rusoviet
1. the script writer did not provide enough information of new cast members when the new cast members 'pop up'. Unless one had read the novel it makes no real sense. So many of the cast seem to be being filmed on their first read through that or the director made no real demands on what skill they 'had' to be cast to begin with.The other is the miscasting esp. of 'Jean-Francoise Mercier as played by David Tennant. He is dull, weak and completely one dimensional in his delivery.The film omitted a major part of the novel, prior to 1st Sept. 1939, where Mercier contacts German 'agents' inside Germany who take a hiking trip into the border region of Germany and Belgium/Luxemborg and document the German panzers 'measuring' the width of the forest roads in the Ardennes for the invasion of June 1940. It was a well crafted passage in the novel and a shame it was not added.It is a shame for the novel is very good but you'd never know it watching this series and sadly it doesn't bode well for future film adaptations of Furst's work
kieran-mclaughlin1
Why do they have to tinker with a great story? Alan Furst's novel is moody, atmospheric and evocative of the period, pre-WW2 Warsaw. The BBC adaptation is lifeless and sterile. The screenwriters have tried to cherry-pick the salient parts of the novel, but all this has achieved is a confusing storyline with no sense of continuity. David Tennant is hopelessly miscast as Mercier, which in turn ensures the viewer will find the series pretty unbelievable. Janet Montgomery's portrayal of Anna Szarbek(Skarbek? Why?) is unfortunately not very likable, which in turn means their relationship suffers on the screen. Both Tennant and Montgomery have mishandled the relationship between Mercier and Szarbek, which is one of the critical drivers of Mercier's actions. A number of other characters (Jourdain, Dr Lapp) have been similarly poorly written and portrayed. Very disappointing all round. I just hope they don't try and adapt any more of Alan Furst's novels - fans of Furst's novels will be very disheartened.
Michael Dixon
Sorry, but it is the leading man who mainly disappoints. David Tennant is totally miscast and is not helped by a poor script, awash with clichés.I have been to Warsaw three times and there was more tension in the air during my visits than here with spies all over the place.It may have worked with a different lead, as Tennant sleepwalks his way through the scenes and physically has an uncanny resemblance to John Laurie when playing the crofter in the original version of the 39 Steps.When he twitches those eyebrows he also looks like a mad scientist rather than the smooth Frenchman tempting every woman from Paris to Warsaw to jump into bed with him. Add to that a non-existent personality and you are left with a problem.There is absolutely no chemistry between Tennant and Janet Montgomery who is very unenthusiastic throughout. Some decent efforts by a few of the supporting cast, but poor old Julian Glover was given a bad hand with some awful lines.And the continual movement from Paris to Warsaw and back again several times over was very confusingSadly quite ridiculous.
geoffcoo
What a marvellous 2 parter. The acting and settings were very good indeed. The story moved very nicely, building the appropriate tensions throughout. Based on a novel by Alan Furst, of whom I had never heard, it was historically accurate(with the exception of some British beer mugs in Prague). I hope the makers will give us more of the novels in the same format.The first part was sufficient to make me buy the first of the Night Soldiers novels by Alan Furst. Having already read it, I shall now read the rest of the series, in sequence, so a way to go before I reach Spies of Warsaw.
AD
