This show is riveting, if you’re into 12th century politicking, which i kind of am.
It is a great show. The character development is quiet good so far and the the ambitions and manipulations are compelling. The scene in episode #2 of Ellen the “witch” squatting and pissing on the Bishop was awesome. 
Like Spartacus, the new episodes are made available on Netflix streaming within a few hours of airing.
I was very surprised and happy to see it on Netflix so quickly!
To me, the first episode was a little “meh,” but the second was great! William’s mother is the creepiest creeper ever.
I was wondering about the scene in the first couple of episodes in which Lady Hamleigh was bathing William Hamleigh. But the third episode seemed to be more explicitly suggesting an incestuous relationship.
Was that in the book? I just read it not two months ago and I don’t remember it being even hinted at.
No idea. I haven’t read the book, so I’m only talking about the series (and I’d prefer not to hear any spoilers from the book).
Bump.
I wasn’t a fan of the novel (though I did read it) but I’m watching the miniseries on Netflix. How often do you get to see anything medieval on TV after all?
The actor who plays Jack is weirdly hot isn’t he? Waleran is a bit too “distant ancestor of Al Swearengen but not nearly as interesting” due to the love for Deadwood I suppose.
I actually like that Lady Hamleigh’s character isn’t as physically hideous as she is in the books- they substituted a large birthmark on an otherwise-not-unattractive woman for the boils of the book. The incest though is a bit too blatant, though- whether it’s the writing or the acting- serves to humanize Will slightly from the Sir Snidely of Whiplash portrayal in the book (in this you get that he’s not as evil as he is f*cked up by circumstance. Alfred is also less of a villain than a “Brothers of Soy un Perdador” character.
It’s been years since I read the novel: did her husband die the same way in the novel? (And I’d never seen an actual bleeding tube like that- cool.)
I like Tony Curran as Stephen and think he does some good acting, especially in his seizure before St. Adolphus. Brother Cuthbert is one of the best actors in the series.
Other thoughts now that it’s a few episodes gone?
By biggest complaint about novel v. miniseries is that while I didn’t like the novel I thought it had a kick-ass beginning: the burning at the stake of the Frenchman and the girl (later revealed to be Ellen) biting off the head of a bird and cursing his accusers. It was this opening that actually convinced me to read the novel. While they do have a watered down version of this in flashback later on in the miniseries I couldn’t believe they didn’t open with this.
I’m a fan of the book, so I was really looking forward to this. My husband sat down with me to watch the first one and now we’re hooked. We caught up with 3 episodes in a night and then had to wait a whole week to see the next one. 
I’ve been pretty impressed with all the acting so far, although the actress playing Maude hasn’t really had much of an opportunity to show off - I think she’s got potential.
Anyway, 12th c. soap opera or not, I find it riveting.
The scene of Waleran/McShane putting the nails in his shoes and walking to the alter was one of my favorite, showing that he actually does deep down have some fear of God and for his soul.
Wow. Another episode that was pretty epic in the scope of events and change. It feels a bit abrupt at the time, but I think they do a pretty good job of advancing the plot as far as pacing is concerned, even if there are periods of years/months between episodes/scenes. I have not read the books, but I know they span many years, so I think they’re meeting that challenge fairly well.
I had the feeling with this ep, more than the others, that they had some choppy editing. I’d wondered how realistically they were going to manage the ceiling collapse since they don’t have a Spielberg budget to work with but all in all I though they did a pretty good job of blending animation and “Star Trek rocks”.
Eddie Redmayne who plays Jack- at first I liked him but something about his perfomance begins to get annoying; anybody else notice it?
Anyone know if netflix will carry the final episode? I’m getting a big fat “save DVD” option only. I suppose that might be because it hasn’t aired but it didn’t happen with any of the other episodes. And my stupid cable company doesn’t carry stars.
I don’t know if it will or not, but it said "DVD only " or something like that last week on Friday but it was still available for streaming on Saturday.
One question about the final episode:
Is there any real-world equivalent to the stone that Jack used to create the “miracle” of the weeping statue? (It was a stone that dripped water after dark.)
The series was mostly pretty faithful, but they changed a lot of the ending. They truncated it a lot. I guess they wanted to end it while they could still use the same actors, since the characters age a lot more in the book. They cut out all of the Thomas Becket stuff, changed William’s end (well they didn’t change how he got it, but when and why), and drastically changed Waleran’s end.
Most of the changes, I didn’t have a problem with (I actually liked it that Aliena’s brother, Richard, came home, stayed alive and stayed Earl, and was just a more heroic character in general), but I didn’t like what they did with Waleran. In the book, in which he is always depicted as genuinely pious and God-fearing, just blinded by (what he sincerely believes is God-centered) ambition, and when he falls from grace, he humbly and sincerely goes to he Kingsbridge monostary and asks to be allowed to live out his life in repentance as a simple monk. It’s rare that you see that kind of inner redemption in an archvillain, and it was one of my favorite things in the novel (along with the completely non-cynical depiction of a truly good-hearted, intelligent and scrupulous cleric as a hero. That was something the series DID preserve). In the series, the fulfilment of his curse was foolishly literalized. I guess they thought the audience would want to see him get his just desserts.
The incest angle with the Hamleighs was not in the book, by the way, but I thought it did add something to those character arcs. William really is pretty much a cartoon in the book.
I was pretty disappointed that church burning, book stealing Jack never paid for his crimes. He really was no better than the bad guys.
Decent series, a reasonable diversion, but it was plagued by hammy overacting in a few characters. Also, the characters were pretty two-dimensional. The evil characters were Evil. The good characters were Good. Very few shades of gray.
I don’t agree with that. Prior Phillip faked the relic and admitted to pride. Jack burned down the old church, stole that book in the last episode and faked a relic. Tom Builder abandoned his infant son and slept with Ellen even though they weren’t married. Waleran was evil but was also driven by genuine religious faith (to the extent of scourging himself). OK, the Hamleighs were pretty much pure evil but aside from them, there was ambiguity.
So am I the only one who doesn’t really like it? I don’t hate it, but none of the characters is particularly compelling, so I won’t be sad to see it end soon.
Well it’s already over so you should be happy!