11 reviews
The adaptation is a disappointment, especially since the producers gave an extra hour to Have His Carcase, by far the weakest of the three books, rather than to Gaudy Night, which needs more time, and then spent part of their severely limited time in flashbacks to the previous episode. It's a pity to lose the subplots, including Peter's nephew, and so many fine scenes. Alas, the scene on the river could not possibly be done properly except when one can read Harriet's thoughts. Bits do remain of the best of the book, the atmosphere of academic peace and the conversations about what one should make of one's life; I hope the film inspires more people to read the book itself. What they did film, however, is well done, and excellently cast. I am very fond of Miss Devine, and it was a delightful surprise to find that I am also very fond of the actress who plays her here.
Gaudy Night is in my opinion (and a very humble one at that) Dorothy L. Sayers' best Lord Peter/Harriet Vane book, so I was quite excited about its screen adaptation. Well what can I say? Nothing short of perfection! Once again I am not disappointed by the ensemble cast - and here they had to evolve and revolve a little on the superb original. They did it well and beyond any expectation of mine. Kudos for them all!
When I first watched Gaudy Night (one of my favorite Dorothy Sayers' books) I got confused because of the missing story lines and characters. For example, Saint George loomed fairly large in the book. I think I would have traded some of the scenes where Harriet was sitting in her room or walking through an archway for some of the missing story lines.
But that would be my adaptation. When I watched the video again, I could let go of what I perceived as missing and enjoyed the acting.
But that would be my adaptation. When I watched the video again, I could let go of what I perceived as missing and enjoyed the acting.
- writergeeknh
- Feb 24, 2003
- Permalink
This is a terrific series ,that does Dorothy L. Sayer's wonderful characters, justice. The time frame for the episodes, is the 20's , a little after WW1. The costume and set design are extensively researched. The best part, of course, is that the actors really know these characters, capturing the feeling and nuances of the books .This is a trio collection, which includes "Strong Poison"(in which Lord Peter meets Harriet, while she is on trial), "Have His Carcase" (in which a body is found on an isolated beach) and "Gaudy Night"(in which, a murder is committed at the university). I strongly recommend seeing them in order, as it will give you a sense of continuity , and an understanding of the relationship between Lord Peter and Harriet. This is a rare instance, where the movie will make you want to read the books.
- nouveauphoenix
- Apr 2, 2004
- Permalink
"Gaudy Night" was the second of Dorothy L. Sayers's "Lord Peter Wimsey" detective novels to be written with the action and plot seen through the eyes of Harriet Vane rather than Wimsey himself. When transferred to the screen, this results in poor Wimsey being relegated almost to a supporting actor. Apart from one or two brief introductory appearances, he appears only in the last half of the series.
Still, the plot holds things together quite well. Detective novelist Harriet Vane has lived down the notoriety of having been accused of murdering her lover. She accepts an invitation to revisit her alma mater, a ladies' college in Oxford. Shortly after she renews her acquaintance with her former fellow-students and tutors, someone starts playing distasteful pranks around the college. The Warden and the other dons ask Harriet to investigate. Wimsey, her suitor, joins the investigation when the practical jokes become more dangerous. Finally, there is the long-standing romantic tension between Wimsey and Harriet to resolve.
Edward Petherbridge plays Wimsey very much in the style set by Ian Carmichael in the 1970's. However, Harriet Walter, as Harriet Vane, rather steals the show.
This is definitely not a stock "Whodunnit". Without laying it on with a trowel, "Gaudy Night" highlights the difference in attitudes between a withdrawn set of cloisters which need deal only with matters of philosophy and theory, and the "real world", with practical problems to face and overcome. This gulf is emphasised by the cut-glass accents and precise diction of the dons and students, and the "common" speech of the college servants and other inhabitants of Oxford, where they appear.
Worth both watching and reading.
Still, the plot holds things together quite well. Detective novelist Harriet Vane has lived down the notoriety of having been accused of murdering her lover. She accepts an invitation to revisit her alma mater, a ladies' college in Oxford. Shortly after she renews her acquaintance with her former fellow-students and tutors, someone starts playing distasteful pranks around the college. The Warden and the other dons ask Harriet to investigate. Wimsey, her suitor, joins the investigation when the practical jokes become more dangerous. Finally, there is the long-standing romantic tension between Wimsey and Harriet to resolve.
Edward Petherbridge plays Wimsey very much in the style set by Ian Carmichael in the 1970's. However, Harriet Walter, as Harriet Vane, rather steals the show.
This is definitely not a stock "Whodunnit". Without laying it on with a trowel, "Gaudy Night" highlights the difference in attitudes between a withdrawn set of cloisters which need deal only with matters of philosophy and theory, and the "real world", with practical problems to face and overcome. This gulf is emphasised by the cut-glass accents and precise diction of the dons and students, and the "common" speech of the college servants and other inhabitants of Oxford, where they appear.
Worth both watching and reading.
This is the third in a series of television movies based on Dorothy L. Sayers's famous mystery series featuring Harriet Vein and amateur sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey. The first two programs are "Strong Poison" and "Have His Carcass."
One of the strengths of the BBC production is that they do not try to dramatize so much that the story does not match the book. One of the advantages of this series is that it is long enough that most of the pertinent information is shown. They made an excellent choice when deciding to use Edward Petherbridge as Lord Peter Wimsey and Harriet Walter as Harriet Vane. They match the book character descriptions perfectly. In fact, if you see this program before you read the book their images will be in your mind.
Maybe due to time restraints or different directing, many of the most interesting book characters were left out of "Gaudy Night" A chessboard plays a significant part in the book and is also left out of this version.
Harriet is invited to her university's gaudy. She soon finds out that it is not an idle indentation. It seems that people are receiving poison pen letters and very nasty pranks. Not wanting the police to be involved they turn to Harriet (knowing of here reputation for solving crimes.) When Harriet receives a letter herself she confides in Lord Peter. Are these innocent pranks or will they lead to something more sinister? And who is the culprit?
One of the strengths of the BBC production is that they do not try to dramatize so much that the story does not match the book. One of the advantages of this series is that it is long enough that most of the pertinent information is shown. They made an excellent choice when deciding to use Edward Petherbridge as Lord Peter Wimsey and Harriet Walter as Harriet Vane. They match the book character descriptions perfectly. In fact, if you see this program before you read the book their images will be in your mind.
Maybe due to time restraints or different directing, many of the most interesting book characters were left out of "Gaudy Night" A chessboard plays a significant part in the book and is also left out of this version.
Harriet is invited to her university's gaudy. She soon finds out that it is not an idle indentation. It seems that people are receiving poison pen letters and very nasty pranks. Not wanting the police to be involved they turn to Harriet (knowing of here reputation for solving crimes.) When Harriet receives a letter herself she confides in Lord Peter. Are these innocent pranks or will they lead to something more sinister? And who is the culprit?
- Bernie4444
- Nov 9, 2023
- Permalink
- fisherforrest
- Jan 19, 2005
- Permalink
- dimandreas
- Apr 15, 2011
- Permalink
I've loved the book of Gaudy Night for years, so when I discovered there was a filmed version I was very enthusiastic and bought it on eBay. Bad mistake. It didn't cost me much but boy did I waste my money. The script is deadly, much of the acting is wooden and a lot of the casting is completely wrong. Peter Wimsey has the right look and dress style but instead of foppish he comes across as camp, while Harriet Vane doesn't appear to be a strong, dependable woman but someone very self-doubting and almost timid. I saw no chemistry between them whatsoever. The actor playing Bunter looks completely wrong and lacks the essential hauteur. While some of the female dons are portrayed well, many of the small parts are attacked with skills reminiscent of The Art of Coarse Acting. And where, oh where is all of DL Sayers's sparkle and wit? The scriptwriter pulls the odd chunk of text verbatim from the book, then proceeds to drown it in long, turgid scenes jammed with his own dialogue. This would be fine if it did any good, but much of what I saw was unnecessary to the plot and wasted good scenes and story lines in the process. So much of this seemed to be going through the motions. It was very sad to see and tremendously disappointing. Perhaps someone will take Gaudy Night on again one day and do a better job??? To be frank, I made it less than halfway through the 150 minutes. I just couldn't bear to watch it any longer.
It is difficult to give an unbiased opinion of this show, for as an adaptation of Gaudy Night, it stinks. There is none of the subtlety or wit of Dorothy Sayers' dialog, and much of the plot is a shambles. Does it make good tv if one hasn't read the book - I couldn't say.
Well, what are the problems? First, the opening. We hear voices upraised in anger, the sound of a shot, then someone's coffin lowered into the ground. There's no establishing time period, no nothing. It could be the day before the events that are to come, for all we know. No grieving people shown over the coffin (from a suitable distance so we wouldn't recognize anyone), nothing to make us care who this person might have been, or what it has got to do with the rest of the story.
Then there's the bloopers. The Warden of the college wants to ask Harriet Vane to come investigate the happenings in college, so she gathers together all the dons and asks their opinion! And yet a little later on Harriet is asking questions and pretending that she's merely there to help Miss Lydgate with her research. (In the book, it is to the students alone that she pretends to be other than what she is).
Wimsey as played by Edward Petherbridge is quite good, if a little old for the part (in closeups at least) and he's given a quite gratuitous scene on a train going into Germany. If they must give him more screen time, why not more screen time in Oxford?
The actress who played Harriet didn't catch my fancy, and she wasn't given much to do in investigating the crimes. Sayers' dialog was replaced in most cases by bad dialog from the scriptwriter.
I'll check the other videos out from the library - thank goodness I didn't have to buy this one!
Well, what are the problems? First, the opening. We hear voices upraised in anger, the sound of a shot, then someone's coffin lowered into the ground. There's no establishing time period, no nothing. It could be the day before the events that are to come, for all we know. No grieving people shown over the coffin (from a suitable distance so we wouldn't recognize anyone), nothing to make us care who this person might have been, or what it has got to do with the rest of the story.
Then there's the bloopers. The Warden of the college wants to ask Harriet Vane to come investigate the happenings in college, so she gathers together all the dons and asks their opinion! And yet a little later on Harriet is asking questions and pretending that she's merely there to help Miss Lydgate with her research. (In the book, it is to the students alone that she pretends to be other than what she is).
Wimsey as played by Edward Petherbridge is quite good, if a little old for the part (in closeups at least) and he's given a quite gratuitous scene on a train going into Germany. If they must give him more screen time, why not more screen time in Oxford?
The actress who played Harriet didn't catch my fancy, and she wasn't given much to do in investigating the crimes. Sayers' dialog was replaced in most cases by bad dialog from the scriptwriter.
I'll check the other videos out from the library - thank goodness I didn't have to buy this one!
- Eighty-Days
- Feb 8, 2003
- Permalink