although I confess that I read only 'Some do Not..' and what I remember as about five pages of 'No more parades'. I found the prose too dense to enjoy. Like Henry James with slightly shorter run-ons. Also like James, Ford might be an ideal candidate to be translated into yuppie costume-drama porn--the ideas and the plot points are complex and interesting, and the visual medium erases the burden of wading through all those pesky words.

But literary criticism aside, you had me at "Benedict Cumberbatch, Rebecca Hall, Rupert Everett, Janet McTeer and Miranda Richardson." Do I know Roger Allam? I will check in with IMDb.

Edit: I am an idiot. Roger Allam. Duh... Forget MI-5, Catherine Tate, Ashes to Ashes and Game of Thrones. Forget 'The Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone' & 'The Iron Lady.' Forget all those. Just ask me how many times I've listened to the London OCR of 'Les Mis'. Oy....

Updated On: 9/1/12 at 09:57 AM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 3:35pm

Yeah, I was ultimately disappointed in the Upstairs/Downstairs reboot, but to be fair, that was started before Downton aired--as poor Jean Marsh liked to point out as much as possible, but it does make sense to see more. I imagine even American network tv is trying things (I guess they haven't learned from the epic failure of Beacon Hill, the 1970s loose remake of Upstairs/Downstairs). I admit, at the time, the huge success of Downton in the US (and here in Canada), surprised me--I had been downloading and burning episodes of it from when it started for friends and family, and then there was the mild controversy about PBS editing the first season because tey worried it was too slow... But in hindsight, I'm not *all* that surprised it took off, at all.

I assume one reason HBO decided to co-produce this, instead of, say, PBS (and it is obvious that it has a large budget--), was to get in on the act, though of course it has a few explicit scenes that PBS wouldn't have shown. But you're exactly right--ideally the Downton "clones" will have their own personality and reason for being--I think it's fair enough to try to adapt Parade's End, being a famous work (I know it was recently called one of the best English books of all time) that hasn't really been adapted before.

I'm with you... As I said, I had to read one in one of my lit courses (I believe it was No More Parades, though it seems odd to start with the second, small, book--but there was a ton of reading in that course). I ultimately enjoyed it, but I found the reading pretty hard (as you say, it's very dense), and never thought to persue the rest when the class was over and I could read for pleasure again. (On the other hand, I did go through a period of obsessively reading James, though it definitely took me a long time to be able to get into his, umm, style lol--and I suspect it was loving many of the film adaptations of his works as a teen that got me into it).

Yeah the cast is really quite outrageous--of course no real names they could sell to the mainstream audience I guess, but still.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 3:51pm

There's a well done "documentary" for the series (let's be honest, BBC2, it's an extended promo) that aired the week before the first episode, for anyone curious to get a glimpse. Part one is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh4IvN_m65g

[Addison D.]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 3:56pm

My memory of the time is that Upstairs/Downstairs was as much of a sensation as Downton is now, but I had a child's perspective and what I mostly remember is that it was a sensation in our house--we watched it religiously and talked/cared about the characters like people we knew. My Mother and I went on to love 'The Duchess of Duke Street' and I always think of the two shows as profoundly connected beyond just the thrilling (to my childhood self) Masterpiece Theater fanfare. (Talk about a Pavlovian response--when I hear that music I am back in the family room with my parents--I swear I can SMELL it...)

I enjoyed Marsh & Atkins' 'House of Elliot', but not NEARLY as much as French & Saunders' 'House of Idiot'. And--having seen 'Idiot'--I can never really take 'Elliot' seriously again. The best kind of satire--zeroing in on the subject's foibles so mercilessly but with so much good nature. Like the best 'Forbidden Broadway'.




'House of Idiot'

Updated On: 9/1/12 at 03:56 PM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 4:16pm

Just watched the first clip you posted--I only vaguely remember House of Eliot (I'm sure my parents watched it), but as always French and Saunders do the best parodies--as you say they're actually quite cutting and yet always done with a lot of affection. (I'm sure you saw the two part "Uptown Downstairs" parody they were involved with for a BBC comic relief special http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5dMlXentLw ). Although, like a lot of UK comedy, the laugh track can seem even more obnoxious than on some American shows (something they even parodied in one of their own skits where they had a mock semi-serious "sitcom" being performed, in the Carla Lane, the creator of Bread as well as of Butterflies tradition, with a laugh track coming in at the most inappropriate places, only to cut to Dawn in the production studio gleefully pulling a lever to crank it up).

I wasn't born until 1980, so missed the original U/D when it aired, but I always remembered hearing about it, somehow. When I was a teen I was pretty obsessed with soap operas and the nature of serialized tv in general, and I remember a number of soap books going on about how the sudden American obsession with U/D showed what a good soap opera could be, although of course nobody would admit to it being a soap (people seem a bit more OK with the term now, although Fellowes insists on calling his show a "televised novel". Whatever).

With less TV to view back then, I think it was even more of a sensation than Downton--apparently prior to it PBS had paved the way for its success with an earlier BBC import, the serialized version of Forsyte Saga, but U/D blew that out of the water. I finally saw the full series when it was rerun late at night in the 90s, and admit to being pretty hooked--even liked the spin off Thomas and Sarah.

I don't think I've even heard of The Duchess of Duke Street--I'll have to track it down. There was a docu a yea or so ago about all the UK period dramas and their success in the US with Masterpiece Theatre that did attribute the true start to Upstairs/Downstairs (as well as I, Claudius a while later). They pointed out that when people are asked what their favorite Masterpiece Theatre programswere, many list Brideshead Revisited (which was an obsession of mine for a long time)--which actually didn't air under the M Theatre marquee.

(I miss when PBS put more of an emphasis on shows like that, rather than endless pledge drives which don't seem to just be seasonal anymore, and inspirational/self help speakers or Josh Grobin concerts--Mystery and Masterpiece are now combined, they don't even HAVE American Playhouse anymore, Live at Lincoln Center and Great Performances seem to happen only a couple of times a year... I sound old :P )

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 9:22pm

Looks good. The fact that it's on BBC Two, their secondary, more highbrow channel makes me think it has aspirations greater than mere soap - and perhaps also they don't think it will appeal to the masses as much as Downton. Am I wrong?

[strummergirl]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 9:44pm

Looks interesting. Cumberbatch is always watchable and Rebecca Hall looks fabulous. Never heard of Adelaide Clemens. She looks a bit like Michelle Williams.

Is the book worth reading for a non-Brit?

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/1/12 at 10:40pm

As Addison said, the writing is a bit dense. I don't think--some British legal jargon aside--where you're from really plays as much an issue as how you enjoy the prose. I'd actually try out the TV series first (but that's just because I found the book in the series I read a bit hard going, so it's just personal experience).

Jay Lerner, you probably are right. The first half of the first episode, before it goes more into the big love story, could be a hard sell for some audiences--you have to pay a lot of attention (not that you don't with Downton, but I'd say you have to pay *more* here), and being based on a classic novel and adapted by Stoppard, it certainly has a high pedigree. (Of course having a creation of Fellowes on ITV was a big selling point for them, as well).

[Scripps2]

Posted: 9/10/12 at 3:54pm

Every time I've been in to a gallery or a stately home recently there seems to have been a Ford Madox Brown retrospective or a we-just-found-this-the-attic painting of his on display, so I was glad of the documentary to explain how these two fcukers came to have such similar names.

The adaption is certainly Stoppard-dense but it's not the only WWI thing he's done recently (Birdsong) and I still haven't forgiven him for Enigma. Downton is at best social history and at worst soap; Parade's End is at best intelligent costume drama and at worst intellectual masturbation. That's probably why the thing I'm enjoying the most about it is Rupie's beard.

Updated On: 9/10/12 at 03:54 PM

[Scripps2]

Posted: 9/10/12 at 3:59pm

"The fact that it's on BBC Two, their secondary, more highbrow channel..."

BBC2 is for pseudo-intellectuals.

BBC4 is for the real thing.

(and most definitely not The Real Thing)

People in this thread should head for the latter.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/10/12 at 4:37pm

Well I'm still loving it--I just watched the third episode. (Scripps, that's interesting that you bring up the artist--I think fo a long time when I'd just hear the names, I thought they were the same person).

I didn't know anything about an easthetic difference between which BBC you're on, though it makes sense... (I'm not even sure what airs on what, honestly--wasn't Torchwood BBC2? And Being Human BBC4? WHich doesn't really say anything...)

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/10/12 at 4:40pm

(And does anything air on BBC3? I never seem to come across it with the shows I download... :P )

I may be mis-reading you,l but Birdsong certainly wasn't Stoppard. I can't recall who it was, but the adaptation wasn't done by a name I recognize with such adaptations (which probably means it wasn't done by Stoppard, or Andrew Davies...)

[Scripps2]

Posted: 9/10/12 at 5:32pm

Oh Crikey, so it isn't. It just felt like Stoppard in my memory.

I think my real problem with Parade's End is that I missed the first episode and went straight in to the second and Stoppard obviously likes to fool the bastards who think they can catch up.

BBC3 tends to be light entertainment aimed at 20 and 30 somethings. It could also be known as BBCOMGWTF. I'm pretty sure Being Human went out on there but, errrr, wouldn't stake my life on it.

One thing I am sure of (tries to drag oneself out of the gutter) is that "Groby" is played by Duncombe Park in North Yorkshire:

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/10/12 at 5:44pm

The first episode did pack in a *lot* of information (so much so that I know some found it confusing--it did jump back and forth in time a lot).

Yep! That looks like Groby, alright. Beautiful building.

[dave1606]

Posted: 3/12/13 at 10:55am

I've watched four episodes of this and I think I am finally a fan. Like most HBO shows, I feel like it takes a bit to get into, and I did find the first episode alienating.

Did anyone else, especially in the early episodes find Rebecca Hall a bit campy? She was throwing glasses and screaming quite a bit in those early epsidoes. I did think as the show progressed, she toned it done and actually turned in quite a good performance, especially the speech she gives in Episode 4.

I LOVE Benedict Cumberbatch and he is giving an excellent performance here.

My issue for me is unlike Downton, where I care about all the characters and subplots, anyone outside of the two leads I just don't care for. The young girl, the brother, and all of the other stories just seemed to be lost on me. Maybe a second viewing would improve this, but my eyes glaze over a bit.

Overall I have enjoyed it. It is a classic BBC production, lush production values (and fantastic costuming-Rebecca Hall seemed to have a new dress every 5 minutes) and some pretty decent acting.

I don't think I would rank this with Downton even if it might be considered even more highbrow than that. It reminds me a bit of the Crimson Petal and the Rose if that one was a bit darker.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 3/12/13 at 11:11am

Seems to me like just another standard pompous and bloated Tom Stoppard production made just so he can jerk off thinking about how smart he is.

[dave1606]

Posted: 3/12/13 at 11:13am

The first episode especially feels that way. The fragmented narration is so unnecessarily confusing, jumping all over the place. In matters of seconds we were jumping two years later, three years before. It was all far more complicated than it should have been.

That said, it does improve once it stops all the flash and just tells its story.

Updated On: 3/12/13 at 11:13 AM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/14/13 at 2:08pm

I really fell in love with it bythe end, and found it moving. But I completely agree that the fragmented, non-linear first half of the first episode, to my mind, serves zero purpose but to confuse and off put viewers. I *assume* this can be blamed on Stoppard, but then again with last year's Anna Karenina I was sure the whole conceit of having most of it done as a stage performance, something I felt really distanced audiences from the strong emotions of the piece, was Stoppard's and apparently ti wasn't at all, and he was never fully sold by it--it was all imposed by director Joe Wright.