Wow. What happened?
I read the book in the late-1970s and I remember it as a page turner.
So what's up with the final episode of the miniseries?
It's dull, beyond belief, and filled with tedious recaps of scenes from previous episodes.
It's a huge disappointment, filled with very boring characters and very little storyline compared to the other episodes. Extremely anticlimactic.
I'll have to read the book again to see if these 1970s events were the same as in the book.
I was telling my husband about Centennial (he's not a fan), and I said that Michener told the history of, basically, Colorado, from the mid 1700s to the 1970s. But then I realized, the story jumps from the Dust Bowl years to the 70s and bypasses WWII, the babyboomes, Vietnam, hippies.
Gee, were we babyboomers that boring that he didn't even want to write about us?
It would have been cute to see Bill and Taffy Danoff and John Denver singing with Cisco Calendar. After all the Danoffs wrote that song Merle Haggard sings at the end. And they were all in Aspen, Colorado and Denver writing Rocky Mountain High and Rocky Mountain Suite in the late 60s/early 70s.
But going back to your comment Rob, I found Sid's comment to Lew, "we have to stop Wendell" rather stupid. Morgan Wendell didn't murder anyone. The only thing he did was remove bones from an excavation site and didn't turn them over to the authorities.
Yes, it totally ran out of gas. If at some point down the line I watch the series again I will just skip the final 2 hour episode. The only interesting storyline was Wendell and the body and there wasn't much to it.
I liked the Julie Sommars character going crazy over the dust storms though. I'd never seen her play that kind of part. Just pretty, patient, and understanding women for men to talk to, or the tame as can be comedy that was The Governor and J.J. (which I only barely remember).
"Ran out of gas" would be the accurate description of what happened. It's not that the filmmakers didn't want to make it as epic as the rest had been but they were literally running out of money & time. They had to wrap it up quickly, hence the anti-climatic ending.
shareI didn't think the ending was bad. With all the different storylines and families, I don't think there was really any way to tie everything up into an exciting climax....things just continue on.
shareI saw some of the original broadcast in the 1970's; and then by the time they rebroadcast it, we had a VCR, and so we recorded it.
The thing is, the last episode got cut off on the tape, and we never saw the ending. As it turns out, we hadn't really missed anything. The best of the miniseries is all before that.
We thoroughly enjoyed rewatching it on the DVD set, but I bought it mostly to see the ending. I guess I would have bought the DVD set anyway, because it looks better than VHS on a big screen through our upconverting DVD player.
Though I love the series as a whole, I agree with others who were disappointed with the ending. My teenage son was watching with me and he said, "That's it?" IMO, in addition to being ho-hum and sloppy, it seemed very disconnected from the previous episodes, and by this time the flashbacks were getting a little annoying. I felt no empathy at all with the modern characters. I really thought there would be more drama with Wendell and the murder "mystery". And I also thought it was a pretty big jump from 1933 to the late 1970's. I guess there was no history worth recording during those forty-plus years.
share[deleted]
MAN do I agree one million percent. I was really looking forward to the last two episodes because I had enjoyed the previous 10 quite a lot. I was sad to see the end coming. But about 15 minutes into episode 11 I was asking myself, Did Mischner write the ending of the book like this? I was thinking the rest of the story had characters that you knew and either loved or hated and the last two episodes I fast forwarded through so much of it. It was like a very very cheesy attempt to let someone who had not seen the previous 10 episodes to get a quick story of Centennial.
The last two episodes really did leave a very very very sad statement for an otherwise very enjoyable and moving story.. What an utter waste of time, money, film, actors, and my time..
Literally, anyone deciding to watch this mini-series for the first time.. Just quit at episode 10. I assure you, you will wish you had if you watch the last two..
What a shame. Left me wanting..
Yes, the last episode was a letdown, but I look at it in context. The miniseries aired over a four month period and undoubtedly picked up new viewers along the way. So the flashbacks probably weren't as tedious for the viewers as they are for us today watching the episodes as quickly as we wish on DVD. And, yes all the heavy-handed preaching about the evils of the white man's capitalism (when it was capitalism that created Centennial and made the story possible) is hard to take. But, viewed decades later it serves as a time capsule for the way a lot of baby boomers felt in the seventies.
As for the jump in the timeline from the thirties to the seventies, one look at the Centennial of the seventies tells you all you need to know about the intervening 40 years: the town is shabby and run down, pocked with trailer homes, old cars and piles of junk. The population was only 2,400, the agricultural industries were in decline, many of the smart kids went off to college and never went back, leaving behind characters like Morgan Wendell's thugs.
They may have made a decision that, to most people watching the show in 1978, the period from the Dust Bowl to the 1970's was still too recent to be interesting.
What I didn't like about the end was the changes made to Morgan Wendell, who was not any kind of a villian in the book. Nor did Paul Garrett run against him for office (but did become Wendell's deputy). Nor was Morgan worried about trying to protect the family name. He was very open and honest about Maude and Mervin, and what he thought of them.
If anyone has read the original novel they would know that the period from the 1930s to the 1970s is not covered so the miniseries is actually faithful to the book.
Yippee kai yay, *beep*
I have to agree. I particularly dislike making Morgan Wendell a villian right out of central casting, as compared to the more balanced character in the book.
I'll Teach You To Laugh At Something's That's Funny
Homer Simpson
Yes, it was sort of lame and full of flashbacks, which only served to remind us how good the rest was. Still, as a whole this mini-series still stands head and shoulders over most of what passes for good writng on TV these days. There really couldn't be a "wrap-up" with all loose ends neatly tied and Wendell getting a come-uppance for the sins of his ancestors. That's not the way life works. Just enjoy this series from beginning to end. There's enough that comes before for forgive the weakness of the last episode.
shareThe real problem with the final episode is that it fails to actually tie all the previous episodes and history to the characters in the final episode.
The book does a better job of that - tying Paul Garrett to nearly all the characters that came before him: not just Pasquinel, McKeag and Clay Basket, but also the Schimmerhorns, the Zendts and the original Garretts.
Even the book, however, has several disconnects that work against the extravagant detail-laden "epic" format of the storylines that take place in the late 1700s, the 1800s and the early 1900s.
For one, in both the TV and the book versions, Morgan Wendell and Paul Garrett are about the same age - despite the fact that their respective fathers are a full generation (~20 years) apart: Maud and Merv Wendell and Charlotte and Jim Lloyd are supposedly around the same age, yet Morgan ends up being the grandson of Maud and Merv Wendell while Paul is the great grandson of Charlotte and Jim Lloyd. Furthermore, Phillip Wendell - the son of Maud and Merv - and Beeley Garrett (Paul's grandfather who was born in 1870) are depicted/shown as being contemporaries - figure that one out. Paul Garrett is cited as having been born in 1927 - and his father, Henry Garrett, is cited as having been born in 1895. Meanwhile, that means that Morgan Wendell - who went to the University of Colorado at the same time as Paul (according to the novel) - also had to have been born around 1927 - when Morgan's father, Phillip, was somewhere in his mid-50s. Strangely, nothing is ever mentioned about Phillip's wife / Morgan's mother and the supposed age discrepancy of his parents (for his mother to have given birth to him in the mid-1920s, she would have to been significantly younger than the 50-ish Phillip Wendell).
Worse, in the miniseries, in the same episodes, the actors that portray the Centennial-settler Wendells (i.e., Morgan's grandparents) look older than the actors that portray the Venneford-inhabiting Lloyds (i.e., Paul's great-grandparents)!
In the book, Garrett's ties to the Zendt, Pasiquinel (white/St. Louis side) and Schimmerhorn families are mentioned, although mostly in passing. For example, Paul Garrett's mother, Ruth Mercy, a descendant of the Schimmerhorns and the St. Louis branch of the Pasquinels, is explained away in a few lines as being something of a racist and altogether unpleasant woman, and Paul mentions that she has since died. Paul mentions nothing more of her.
Also in the book, Hans Brumbraugh's descendants and Timothy Grebe's descendants end up influencing "modern-day" Colorado. Their absence from the miniseries for the sake of time and detail is understandable, but, at the same time, their absence is why the final episode of the miniseries seems so disconnected from the previous 23 hours.
All in all, I would say Michener got sloppy in the last chapter of his novel - and the producers/writers of the miniseries got even sloppier.
"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"
The final episode of this epic series followed James Michener's preachy wrap up style which usually causes me to put his books down without finishing them. Yes, it was boring and there were too many flashbacks, nearly driving me crazy. After the magnificent early episodes showing the first encounters with the Indians and the relentless pressure of the early settlers, the ending was a big let down. It definitely looked as if they were running out of money and network support and were being pressured to get this over with.
The DVD release could have used some editing to tighten up the end without the constant flash backs. I could also have done with a family tree showing who was who, when they were born and to what family. As it was, by the time they got to Paul Garrett I hadn't a clue who he was.
Some reviewers were disappointed that the 'bad guys' didn't get what was coming to them. That's not how life works. The Wendells got away with murder and built their fortune on Sorensen's money. Sheriff Dumire never did get his man. the fanatical Colonel Schimmerhorn was hailed as a hero, just as today some war criminals are held in reverence. People are cheated and swindled by opportunists. Immigrants from south of the border trying to make an honest living are still persecuted. If the world was fair, the Indians would have won.
Overall, I feel that the 70's and early 80's were the golden age of TV, and the mini series were the reason. Nothing beat sitting by the fire on a winter night watching the likes of Centennial, The Noble House, Winds of War, A.D. and Rich Man Poor Man. Even better, because they did not feel the need for foul language and graphic sex, the children could also watch. TV is the poorer for no longer investing in this type of show. Just think of all the great books still out there.
The reason there were so many flashbacks in the final part is because the parts were not shown one after after the other, but shown several weeks apart. By the time the last part was shown, three months had passed. And of course you know the people in Hollywood think the American people can't remember things from one week to the next.
shareAgreed. Shirtless Gregory Harrison is HOT but NAKED Richard Chamberlain in "Shogun" is TOO TOO HOT. They just don't make 'em (miniseries, that is) like they used to...
"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"
Another mini series that I enjoyed was " Chiefs " , starring Brad Davis .. I've only seen it once and would love to see it again .. TV is nothing but crap these days .. thank goodness libraries and kindles are around and I can just sit and read .
"A man that wouldn't cheat for a poke don't want one bad enough".
Love the miniseries but hate the final episode. Badly written (the characters given endless expository speeches), badly acted by most of the "current-day" cast, and Sharon Gless and Merle Haggard have to be the world's most disgusting couple.
shareWell, the last part takes place in the then present. It can't really resolve much because the themes of land use/misuse are still ongoing. They could really only present the issues. The end of the book is similar, but different as well. Garrett doesn't run for office, but agrees to assist Wendell, who's less of a villain and while concerned with the bad publicity about the body, doesn't really deny anything. Once assured the lead time for a magazine article couldn't affect the election, he's more than willing to discuss the murder.
It also deals more with Garrett's native American heritage which while acknowledged in the mini-series, doesn't make sense since they skipped a generation. He's the great-grandson of Jim and Charlotte in the novel, not grandson. Beeley Garret was actually married to Levi's granddaughter and it was their son who married Jim Lloyd and Charlotte's granddaughter.
One thing of note is that the book ends on the depressing note that Centennial probably won't survive another hundred years as urbanization flourishes.