The Forsyte Saga, Series 2

Rating:
Summary: McKee is Sensational...
Review: As one of England's most gifted actors, Gina Mckee is superb in "The Forsyth Saga" (BBC) . Her subtle, gentle performance gives her character an intensely complex dimension usually stripped out of BBC period dramas. KcKee almost leaves the other actors for dead in many of her most important scenes. An actor of superb technique and armed with undeniably the most beautiful, complex profiles in contemporary film and television. Her alluring, slightly theatrical presence and physicality are what make this remake so impressive. A fine example of an exceptional actor totally in control of her craft, handling an incredibly difficult role with decorum that only a first rate, classically trained, and gifted actor could.

Rating:
Summary: McKee is Sensational...
Review: As one of England's most gifted actors, Gina Mckee is superb in "The Forsyth Saga" (BBC) . Her subtle, gentle performance gives her character an intensely complex dimension usually stripped out of BBC period dramas. KcKee almost leaves the other actors for dead in many of her most important scenes. An actor of superb technique and armed with undeniably the most beautiful, complex profiles in contemporary film and television. Her alluring, slightly theatrical presence and physicality are what make this remake so impressive. A fine example of an exceptional actor totally in control of her craft, handling an incredibly difficult role with decorum that only a first rate, classically trained, and gifted actor could.

Rating:
Summary: What? The story of Soames Forsyte having a happy ending?
Review: For most of the four episodes of "The Forsyte Saga, Series 2" (a.k.a. "The Forstye Sage: To Let") I had a sense of disappointment that it was just not as good as the first part, produced a year earlier. I was able to trace my feelings to a couple of key points. First, I had never read the John Galsworthy novels and had not seen either the 1949 Hollywood film "That Forsyte Woman" with Errol Flynn and Greer Garson or the the 1967 BBC production with Eric Porter, Nyree Dawn Porter, and Kenneth More. So when I watched Series 1 it was all news to me. Then, unwilling to wait for Series 2 to make it across the Pond, I went ahead and watched the 1967 version. That meant that with Series 2 the story was not new to me and I was aware of some plot lines that were missing.

Second, Series 1 ended with the most powerful scene in the entire story. The tragic Soames Forsyte (Damien Lewis), having seen his first wife Irene (Gina McKee) leave him for his cousin Jolyon (Rupert Graves) and bear for him the son she refused to give him, has remarried and his wife is finally having his child. But the birth was difficult and Soames had to decide if the doctor should operate, which would kill the baby but save his wife, or risk both their lives on the slim chance they would both live. Soames takes the risk and is rewarded by the birth of a daughter and not the male heir he desired. Then word came that his father was dying and Soames rushed to the old man's side to announce the birth of his son. His father died happy hearing the lie and Soames returned to his home to be told that his wife would never be able to have another child. But when Soames looks at his daughter for the first time, his heart warms to her. It was a marvelous moment and a great performance by Lewis and I watched Series 2 knowing that it was not going to be equalled let alone surpassed.

On the one hand I was certainly right. The final great irony of the Forsyte Saga is that Soame's daughter Fleur (Emma Griifiths Malin) and young Jon Forsyte (Lee Williams), daughter of Irene and Jolyon, manage to meet and fall in love to the absolute horror of their parents. The young couple, of course, do not know about the ugly circumstances under which Irene left Soames long before they were born, and nobody is eager to tell them the story. Eventually it will come out and result in the less than happy circumstances that we have come to expect in this particular soap opera. This is not a saga in which everybody lives happily ever after.

The good news and the bad news is that I liked the final scene of this production. This is good because it salvaged Series 2 for me at a point when I was close to regretting the sense of anticipation I had enjoyed waiting for it to come out on DVD. The bad part is that it is a scene that created for this version and not part of either the original novel or BBC series. The climax of a work is not exactly the part to go off text as far as I am concerned and I am glad I was not as familiar with Galsworthy's work as are others who have taken this production to task for various changes and additions they see as violating his original vision. That is why I was able to enjoy Series 2 well enough, while still thinking it falls short of the greatness of Series 1.

Whoever wrote this adaptation seemed to have been as captivated by Soames' character as I was, and determined to give him another big moment that decidedly changes the meaning and import of the entire saga. The return of Annette (Beatriz Batarda) into Soames' life helps to set up the final scene, so it is not like it is it was just tacked on to the story. But I missed the way Soames struggled with the demands of modern art, which is now replaced by the symbolic irony of juxtaposing Irene playing modern music on her piano while Soames purchases a player piano. Galsworthy made his point with considerably more depth, which is what I wanted this time around as well. Series 2 really is reduced to the story of Fleur and Jon as something of Soames and Irene the next generation, and obvious "The Forstye Saga" is on a grander scale than that.





Rating:
Summary: This was a BAD adaptation.
Review: I disliked Part One, but I'm trying to be fair to Part Two. First I'll say the things I liked about this part of the series:

-- The actors playing Jon & Fleur were really very good -- with the exception of Fleur's "screaming scene" at Robin Hill after she & Soames go there & she's rejected finally by Jon -- but I'll let that pass because that melodrama was really the director & the writer's fault. I only kept watching the series because they were so attractive together. The actor who played Michael Mont was good too -- although they didn't give him much depth to work with.

-- The last few minutes before Fleur's wedding, when Soames confesses to her about what he did during his marriage to Irene, and how painful it is to him that Irene should only remember that when she looks at him. (Not in the book, but a good scene and Damien Lewis really played it well.)

THAT'S ABOUT IT. There is SO much wrong with this adaptation -- not following the book, for one. To deviate in so many important respects (having Jon & Fleur have sex?? How 21st century, but not in 1921! And after the revelation of what happened between Soames & Irene?) The Prosper Profond character, what's up with him? He was a minor character in the book, and here he's blown up into someone who interferes in most of the character's lives. The miscasting of Gina McKee as Irene is another (continued) fault. She looked even less beautiful "old" than she did young. The fact that the writers turned "Young" Jolyon into this strident, yelling, negative force. The fact that no one told Damien Lewis that not moving his arms when he walked made him look like a zombie. I know he was trying to show Soames as a repressed Victorian fortress of a man, but come on. I love Damien Lewis but either this was not the part for him, or I'll just be generous to him and say, since the writers and producers got everything else wrong, their take on Soames was wrong too.

I'm guessing they are NOT going to film the remaining Forsythe novels, since they already showed Jon & Fleur having sex, and Irene & Soames shook hands at the end (a major part of the even later novel was that finally, SHE wanted to and HE wouldn't) so they have nothing else to dramatize. Thank God for small blessings!! Or will we get a Fleur pregnant by Jon and passing the baby off as Michael's? OH, please NO...did I just give the writers an idea? I take it back, I take it back!!

Rating:
Summary: Really disappointing
Review: I had high hopes for one of the most interesting novels in the Forsyte Chronicle Series: To Let. This novel featured the "star crossed lovers" Jon Forsyte, son of Irene and Young Jolyon and Fleur Forstye, daughter of Soames and Annette Forsyte. I read the novel and was enthralled with the 1969 dramatization which featured the exceptional and perfectly cast Susan Hampshire as Fleur Forsyte. The episodes covering To Let not only featured Ms. Hampshire but Kenneth More, Eric Porter, and Nyree Dawn Porter. It was wonderful.

As I started to watch the new series I thought I was in for a treat. Was I wrong! The writers seemed to throw Galsworthy's wonderful story out the window for a revisionist look at Jon and Fleur's love story. It started by creating a meeting that never took place in the book between Jon and Fleur as children (giving the young people a sense of deja vu when they meet in the art gallery in 1920). Nothing of the sort ever took place. Jolyon and Irene spent much of their time at Robin Hill and Soames and Annette at Mapledurham. The young people never met until the fateful encounter at the art gallery.

The writers took liberties with the plot in many jarring ways. Monty Dartie died before events of To Let took place. Yet there he is (looking like he hasn't aged a day) stirring up trouble for Winifred. The new series has Fleur going incognito to Robin Hill and making the acquaintance of Young Jolyon(who also looks like he never aged a day). Fleur Forsyte was an intelligent young woman who never in a million years would have pulled something so blundering. And Young Jolyon, according to Galsworthy, only met Fleur once, at an awkward tea at Robin Hill; Irene met Fleur and Jon and invited them to tea. Young Jolyon never really had anything against Fleur save she was the daughter of Soames Forsyte. It was Irene that he was most worried about; Jolyon was horrified for Irene to have her son married to the daughter of the man who once hurt her. And there was never a reconciliation between Irene and Soames at the end of To Let. Irene refused to shake hands with Soames at Robin Hill and later, in an art gallery, Soames refused Irene's offer to shake hands with him.

I was disappointed at the way the writers handled Jon and Irene's trip to Spain so Jon could "forget" Fleur. All we have are Irene dancing in a restaurant. It doesn't convey Jon's longing for Fleur and his desperately trying to shorten the vacation so he could get back to her.

Fleur and Jon never had sex during events of To Let. In a later novel, Swan Song, Fleur wishes she had trapped Jon into marriage by sleeping with him and being "compromised," but Jon and Fleur only had a one night stand many years after events of To Let took place.

I was disappointed with the age discrepancies of the characters. June Forsyte was supposed to be in her fifties. Here she looks younger than her half sister Holly (who was supposed to be born about 12 years after June). Prosper Profund was a shadowy, sinister figure; here he's played like a buffoon.
Michael Mont, a pivotal character, is never fully delineated like he was in the 1969 series. Nicholas Pennell who played Michael then did an excellent job of depicting his longing for Fleur and his patience with her.

The acting of the players was good, but they lost credibility playing the characters who didn't seem to belong to Galsworthy at all.

I hope the producers do not plan to do the Modern Comedy series; this was the weakest part of the Galsworthy saga. The best of the three novels in the trilogy was Swan Song, which concerned Fleur's reawakened passion for her cousin Jon (even though both Fleur and Jon are now married to others). The Forsyte Saga novels: The Man of Property, In Chancery, and To Let, were the best of the series. I would probably cringe at what the producers/writers do to the Modern Comedy series.

Rating:
Summary: I didn't want it to end
Review: I have never read the books or seen the original series. I only was obsessed with the first series on DVD last year and for the last couple of days have been obsessed with the second. The only reason why I went onto the internet as soon as the second one finished is I wanted to see if that was indeed the end. Unfortunately it is.

I am upset that they rushed through the developing love affair between Jolyon and Irene in the first series. I also did not love Series 2 as much as Series I.

But as I had not read the books or seen the 1969 series I did not miss the omissions that obviously disturbed other viewers. It was just a fabulous British drama with wonderful sets and costumes and it totally sucked me in. That is what I really want these days when constantly searching for new dramas to watch on DVD. This one fulfilled this requirement.

I would recommend this version series to anyone!!!!!!!!!!!! I am now just going to have to buy the 1969 series.

Rating:
Summary: A treat for Forsyte fans and lovers of the era
Review: I loved this movie even more than the first part. The first part deserves a five-star rating as well for great acting and story. Unlike many of the reviews I loved series two more than series one. By the time you have watched six episodes of Forsytes you will know them pretty well and as you watch Fluer and Jon try to unravel the mysteries of Forsyte History you can feel the emotions of every character and see where they are coming from. As a plus I am infatuated with the Jazz era. The clothes and the lifestyle are the backdrop for this eye-candy of a film. The diffenerces between generations is always an interesting subject and it is a re-accuring theme here. You see how London has changed, how Soames gasps at the revealing dresses his daughter wears, how Irene struggles to get her head around the new music and dancing. I have not read the book or seen the 60's versions of either series so I can give an unbiased opinion. I also can understand how sometimes in adaptations, certain things that work in print do not work on the screen, so it doesn't bother me when the screenwriters take liberties. On it's own aside from previous versions, this is a fantastic movie with a deeply rooted story, multi-faceted characters, beautiful costumes and production, and fabulous acting. Remember that most of the actors in this series have already played their respective characters for the epic first series and have mastered them. That is the beauty of this series. Some will complain that the characters are not significantly aged enough, but lets face it, many of these actors are supposed to span 40 years of their characters life between the two series, and make-up aging usually just looks frightening. At least this way you have the same skillful cast.

Rating:
Summary: Better than the First!
Review: I very much enjoyed the second installment of the Forsythe Saga. Damian Lewis is remarkable as Soames. His portrayal is just so heart-wrenching at times. The relationship between Soames and Fleur is lovely. Emma Griffiths Malin is beautiful and does justice to the name "Fleur." The returning characters from the first installment glide right back into their roles. The new characters, Jon and Michael Mont are played by excellent actors, Lee Williams and Oliver Milburn. Unlike some of the other reviewers it didn't bother me that the adaption wasn't entirely faithful to John Galsworthy's books. In fact, I found that this version resolved things between various characters better than the novel. I highly recommend the DVD to anyone who enjoys Masterpiece Theatre. I gave it 4 stars rather than 5 because the DVD has a sad lack of special features. A making-of featurette would have been nice, but all and all, it's a highly entertaining and well-acted series.

Rating:
Summary: Entertaining and engrossing on its own merits
Review: Not having read any of the Galsworthy stories or seen the 1960s TV version of the Forsyte Saga, I'm blissfully free of the prejudices that seem to afflict some of the other reviewers. I don't doubt that those who wish to compare every difference between the source materials and/or the older TV version will find much to confront them. For myself, though, life is too short for such silliness, and a good drama should ultimately be appreciated on its own merits. By that measure, these new chapters in the story of the Forsyte clan are dandy.

When I came across it on my local PBS station, I stopped flipping channels and watched. And what I watched was genuinely engrossing. I was curious about what these people would do and what would happen next. I found the young lovers to be well-played and Damian Lewis to be quite good. As far as production values, as a long-time fan of British TV, I've learned that production vlaues are ultimately secondary to a good story well-told (and well-played). By that measure, this saga was satisfying in its own right.

Rating:
Summary: A DIFFERENT WORLD.
Review: Once again I must compare the acting and directing of this new version of the Saga with the original version of 1969.ALL of the characters in the new version are miscast.Soames is portrayed as too mean and too wooden.Young Jo is too young and uncharacteristically cruel.Irene is listless and wimpy.But the most jarring note is Fleur.She is portrayed as a spoiled brat,completely selfish and incredibly manipulative.Galsworthy's Fleur was no angel,but she had qualities of brightness and kindness as well.She also realizes that she is possessive and tells Michael so soon after they are married.However,the most jarring note of this production is the production itself.Part 1 departed greatly from the books to the detriment of the story.But Part 2 exceeds even that:it flings Galsworthy's narrative to the ground and dances upon it! Examples:Young Jo would NEVER go to Fleur,whom he mistrusts,and reveal the secret of his fatal illness.Irene would never scream at Jon and have an hysterical episode.Jon is too innocent to have sex with Fleur after his father's funeral.Soames would sooner die than tell Fleur about his dishonoring Irene.And Fleur would not turn into a screaming harpy when she loses Jon.Then:Soames and Irene patching it up and he leaving Robin Hill with a smile on his face and a spring in his step?PLEASE!The story is set in 1920,a different world from our own.The world portrayed is 2002,and it just doesn't wash.The original 1969 version got a huge audience from it's faithful adaptation and inspired acting.The new 2002 version has to rely on sex and violence to attract an audience.It seems that you can never go broke underestimating the taste of today's viewing public.If you want to own an outstanding version of the Saga,buy the dvd or video set of the original 1969 version.It's still available for purchase on Amazon.