Comments | meganbmoore: Pillars of Earth

meganbmoore

Pillars of Earth

Apr 10, 2010 12:36

Youtube trailer for upcoming mini:

Can anyone who's read the book guess at my likely level of like/annoyance? I actually don't know much about it, Ken Follett's books not normally being my thing and all.

tv: pillars of earth

Comments 6

nebulia April 10 2010, 18:05:49 UTC

I don't know about your level of like/annoyance, though as a history major beginning to focus in on medieval studies I both loved and hated the historical accuracy level. The culture and the architecture (oh, the architecture, he's immaculate with architectural terms and history of the era), he has down pretty well. The language is relatively modern (though the frequent use of the word 'fuck' would not necessarily have been out of place amongst commoners in the era, given where the word comes from), but that kind of bothered me sometimes--on the other hand, using the actual English of the late middle Ages would not have been feasible. I noted a lot of historical accuracy--however, there are some moments (I'm not a big fan of this review, as I disagree with her on the fact that the people she says are completely historically accurate aren't (really good, extremely accurate medieval read: The Name of the Rose, Umberto Eco, but there are no female characters whatsoever as it takes place in a monastery), but the list of historical ( ... )

nebulia April 10 2010, 20:15:18 UTC

And upon rereading, ouch,, typo-ridden post. My most sincere apologies.

meganbmoore April 10 2010, 20:30:17 UTC

I'm pretty big on medieval TV/movies, even if a lot of them end up not-great. I'm fine with what we'd consider gender-iffy-ness/fail today in things where that actually did happen and was normal (like, men like William Marshall and William the Conquerer may have comparatively treated their wives [and probably daughters] like gold as compared to to other men of the time, but it would probably still been bad for our minds) if it's in that context. I'll likely at least watch the first episode or two. In the meantime, I think I have a book of Sharon Kay Penman's about the same political struggle that I may read before that airs.

nebulia April 10 2010, 20:39:29 UTC

Follet's covering the political/war issues is really quite good as well, I did forget to mention that. My issues with Penman are not her research, but the way she portrays her characters--not characterization itself, but they have a modern (modern in Europe being post Renaissance and Reformation, more or less) outlook and view of the self and the world. I found Follet's characters slightly less modern, though not perfect by any stretch of the imagination.

sisterjune April 10 2010, 18:22:58 UTC

Oooh shiny and it has rufus sewell looking all scruffy and delicious. Provided early reviews for it aren't awful I think I'll give this a whirl when it comes out. Oh (to my great delight) I have been seeing an up-tick in fantasy and historicals on tv recently (eagerly awaits song of ice and fire tv series). really with the money us studious have and the vast amount of cable channels, there's no reason why we shouldn't have more shows based off of historical and fantasy novels (or original premises).

and I haven't read the books at all so I cant help on that front. :(

lilacfield April 11 2010, 01:33:43 UTC

Follett likes writing strong women. Here we have a woman who lives in the forest while raising her fatherless son, and another woman who, among other things, starts her business from scratch then starts it again when Bad Guy burns her merchandise down to the ground. I think these characters should translate well to the screen, providing the script isn't dismissive of them.

On another note, I like one of the male MCs very much, the priest. He's a very pious person who knows how to be cunning without breaking the teachings of his religion. I just hope the script won't make him out as a super-saint or such.