Dangerous Liaisons

Ok a lot people reviewing this obviously didn't bother to read the synopsis or watch the trailer. This is a television show so they are expanding on the novel. The show starts by giving origin stories to Merteuil and Valmont. The direction for their origin stories is kind of weird to me. Merteuil and Valmont being snobbish aristocratics is part of their appeal and says a lot about who they are personally. The show instead tries to give them a Dickensian type of humble beginnings origin. I'm guessing they are trying to make them more relatable but I find it kind of boring. Merteuil and Valmont are rich jerks who look down on people. Aside from that the show obviously is shot well. The female lead is descent. Not sold on the male lead though. The supporting actors are good. I'll keep watching but I'm going to manage my expectations.

First of all, it's not really an adaptation. If you read carefully even here on IMDB, you will find out that Harriet Warner, who have written the first episode, was merely inspired by the original story. So it's more like a story based on the characters rather than adaptation of the classics, which could be enough for some people to skip it. The story in the series is so different that it actually puzzled me at first: what am I even watching? Character names are known, there seems to be the same period as in the novel, but that's where resemblance ends and it is in a bad way.

Don't be fooled, that's just another attempt to make money on the story with fancy name with the hope that viewer had never read it. Because if you did, there's no other answer to the omnipresent question: why diverting so much from the original novel while keeping character names and the name of the story?

Picture is good and there seems to be an intrigue, but once again, this is not original de Laclos writing and competing with him while keeping the name of his novel seems insulting.

I have only seen the first episode of the show and will not continue with it. If you have never read the story, better read it or watch one of the many successful films: Dangerous Liaisons (1988), Cruel Intentions (1999) or more dated French version from 1960.

This just seems like the scriptwriter has read the premise of Dangerous Liaisons on the back of the book and created a series based purely from their own ideas of what the novel should be about, the period is the same as the novel and some of the characters are but others have been added for some reason. I also want accuracy for anything set historically and while servants and lower classes may be EM in the 18th century a Chevalier would definitely not be. If you want to watch an adaption of DL then watch the 1988 film. Even the Colin Firth film Valmont is a closer adaption and at least they changed the name so as not to confuse people. Unfortunately modern adaptions of classics are getting so bad they should just use the premise and set them in the modern day as modern writers and producers are unable to take themselves out of today's society. I am dreading the next adaption of a Jane Austen novel.

It isn't the epistolary novel put to digital media - that wouldn't be possible would it, as it would still require a screenwriter/adaption - so complaints that it isn't that are a bit weird - also part of the joy of the epistolary form is that the authors aren't an objective narrator so as you read you fill in the gaps, guess at the truth, compare and contrast. That is what this take does, it is an expanded universe imagined from those letters and using more modern critiques of the excesses and hypocrisy of the historical period. Its fun, fruity and with enough faithfulness to the time (with the added glamour and gorgeousness and grime and stench in other settings, that you want from entertainment) to give new insights and considerations into this time in France. The acting is largely good, the script and dialogue trot along nicely and are funny and intriguing without being too earnest or 'olde worlde' clunky, and the cast, costumes and sets are presented brilliantly, producing a well realised world. Ongoing and boring complaints from reviewers who are obsessed with how much melanin some actors have proves again that they need to read more books (I mean Jean-Baptiste Belley was elected to the French Parliament 10yrs after the first book so the idea that people of colour weren't in respected/high positions at this time is pure nonsense) Worth a watch.

Not based on any book or movie. I only watched this due to my obsession with costume drama and 18th century in particular. But there is a reason I prefer to rewatch BBC series from the seventies to most of the newer films and series claiming to be "period drama". Those at least followed the basic mores and customs of the time portrayed for the most part and worked hard to get the shapes of costumes and hair accurate. Now in these newer ones you see long flying curls on grown women (which you would not see even on little girls in most eras) modern eye makeup and "shrugs" to act as Spencer jackets etc...to name just a few. I love period drama and history and am sure that most people can manage to watch and enjoy these shows showing how people looked, acted and dressed during the time that they lived...but producers seem to think a modern audience can't handle that, that we must have modern dialogue that clangs on the ear like a metal trash bin lid, pop music and beachy waves, in order to engage. It would be nice if some of these series were made for adults who go into it wanting to see how life was lived "back then" and not some young producer's idea of what would be cool and watchable. I know I am in an age bracket (old) that it not catered to in any way, shape or form ...okay I get it. But most teens are not looking for period drama anyway unless it has time travel, dinosaurs or vampires so they are not the audience for these period dramas anyway. I just watched "Mr Malcolm's List" which is a perfectly enjoyable, benign romance/comedy but the idea of Mr. Malcolm taking a young lady to the opera on a "date" early on made me laugh out loud and kind of ruined it for me. There is no way in hell any young woman was going on a date with a man or that he would even ask. Unmarried young women often could not even be alone in a room with a brother or cousin, so strict was the division of sexes, without a chaperone. That may be a small point but it tilts the whole of the era being shown. Why bother make it "period" at all if you intend to modernize it beyond all recognition? Just make a romantic comedy or drama and be done with it. So many disappointments recently. But this show, and also the latest "Persusian" have to be clunkers for sure.