Reviews

I don't understand the low scores logged here, particularly regarding the script. The dialogue in this series has the same style and atmosphere as the original Witcher novels, much closer than either the TV series or the games. People who complain that CGI for the "dragon" obviously haven't read the books: it's a creature from Polish or Eastern European mythology, not a dragon. Long dialogues on subjects such as philosophy and politics run throughout the Witcher, as does the expositional style, so the writers have done a good job here. Production values are very high, and I would argue with those who claim there is a lot of overacting. I thought it was quite naturalistic, given the situations the characters are in. I also thought that the characters were fleshed out quickly and effectively given the time restrictions.

Tom Riker's resistance group calls themselves the Maquis, after the WWII resistance fighters in Vichy France: but many cast members, particularly Avery Brooks (Ben Sisko), mispronounce it as if it is "Marquee". One is a group of tough mountain based anti-Nazi resistance fighters, the other is a large tent for parties: a bit of a difference! Other than this, it's a good episode with lots of character and plot development.

As a long time fan of the Discworld books, I was intrigued to see this adaptation. It turns out that the only things that have survived from the books is the name of the city of Ankh-Morpork, the characters' names, and some (only a few) of their characteristics. Initially I was put off by some of the artistic choices, such as transferring Ankh-Morpork from a quasi medieval setting to an alt-reality steampunk one, changing the gender of Wonse and CMOT Dibbler, and having the Patrician played by a woman, but always addressed as if male. The production is chaotic and noisy (I sometimes had to switch subtitles on to follow the dialogue) but that all suits the story. By Episode 3 I was hooked, and although not much of said story follows that of the books, it is a satisfying romp, quirky and well acted by a top notch cast. I can only guess that the really low scores came from fans of Pratchett's books, which I can understand, but if you look past the use of his name as a pure marketing exploitation, the series is actually quite good fantasy fiction.

I wanted to like this, I really did, but by episode 3, I was getting fed of of the unimaginative storyline, the use of conflict within the crew as a tension device, and the soap-opera level acting. What was the moment that made me decide I'd had enough? This episode, in which the pilot has to manoeuvre through an asteroid field so densely packed that they are having to squeeze through tiny gaps. Really? In this day and age, where we know that asteroids are spaced thousands, if not millions of miles apart? It's just lazy, and didn't actually add any tension or drama. Even the "political intrigue" aspects of the story are weak and poorly crafted.

Exasperated, I decided at his point that, despite my love of science fiction, this series is not for me

Some of the footage looks anachronistic to me, with one shot of fighters inappropriately in NATO pattern or Chinese helmets. Some supposed US soldiers fighting in undergrowth look more like NVA or Viet Cong as well. Some of the colourisation is suspect, with oddly bright green Sherman tanks, Waffen SS soldiers in green, rather than grey uniforms, and Corsairs and Hellcats being launched from US carriers in the Pacific coloured green instead of blue. There's also some mixed footage, with one shot of Russian T34s in a North African tank battle! These errors form a very brief element in the presentation, and though they grate a little, don't prevent this being an interesting brief history of WWII. Not a patch on The World At War, though, IMHO.