Poldark: Now, Then, and Before (the Books, the Original Series, and the Remake)

[photo fox]

This is the place for comparisons between the new version, the old version, and the books. Please restrict that type of conversation to here, this includes any 'but it's different in the books' comments or variations thereof.

[M. Darcy]

One thing I've noticed as how much faster they seem to be going (obviously since there are so much fewer episodes than the original series).  Demelza showing up in episode one when it wasn't until episode 2 originally.  Though, I thought it took longer before but I just checked - episode 2.

[Llywela]

One thing I've noticed as how much faster they seem to be going (obviously since there are so much fewer episodes than the original series).  Demelza showing up in episode one when it wasn't until episode 2 originally.  Though, I thought it took longer before but I just checked - episode 2.

There are eight episodes in this season and they are covering two books, so I suppose they have to rattle along at a fair lick - four episodes per book. When I watched the first Poldark, I saw it as a kind of omnibus version - the DVD I rented didn't have an option for viewing individual episodes, so I have no idea what happened per episode, it was just hours at a stretch for every disc!

 

Rewatching tonight, I was struck again by how different Demelza's introduction was compared with the '70s - this one being, I believe, more faithful to the books. The young Demelza propositioning Ross to avoid being sent home was evidently what infuriated writer Winston Graham when the original series aired back in 1975, he tried to get the rest pulled from the schedule because of it! It also struck me that in this version, Ross did not give Demelza's father any money when he sent him home without her - in the '75 version, he paid a couple of years' wages in advance and it was that cash-in-hand that persuaded her father to leave her there. I've not read the books, so don't know how either relates to those.

[Llywela]

Hmm. Episode two was good - after setting the scene in ep 1 they are beginning to delve deeper into the story now - and if I knew nothing of the story I'd not only thoroughly enjoy this new version but also have no complaints about the story being told. But already being familiar with the '70s version, I had this nagging feeling throughout ep two that something was missing, and then I realised what it was: sub-plots. Some of them appear to be missing. For instance, shouldn't Jim Carter be romancing Jinny Martin by now if not married already? But in this version we haven't even 'met' Zacky Martin, never mind his daughter and her romance with Jim. Looks like there wasn't room for them in this version. This is a very lean production. It's chosen which aspects of the novel it has time and space to focus on, and is sticking to them. The '70s version was more leisurely and therefore spent more time just getting to know the characters, including the supporting characters.

[Ceindreadh]

Am I wrong or did they tone down Captain Blamey's actions re the death of his wife?

IIRC (and it has been a long time since I read the books), I thought he'd hit her while he was drunk and killed her, and she was pregnant at the time.

Whereas in the new version it's almost self defence (she hit him first).

 

(am trying to resist the urge to re-read the books, at least until this season is finished, so I don't spoil myself for the bits I've already forgotton)

[steeledwithakiss]

I think you're right. I remember when I read it how shocked I was that Verity "forgave him" (I think it was the exact words) for what he did to his wife, like it was her right to do so. And Demelza was all Ross, you gotta help them sure he's a drunk but Verity loves him so she's ready to accept that little flaw. Still I'm a little fuzzy on the details of her death.

 

In the1x04 thread we were talking about Ross having many realizations about his love for Demelza but still being stuck on Elizabeth. I remember one of the book had Ross finally telling Demelza she was not second best, does anyone remember which book it was?

[Llywela]

I may be strange, but I'm not all that confused about the stories of the supporting characters. I don't feel the least bit slighted with regard to the storyline or characters. So far everything has made sense to me.

Oh, I'm not confused by the stories of the supporting characters. I'm just disappointed that they haven't been fleshed out enough to allow us to really care about any of them - they're just plot fodder, really. I thought at first it was because this adaptation has so few episodes, but having calculated it, it actually has more hours per book than the last one did, yet they managed to flesh out the supporting characters in 1975 in a way we're simply not seeing here. Dwight Enys is a prime example. In both the book and the '75 adaptation, we see him arrive in Cornwall as a stranger and strike up a firm friendship with Ross as they immediately discover a kindred spirit in one another and spend time discussing their shared liberal beliefs - here, Dwight was introduced as an old friend of Ross, which is more economical in plot terms, sure, as the getting-to-know-you stage can be skipped...but that getting-to-know-you stage is actually really important, as it allows us to build a bond with the new character and learn to understand who he is and come to care about him. The Dwight we met in 1975 was passionate about his work and beliefs. This Dwight...was kind of just there. I didn't feel we got to know him at all. Plot fodder. This is a very plot-centric adaptation, with not much meat on its bones.

 

On the other hand, this adaptation is doing a lovely job with  Ross and Demelza and their more immediate circle. I especially love the focus on female friendships - there've been some lovely scenes between the women.

 

This episode amused me immensely right at the start when Demelza left the play and went home to have the baby. I mean...just how long did that play go on for? Demelza had time to walk home, in the early stages of labour so she wouldn't have moved fast, and go through her entire labour - and only when the play ended did Ross borrow a horse to gallop home just as the baby was born. Either it was a really short labour or a really long play!

[skyways]

Thank you to all who responded. Llywela I feel you because you care for the secondary characters but I also agree that the adaptation has to keep the story strictly on those characters who are key or integral to Ross's story. Dwight is significant but not integral - not as integral as the female character who is yet to appear (I think you know who I'm talking about). She is likely to appear in Series 2 if this continues. So in that sense, they are not impacting the flow too much as I think newcomers are not really 'missing' anything. However characters like Mark Daniel and Keren, I wonder if viewers even registered them?? Now he is integral as his story impact's Ross's decision to concerning his Mine?? Do you remember this? My only concern with regards to the secondary characters is whether their motivations and thoughts will be clear to the viewer when certain significant events will happen in the future involving these characters. We will see how this adaption handles this.

 

Elizabeth is one such character. For instance , is she making a play for Ross or not, at this point? Some of their conversations have certain 'regretful innuendoes' that makes it likely. On the other hand, everything is still so civilized and above board. She is one character that for me hasn't been given the depth that may explain her actions later with regards to Ross - but again we will see this if the series continue.

 

Steeledwithakiss, beware!! the next few episodes are based on the book 'Demelza' which is for me the worst of all the books with regards to the Ross/Demelza relationship. Ross was quite rascally and an ass to her at times and they had one of their biggest challenges in this book. I saw hints of his 'attraction' to Elizabeth in this episode which I've been eager to see how this actor will play that and I think so far, it's not playing like it's gone for good or that he's now a happily married man 100% committed to his wife. Right now (book-wise and in my view) he's only 50% committed. So while it's unpleasant to watch, more is yet to come. Keep an eye for the ballroom incident in the next episode!!

 

Glade, I think you meant Elizabeth not Julia. Julia is the baby. What he said there about each lacking what the other has, is straight from the book. Did you notice the throat clearing after he caught himself staring a bit too much? lol

Edited April 6, 2015 by skyways

[Llywela]

I was less understanding about why the actress came back for Mark.  It seemed she must have seen him as a way out of the road show business, but I didn't get what she was expecting or why she was disappointed when she saw the house he was providing for her.  I never got why she would be expecting more from a working man in a small village, since she should have some idea what life was like in these places..

As skyways says, this is where my point about the under-development of supporting characters comes into play. Mark Daniel's marriage to Keren is the beginning of a major plot, yet you'd be forgiven for barely realising it happened here, and we certainly got very little sense of who either character is. Keren's aspirations did come across - as did her eye for Dwight - but everything was so compressed, her motivations weren't made clear at all, and they needed to be.

 

And not to harp on, but the point I made earlier about Dwight's introduction - in the original story, he was the first new friend Ross and Demelza made after their marriage, and the fact that he immediately accepted Demelza for who she is was hugely important to her, a really big step forward for her self-esteem. Introducing him as an old friend of Ross takes all of that away, because it casts him in the same position as Verity - accepting Demelza for Ross's sake. It's a small change, but it does have an impact. As much as Demelza loves Verity, Dwight's acceptance of her - as an outsider with no vested interest - was really important to her, and that's been lost.

 

As for Ross, I'm liking the progression of his story. Although he is still being played very much as the brooding romantic hero, his flaws are becoming more evident, which is as it should be. He's a very forward-thinking man in many ways, but he is also still a man of his time, high-handed and willful and autocratic. When he's alone with Demelza he's largely content...but something in him can never quite let go of Elizabeth, and that's his curse.

 

I'm enjoying this presentation of Francis, as well. I'm reminded of watching the '75 adaptation for the first time and slowly growing to despise Francis - until he hit rock bottom and suddenly his inner sweetheart was released. With this Francis, we've seen flashes of how sweet-natured he can be, but we've also been shown how that basic sweet nature is overlaid by layer upon layer of inferiority complex, jealousy  and resentment, which make him bitter and twisted and ineffective. He's a broken reed. He grew up in the shadow of an overbearing father and larger-than-life cousin and never got over it. He can't cope with anything.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Llywela

[halkatla]

I was half through with the first episode when I decided to read the books instead (at least the first one). I´m really glad I did because the books are awesome. I´m sure I would enjoy the show more if I couldn´t tell when they were changing stuff or leaving it out. I don´t get the reasoning behind any of it. So far, I´m only on book 2 and I´ve only seen episode 2, so I have my hopes up that some good scenes and funny or scary characters from the first book are still to come. I agree with whomever said above that there seem to be some subplots missing.

Edited April 8, 2015 by halkatla

[skyways]

Ahh! Rascally, self-righteous Ross! In the book, I wanted to slap him - after his trial, he was insufferable. But let me get first to the things that tickled me in this episode:

 

George's wig and graceful bow after his dance with Elizabeth

 

Sanson's accent

 

That intense scene between the Senior Poldark and the Junior Poldark! What great acting! It was close between them until Senior Poldark had that last parting shot and delivered it so perfectly. Wow. Poldark senior still has it!! Loved it.

 

I guess I'm suffering from "Inevitable Comparisons Syndrome' but I'm missing something from this adaptation. I can't identify it yet. Does someone know what it is? I don't know.....................maybe this Demelza is too sober? mature? I need to see more spirit but then again I'm not sure if this is it. I'm not feeling her as much as I was hoping to by now . I'm not saying she's not Demelza but maybe it's that she's not given that many lines?? Aaaargh I don't know.

 

And this adaptation denied me that scene when Ross handed back Demelza"s necklace to her and apologized for being an ass on the dance floor. WHY?? WHY??

 

All in all not a bad episode.

Edited April 14, 2015 by skyways

[purist]

I agree that the lack of fleshing-out of the supporting characters is a flaw of the new series, especially regarding the non-upper-class ones. The original had much, much more about people like Jud and Prudie, Mark Daniel, the Martins, and as a result it was much more 'gritty' and less 'pretty romance novel'.

 

As far as why Margaret was at the party--I assumed it was partly because of her relationship with Francis (after all, he's buying her lavish gifts) or even perhaps because she was well-known among the aristocrats--I assume that at one point or another any one of the men on the room had visited her, so it's not hard to believe that she would be a fixture at a gathering of her "clientele".

 

In the book we are told Margaret married a rich man who died at the age of 40 not long after. At the time of the card party she is therefore a wealthy widow who is permitted to move in upper-class circles.

[maystone]

I was a huge fan of the original Poldark series both in the books and on TV. And while I admired Robin Ellis as Ross, for me it was all about Angharad Rees as Demelza. As I recall, the series was so popular that there are now a fair number of 40ish women out there who were named Demelza by their very fannish mums. I was sad to read that Ms. Rees died a few years ago; she owned that part.

[kirinan]

I adored the 1975 version, but this one surprised me by how much I liked it. As Rhetorica said, the music and cinematography are beautiful. The girl who played Demelza is no Angharad Rees (who could be?), but I liked her (and the puppy; I "aww-ed" when she snuggled with him in front of the fire). I'm sort of meh on Elizabeth; I thought the '75 version (was it Jill Townsend?) was perfect because, as JudyObscure said, it was easy to dislike her. This one I don't dislike, but I don't like her all that much either. She is very pretty, though.

 

And the most important character, Ross--not bad. I liked him well enough, he's extremely hot (although no one could ever come close to Robin Ellis for me), he has a GREAT voice, but the one thing that stays with me the most about Aidan Turner? Man, does he look like a young Liev Schreiber! I don't know if anyone else sees it, but it was so clear to me that I had a hard time un-seeing it (not that I want to; I love Liev Schreiber) so I could see him as Ross Poldark.

 

It caught me, though; I'm definitely in for the long haul.

[Milz]

Maybe it's just me, maybe it's just me and the wine, but this feels like Masterpiece Presents: A Deadly Adoption. Aiden Turner sure is pretty but the character is just a smug, emo pastiche of Masterpiece men before him. OTOH, I loved Evil George from his first scene and I'm pretty sure I'm not supposed to.

 

It's not you. The first episode left me feeling unsatisfied. Turner smoldered, but that's all he did: smolder. Ross Poldark in the books is a complex character who only smolders when he's with Elizabeth and Demelza, never while yelling at Judd and Prudie, or talking with Zackie Martin.  BTW, that scar looks like a really bad prison tattoo. Seriously, I found myself cheering for the Carnes during the Nampara brawl.

 

So far, I like Verity, George Warleggan, and Garrick. They seem to come across as they should.

 

Elizabeth.....In the later books, Francis tells Demelza that Elizabeth loves only loves Elizabeth, which is partially why she married Francis (he was the Poldark with the $$$$$$$$$$$) . That's what made Elizabeth a character to dislike because you can't understand why Francis or Ross would be in love with someone that superficial and that self-serving. I'm not getting that from this Elizabeth. This one seems to be easily bullied by her mother and not so in love with herself (and money) that she has a soft spot for Ross.

 

Francis: Gosh they've really made him into a dandy and fop.

 

Jud and Prudie: WTF???? They're supposed to provide comic relief. There was nothing remotely funny or comedic about them. They're coming across as mean slovens, not funny ones.

 

Demelza: I'm reserving judgment right now.

 

I'll continue watching and hoping the characters develop more.

[Nidratime]

With regard to the pacing, that is problematic for the first few episodes, where they try to stuff a lot in that happened over a number of years, and it can be difficult to understand how time is passing, but that sorts itself out in the second half of the season.

 

 

I believe in the 70's version, they covered the first 7 books through 2 seasons. The first season was 16 episodes and the second was 13. I don't know how that's going to work out in comparison this time, but I do feel we're losing some plot exploration and some depth in the secondary characters in this production. Of course, we've only seen one episode, so who knows. I do think Jud and Prudie are a real miss here. They were wonderful in the 70's version.

[skyways]

For those wondering about the Elizabeth character, as a book-reader I  remained puzzled about this characterization and how she came off, to the very end. In the book like someone mentioned above, she's easy to get, not because she's a stereotype but because the author did a very good job painting a picture and explaining her thought and actions. Now I understand that TV portrayals will not be that communicative but the 'niceness and vulnerability' is off.

This is much discussed on the boards going forward. For me she's the only character that did not gel with me.( in comparison with the books)

[Llywela]

Yes Yes Yes Yes.  How in the heck did they decide on Red Hair????  It annoyed me no end in the original and now, when they had the oppty to get it right, they did it again!    Argh.   And yes, the gal this time is too tall by far and too boyish in body.    I could have lived with the light brown Elizabeth if Demelza had been correctly Cornish small and dark -- there would be the right sort of contrast.

Demelza is tall in the books, that detail is mentioned many times, so Eleanor Tomlinson's height is a good match for the character as an adult - she just couldn't pass for the child Demelza who first arrives at Nampara. But in this version, she's older anyway from the start - it only seems to be about a year between Ross bringing her home and the start of their relationship, instead of the four years in the book during which Demelza grows from a scrawny urchin to a tall, willowy woman. The red hair they went with as homage to Angharad Rees's Demelza, who was so ingrained in the public consciousness. So, Eleanor Tomlinson's hair is wrong for dark-haired Book!Demelza, but her height is a perfect match for the character as an adult.

 

George Warleggan, however, is all wrong, physically. Book!George is a big, heavy-set man who looks more like the grandson of a blacksmith than a rich banker. All through the books the contrast is highlighted between his hulking physical appearance and his controlled nature and position in society. This George is too small, too refined, too polished.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Llywela

[Hybiscus]

It's not a remake of  the earlier series though, it's a new adaptation - and one that's more faithful to the source material - of Winston Graham's books.

 

I'm enjoying it so far although I think that the cliff top galloping would benefit from a little judicious editing.

This is more faithful to the books?  I thought the '70s version was pretty faithful, enough so that I was never dissatisfied with it.  Based on casting alone, this version seems pretty crappy to me.  Aidan Turner is fine as Poldark, but he's not tall enough.  The gal who plays Demelza hasn't sold me yet, and the woman who plays Elizabeth chick is just awful.  I'll continue to watch it for awhile, but this is a classic case of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

[Llywela]

This is more faithful to the books?  I thought the '70s version was pretty faithful, enough so that I was never dissatisfied with it.

Well, any adaptation has to make compromises, and the two versions of Poldark make quite different choices along the way. This version has a tighter focus on Ross than the other, and does play his and Demelza's story more faithfully (well, in some ways, it compresses a lot) - but then it makes compromises in other areas, so overall neither can claim to be truly faithful to the books!

IMDB lists Robin Ellis as a "Reverend Halse" -- above post said he will be a judge. 

Judges (or magistrates, rather) in those days were drawn from the body of local dignitaries and public figures, so a reverend might also be a magistrate.

[jjj]

The original series is also available on Acorn TV, which has British shows.  Like Netflix and Hulu, the first month is free, then a similar monthly fee.  I may sign up this summer to see the original "Poldark" again, which I enjoyed at the time.  I don't know if I ever saw the second season of it. 

[Milz]

Demelza is tall in the books, that detail is mentioned many times, so Eleanor Tomlinson's height is a good match for the character as an adult - she just couldn't pass for the child Demelza who first arrives at Nampara. But in this version, she's older anyway from the start - it only seems to be about a year between Ross bringing her home and the start of their relationship, instead of the four years in the book during which Demelza grows from a scrawny urchin to a tall, willowy woman. The red hair they went with as homage to Angharad Rees's Demelza, who was so ingrained in the public consciousness. So, Eleanor Tomlinson's hair is wrong for dark-haired Book!Demelza, but her height is a perfect match for the character as an adult.

 

George Warleggan, however, is all wrong, physically. Book!George is a big, heavy-set man who looks more like the grandson of a blacksmith than a rich banker. All through the books the contrast is highlighted between his hulking physical appearance and his controlled nature and position in society. This George is too small, too refined, too polished.

 

IIRC, Winston Graham based Demelza's physical appearance on his wife.

 

Anyhow, I agree that George is all wrong physically speaking. The personality is similar so far. But Elizabeth is all wrong. I hope they don't cop out and change Elizabeth as her marriage to Francis continues. Elizabeth was a cold, self-centered bitch when Francis married her: she didn't evolve into one.

[skyways]

I'm not one to fixate on physical appearances when it comes to adaptations AS LONG AS the essence of the character is accurate and comes across. George Warleggan is played very well because the character is the same - smooth, cunning and smart with some inferiority complex. The lady who plays Elizabeth has lips like that. The make-up is the least of the problem for the character.

I must say this Demelza, I really wanted to like her more than I did. The other 1970's Demelza appealed to me more in terms of how the book presented her. I don't mind if she's tall or short but I don't yet see the free spirit and fire and cheekiness.

[Clanstarling]

I find it kind of frustrating when I see people comparing this version to the 70s version, as if that is the template, or even the gold standard. This version has nothing to do with that version.

The 70's version may not be the "template" or "gold standard" but it IS the version a number of us watched and is the reason many of us are watching this version. If you watched that version, you can't help but compare - just as readers of the books will compare this version to the books.  I watched the original TV version, of which I remember very little except for the actors who played Ross, Elizabeth and Demelza. I am watching this version because of it, and because of Aiden Turner - who I first saw in Being Human, and then The Hobbit. He's just so very pretty - and has quite the glower. But also an amazing smile, when the script will call for it.

 

I saw very little acting from Turner beyond smolders, glowers, grimaces, and a look of extreme constipation.  Of course this could be the fault of the director.  Ross Poldark has plenty to be miserable about when he returns from America. But unlike the Warleggans, Jud, and Zackie, Ross is a gentleman. Walking about with a face like thunder isn't what a gentleman did back in the day: they grinned and bore it.

Ross may be a gentleman by birth, but the backstory (at least so far as the tv version says) is that he was less than gentlemanly in his actions in general. Plus, I would respectfully suggest that it's a bit difficult to us to know if gentlemen in the 1700's, and Cornishmen in particular, walked around with glowering faces.

Edited June 24, 2015 by clanstarling

[LittleIggy]

Judd and Prudie in the 70s series were so funny, especially Judd. These two, not so much.

[Milz]

 

 

Ross may be a gentleman by birth, but the backstory (at least so far as the tv version says) is that he was less than gentlemanly in his actions in general. Plus, I would respectfully suggest that it's a bit difficult to us to know if gentlemen in the 1700's, and Cornishmen in particular, walked around with glowering faces.

 

Book Ross was "high spirited" and had some indiscretion that prompted him to go into the army. But he wasn't any less than a gentleman for that and it's clear in the book that he wasn't any less either. Book Ross knew his place and what was expected of him as a member of an old, landed, but not titled family. 

 

 

Elizabeth's mother is a piece of work, not too nice and towards the end there was a scene with Elizabeth that seemed to foreshadow Elizabeth getting a little more bitchy.  I can see where it would be hard to have your choice not to wait for your true love thrown in your face all the time and it might make you hard.

 

 

Here's the thing. Ross isn't Elizabeth's true love. Elizabeth is Elizabeth's true love. And it was Elizabeth's decision to marry Francis: Mama didn't push her into it. At least, that's how it was in the book and the 70s series: Elizabeth tells Ross that she loved Francis and any feelings she did have for Ross two years prior were a kind of puppy love and nothing more. Book Elizabeth doesn't turn into a cold bitch: she's one from the start.

[Clanstarling]

I don't know anything about "book" Ross. I may have read the books after I watched the 70's version (likely did, that is my habit), but I don't remember anything about them. I try, in general, not to compare books to television or movie versions. In my experience, I've found that it just leads to frustration and disappointment.

 

So, when watching a film or TV series, I go by how the character is depicted on screen - not what the source material states. YMMV.

[Milz]

I don't know anything about "book" Ross. I may have read the books after I watched the 70's version (likely did, that is my habit), but I don't remember anything about them. I try, in general, not to compare books to television or movie versions. In my experience, I've found that it just leads to frustration and disappointment.

 

So, when watching a film or TV series, I go by how the character is depicted on screen - not what the source material states. YMMV.

 

I haven't seen the 70's version or read the books, but I did watch the first episode yesterday and enjoyed it. I find it very interesting to read the comments comparing this show with the previous version and the book. The comments about Elizabeth are particularly interesting; even though I have no exposure to the other versions, I would agree that she definitely seems softer here than perhaps she is supposed to be. I got more of sense that she is sorry about what happened to Ross but she's not going to go back on her word to Francis. The only thing (to me) that indicated that maybe she didn't really care for Ross was the lack of communication between the two of them once he returned-- she couldn't have sent a letter? (Though the same goes for Ross, good grief.)

 

Aiden Turner is easy on the eyes and the scenery porn will probably sustain me through seven episodes, even if I don't end up loving it.

 

When Debbie Horsfield says "I didn’t feel under any ­pressure about the 1970s adaptation. If I was under any pressure it was to do ­justice to the books.” and "“I felt no pressure at all because my source is the book not any previous ­versions, the same as if I’d done an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice. The source is what I felt I had to do a good job on. I didn’t think at all about any previous adaptation.”, then comparisons to the book are completely valid.

 

. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/08/bbc-poldark-adaptation-eleanor-tomlinson-aidan-turner

[Clanstarling]

When Debbie Horsfield says "I didn’t feel under any ­pressure about the 1970s adaptation. If I was under any pressure it was to do ­justice to the books.” and "“I felt no pressure at all because my source is the book not any previous ­versions, the same as if I’d done an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice. The source is what I felt I had to do a good job on. I didn’t think at all about any previous adaptation.”, then comparisons to the book are completely valid.

 

. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/08/bbc-poldark-adaptation-eleanor-tomlinson-aidan-turner

I did not say comparisons to the books were invalid. I simply said that I, myself, try not compare books to film or tv.  I also said that mileage varied - meaning that if comparing to the books floats your boat, more power to you.

 

It simply doesn't do that for me, and since I didn't read them, I have nothing to base my opinions on except I see on the screen. When I refer to what's been shown, I only mean what's shown in this series, because I only remember  few of the key characters from the 70's version, and only on a superficial level (I thought Robin Ellis was hot then, and Aiden Turner hot now.)

 

But I do think it is also valid for those who remember more about the old show than I do (and who are rewatching now) to compare this series with that one.

 

So, comparing this series to the books=Valid. Comparing this series to the original TV series=Valid. Basing observations and opinions solely on this series=Valid.

Edited June 26, 2015 by clanstarling

[lucindabelle]

I love if! Loved the 70s version too which I watched on Netflix a few years back after watching a few episodes by chance back in the day when I was a kid.

Robin Ellis height and presence can't be equalled but I think At is doing great.

This Elizabeth seems a sweetheart without confidence. I'm not sure his coming back with her not yet married works. Did that happen in the other series? I remembered they were married already but could be wrongl but just the fact that Elizabeth was going to ask Ross what they should do shows she was open to persuasion.

I think having Ross fall for a blonde goddess aristocrat actually makes more sense than his loving a pretty sweetie who's weak.

I like Demello and Garrick.

[Llywela]

This Elizabeth seems a sweetheart without confidence. I'm not sure his coming back with her not yet married works. Did that happen in the other series? I remembered they were married already but could be wrongl but just the fact that Elizabeth was going to ask Ross what they should do shows she was open to persuasion.

Elizabeth is engaged to Francis but not yet married in every version of the story - books and TV adaptations. The fact that she isn't married yet is central to the development of numerous characters and storylines, because she could have changed her mind, but didn't. And her decision impacts on other people, not just herself.

[LittleIggy]

Watching this new version brings back such wonderful memories of the original series that I want to see it again. As a young teen, I was enthralled by "Poldark." I absolutely adored Angharad Rees' Demelza and could not imagine why Ross was obsessed with the frigid Elizabeth. The guy who played George in TOS had, to borrow a line from the Bard, "a lean and hungry look." The actor in the new version is too pretty. And the new Judd and Prudie are awful. I could go on and on.

[Llywela]

-screeching to a halt in the forum- sorry i'm late, cable was out and am only seeing the first ep now. How many books are they going to try and cover with these 8 eps?

This series covers the main events of the first two books.

 

I am not familiar with the books this series is based on. Are they modern works, or older classics?

The Poldark novels are a series of 12 books of finely-researched historical fiction written by Winston Graham over a period of about 40 years. The first was published in the 1940s.

[janeta]

Up to 12, huh?  I think I only read the first 10; i know i had to ask my sister to try and find three of them for me when she went to england once.  I will have to see if i can find the last two.  Looks like they're re-issuing them, so hopefully they'll get up to them eventually.

Edited July 1, 2015 by janeta

[duVerre]

I have never read the Poldark books, but in general I tolerate a lot of changes when a book I love is adapted for t.v. or a movie, as storytelling works in different ways in different mediums. For instance, what seems ominous/exciting/whatever on the page may seem boring or puzzling when done by an actor--and vice versa.

 

If I wanted the series to be as close to the books as possible, I would be grateful that, in the new version, Ross's marriage to Demelza isn't shotgun (I gather that that was invented for the 70s series). But I liked the pregnancy as a plot device, and would have preferred they use it now. Throughout the original series, Demelza feels threatened by Elizabeth, who has such an enduring hold on Ross, and some of that insecurity seems driven by the fact that Ross married her due to her pregnancy. Would he have married her otherwise? As the 70s series went on, Demelza come to accept that Ross really did love her, but her pregnancy as a bride (as well as Elizabeth living close by) caused the shadow of a doubt. And the doubt gave the actress more to play, and it made the marriage seem perilous at times (well, at least to me). How deeply Ross really loved Demelza was a question that the series took 2 whole seasons to resolve.

 

In the current version (I've seen just the first three eps), Ross marries Demelza because that is what an upright man does for a woman after sleeping with her. And I think he also likes the fact that the marriage would be a public declaration of where his sympathies lie--with the poor and working class, not bankers and the aristocracy. So he marries on principle. But in the 70s, Ross was motivated both by principle and a real fear of what would happen to Demelza if she returned to her old life, reputation ruined, with another mouth to feed. That motive is something actual and concrete--not just a value or philosophy. It's a point of anxiety and conflict for Ross and Demelza--and it's conflict that makes drama.  (Naturally, Ross also wants to raise his own child, his own way. But it seems secondary to the dilemma of a pregnant and penniless Demelza, walking toward town, all alone.)

 

I don' t know how other viewers feel about this.

Edited July 6, 2015 by duVerre

[NumberCruncher]

If I wanted the series to be as close to the books as possible, I would be grateful that, in the new version, Ross's marriage to Demelza isn't shotgun (I gather that that was invented for the 70s series). But I liked the pregnancy as a plot device, and would have preferred they use it now. Throughout the original series, Demelza feels threatened by Elizabeth, who has such an enduring hold on Ross, and some of that insecurity seems driven by the fact that Ross married her due to her pregnancy. Would he have married her otherwise? As the 70s series went on, Demelza come to accept that Ross really did love her, but her pregnancy as a bride (as well as Elizabeth living close by) caused the shadow of a doubt. And the doubt gave the actress more to play, and it made the marriage seem perilous at times (well, at least to me). How deeply Ross really loved Demelza was a question that the series took 2 whole seasons to resolve.

 

In the current version (I've seen just the first three eps), Ross marries Demelza because that is what an upright man does for a woman after sleeping with her. And I think he also likes the fact that the marriage would be a public declaration of where his sympathies lie--with the poor and working class, not bankers and the aristocracy. So he marries on principle. But in the 70s, Ross was motivated both by principle and a real fear of what would happen to Demelza if she returned to her old life, reputation ruined, with another mouth to feed. That motive is something actual and concrete--not just a value or philosophy. It's a point of anxiety and conflict for Ross and Demelza--and it's conflict that makes drama.  (Naturally, Ross also wants to raise his own child, his own way. But it seems secondary to the dilemma of a pregnant and penniless Demelza, walking toward town, all alone.)

 

I don' t know how other viewers feel about this.

You will get more insight into Ross's motivation in marrying Demelza, as well as the realization of his full feelings towards her, in episode 4. Demelza's insecurity you speak of about her marriage and Ross's relationship with Elizabeth is very much present in this new adaptation. You'll hear her verbalize doubts about both in episode 4. Her jealousy/fear regarding Elizabeth is also very blatant in episode 8.

I can't speak to the pregnancy plotline in the 70s version, but IMO, this version does a good job tying Demelza's pregnancy into her insecurity about her marriage.

Edited July 6, 2015 by NumberCruncher

[duVerre]

Thank you, NumberCruncher, I'm glad to know that. i'll try not to speak too soon in the future ... Now I'm intrigued!  

[Llywela]

I'll add that in the books, Demelza did not need a pregnancy and shotgun wedding to be threatened by Elizabeth. She was threatened by Elizabeth's mere existence. It's hard to describe. Book!Elizabeth is like this shining light of what a noblewoman is meant to be, she has men falling for her left, right and centre not because of who she is but because of how she looks. She is beautiful, graceful, elegant. She looks fragile. She makes men want to take care of her. She exudes class and good-breeding effortlessly. Everything about her makes Demelza intensely conscious of the poverty of her own upbringing. Elizabeth is a lady, and her gentility makes Demelza accutely aware of being a scullery maid.

 

Plus, for Ross, Elizabeth is the one that got away. He loved her first. Demelza doesn't feel she can compete. It doesn't help that Elizabeth isn't above making a play for him from time to time - not because she wants him, but to prove she still has it, so to speak. She makes Demelza intensely insecure, even after they've become friends.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Llywela

[limecoke]

I'm liking this, I really am.  This Ross is good-looking and smoldering and all that and, for the most part, is playing the part well.  However, this version of Poldark is just clipping along way too quickly for me.  I've read the books multiple times (I do that with favorites) and in this production, the depth and breadth of the story is just not coming through.  For example, it seems as though Verity and Blamey fall in love in two minutes or less and it's a bit hard to buy their love story considering all the trouble it causes.  In the books, and in Poldark 1.0, their meetings  at Ross and Demelza's happened over time and it even took some doing for Demelza to convince Ross to be a party to it.  While 1.0 left out all kinds of information, they did a much better job of giving the viewer a feel for the vastness of the story.  This one is just failing to do that completely.

 

I'm not all that chuffed with this version's George Warleggan.  Can't really put my finger on why but he's not working for me.  While I greatly admire the actor playing Jud Paynter (he was tremendous in Bleak House), Paul Curran really brought the Jud of the books to life and Philip Davis has put a different spin on the character that I don't like.  Too nasty.  

 

I highly recommend reading the books...every one of them from ROSS POLDARK to BELLA POLDARK.  They are magnificent.

Edited July 6, 2015 by limecoke

[Llywela]

I'm not all that chuffed with this version's George Warleggan.  Can't really put my finger on why but he's not working for me.

For me it's that he's too good at being aristocratic - he comes across as a natural gentleman, whereas book!George never quite looks the part and always tries that little too hard. This actor isn't a good physical match for the role, being small and refined - unlike the descriptions of George as a big, thick-necked man who can dress as fine as he likes but always has the look of the blacksmith about him.

[limecoke]

Llywela, I think you might have nailed it.  Ralph Bates was so good at bringing that "blacksmith's son made good" feel to the character.  Ralph's George seemed always aware of what he had been and what he had become so he overcompensated by wanting everything Ross had.  He wanted to buy Ross's mines and he badly wanted Ross's old love.  He tried but could never match Ross's gentlemanly ease with himself.  Ross had the gift of holding his own with both the gentry and the underclass.  George wanted no part of the underclass and was a party to their harsh treatment (like Jim Carter, whose story has been left out of the new version). The new guy manages none of that - he comes off as more of a all-around entitled fop.

Edited July 6, 2015 by limecoke

[Nidratime]

This looks like the thread for me....

 

With regard to theGeorge Warleggan from this adaptation, to me, he looks a lot like Francis Poldark. Part of it is dress, but part of it is that he's got the same type of build, general hair color and style and even his manner. In fact, George and Francis look more like relatives than Francis and Ross. Now, granted relatives -- especially cousins -- don't necessarily look similar but the production hasn't made an effort to make George stand out from the gentry around him, like the 1975 version did.

[duVerre]

 

For me it's that he's too good at being aristocratic - he comes across as a natural gentleman

 

That's a really interesting observation about George, and it certainly applies to Ralph Bates. But there's another side of me that thinks that Jack Farthing's Warleggan seems so much the gentleman's gentleman, so much the ne-plus-ultra of aristocrats, because he studied them very hard, from a close range, for a very long time. He probably practised their manner in front of the mirror, and has actually done them one better at this point.

 

I confess that I am loving his performance. He is doing a splendid, old-fashioned Scarlet Pimpernel-type villain, and he entertains the heck out of me. 

 

 

In the books, Demelza did not need a pregnancy and shotgun wedding to be threatened by Elizabeth. She was threatened by Elizabeth's mere existence.

 

Oh, I agree that Demelza would not need a shotgun wedding to feel threatened by Elizabeth. After all, she’s … Elizabeth, epitome of beauty and breeding. Just dealing with her appearance and class would make any poor servant girl insecure. Add the fact that Elizabeth and Ross have a shared romantic past… well, Demelza carries on in spite of it all, but it must feel terrible from time to time.

 

It's just that--this being a script rather than narrative prose--part of me expected a specific development to gather Demelza's insecurities at flashpoint. For instance, in The Glass Menagerie, the play could have shown us how timid and self-conscious Laura is, and ended with her withdrawing from the world. But as it's written, the play shows us how timid and self-conscious Laura is, and how, on top of those feelings, she endures an awful visit from the Gentleman Caller. That event crystallizes all of her insecurities and fears, and sort of becomes their symbolic centre. And, pushed along by this, Laura finally withdraws from the world. 

 

At any rate, I'm looking forward to how the series will show Demelza's insecurities as the marriage goes on.

Edited July 9, 2015 by duVerre

[Milz]

 

I'm not all that chuffed with this version's George Warleggan.  Can't really put my finger on why but he's not working for me. 

 

It's because he's coming off as a tattle tale school boy. And we are constantly reminded of how bad George is because he's always whispering into Francis' ear before Francis does something stupid.

[skyways]

I like this version of Warleggan. The 70's version and book version made no impression on me.

[Milz]

I like this version of Warleggan. The 70's version and book version made no impression on me.

 

In the first book, Warleggan is Francis' gambling buddy. In the second book, when Ross and Francis expose the card cheating Warleggan cousin, George becomes a full fledged enemy. The third book and after, George Warleggan and Ross are arch enemies.

 

I haven't seen P15's Christmas at Trenwith yet, but if it does follow the book, we'll see that George has the hots for Elizabeth unless that's cut out.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Milz

[skyways]

Truth is I didn't pay that much attention to George in the books until 'Warleaggan'. And as mentioned before this series is faithful to the story as it affects Ross/Demelza, especially Ross. Going forward in this series and without giving anything away, you will find that to be true ( especially with regards to the points you mentioned in your post)

[Llywela]

This version escalates the feud between Ross and George, brings their bitter enmity to the boil earlier than happens in the books, where it's more of a slow boil.

[Milz]

Truth is I didn't pay that much attention to George in the books until 'Warleaggan'. And as mentioned before this series is faithful to the story as it affects Ross/Demelza, especially Ross. Going forward in this series and without giving anything away, you will find that to be true ( especially with regards to the points you mentioned in your post)

 

Well, it does seem like P15 tried to keep the Demelza-Ross story as book-close as possible, but sacrificed the other characters.  And the way Winston Graham wrote the books, it's conceivable to skim or skip completely the non-Ross/Demelza parts and come away with the feeling that P15 did a good job with Poldark . the trouble with that is the non-Ross/Demelza parts are equally important to Poldark, unless any future series will concentrate on Ross and Demelza (and as the series goes on, that will run the risk of becoming boring.)

Edited July 7, 2015 by Milz

[Llywela]

I am torn over it, because I really do love how faithful P15 is to Ross and Demelza's story, which is beautifully told. I just regret that it comes at the expense of just about everyone else in the story, and am every bit as disappointed in those changes as the 1975 book-readers were by the changes to Ross and Demelza. I absolutely believe that it is possible to tell Ross and Demelza's story faithfully without shortchanging the other characters in the story. Some are worse off than others. I've mentioned Francis before. I get the distinct impression that Debbie Horsfield neither likes nor understands his character in the slightest, since in her hands he is transformed from a mercurial, witty, sardonic, depressive ne'er-do-well rake into an ineffectual fop who can't do anything right. She changes his story in a myriad of small yet significant ways to ensure that he is almost always presented in the worst possible light. It's possible that this is intended to accentuate the Elizabeth-Ross-Demelza love triangle, but that approach is both short-sighted and unnecessary, and I always hate the kind of writing that feels impelled to diminish one character to make another look better. A lot of screen-writers do it, and I never feel it's necessary, they'd do better to trust in the virtues character they seek to bolster. And it leaves her a lot of ground to make up next season. She does seem to like George, though, since she tends to present him in rather a better light than the books ever do.

 

Keren Daniel is another character who suffers, in much the same way as Francis. Book!Keren isn't particularly likeable, but she is sympathetic. She is given extended POV passages that allow us to understand who she is, how she feels and why she makes the choices she does. We may not approve of her, but we can understand her, this young, unhappy, ambitious girl who yearns for a better life and tries to achieve it in all the wrong ways. P75 Keren is also shown in a sympathetic light - again, we may not approve, but we can understand. P15 strips her of all perspective. We are not shown her point of view even once. And, like Francis, her story is altered in numerous small but significant ways to present her in the worst possible light at all times. She is even made the villain of her own murder - to the point that even the murder is fudged into an accident, presumably so that hero Ross doesn't have to be portrayed as helping an out-and-out murderer (because heavens forfend this story be allowed any shades of grey). Or possibly because Horsfield read the passages of the book written from the point of view of the villagers, who never trusted the outsider and blamed her for everything, and took those passages to be authorial censure rather than character perspective. That's a dangerous game in a book written so intensively in the third person limited, in which every character is the hero of his or her own story and their bias only rarely softened by authorial interjection, because he trusts his readers to be able to read between the lines.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Llywela