MovieChat Forums > South Riding (2011) Discussion > Definitely too short... (spoilers)

Definitely too short... (spoilers)

posted 13 years ago by PVarjak
3 replies | jump to latest

I just finished watching this. I 'banked' them on DVR so I could watch them in a row, which I prefer.

The first two episodes seemed reasonably well-paced, even accounting for a lot of stuff left out (thanks for the great posts Silverwhistle). I'll definitely read the book now. I can live with some abridgement for dramatic purposes and even economics. But the last episode was almost ridiculous. Half of it was a cheapish montage to let people know how it 'ended.' As I started the last installment, about 10-15 minutes in, I'm thinking to myself that there's no way they can finish this in time. I even thought I might have missed a whole episode. Is the BBC in that dire financial straits?

Since I haven't read the book, I can't say for sure, but I don't think it needed 13 episodes (1974 version) or even 6 or 7 as some suggested. 3 or 4 90 minute episodes would probably have done it, which is about what most similar works receive. A prologue might have briefed the early events in the book I've gathered, like the council elections, etc.

One other thing. I don't know how it was handled in the book; but the treatment of Robert's death was ridiculous. How could people think that Robert committed suicide, when the fact that half the cliff fell off would be readily apparent to anyone who went to the estate. The newness of the calving off would be obvious. The dialogue makes clear that they knew he went off at that particular point, since they were calculating when and where his body would wash ashore. If that was the story they chose to tell, they simply should have had the horse spooked and Robert thrown (good rider or not) off the side of the cliff. Then it would be believable at least.

Loved the performances though Maxwell and Morrisey were particularly good (not surprisingly) and deserved a longer running time.

[–] silverwhistle 13 years ago

Since I haven't read the book, I can't say for sure, but I don't think it needed 13 episodes (1974 version) or even 6 or 7 as some suggested.

When you read the book, you'll change your mind on that. The 13-episode version has nothing wasted in it. There are whole plot-lines and families of characters that were sacrificed to the short version.

when the fact that half the cliff fell off would be readily apparent to anyone who went to the estate.

But that's a very common occurence thereabouts. And if someone wanted to make suicide look like an accident (for insurance purposes), s/he would go to an obviously weak point. The chief pointer against it, though, is the death of the horse. Robert would never gratuitously sacrifice a horse. A person, possibly, but never, ever a horse.

If that was the story they chose to tell, they simply should have had the horse spooked and Robert thrown (good rider or not) off the side of the cliff. Then it would be believable at least.

Unfortunately, Winifred can't answer your query on that. I agree, it would have made more sense, but that's not what she wrote in the book: he goes over the edge with the horse.

Seingner Conrat, tot per vostr'amor chan
http://www.silverwhistle.co.uk/knightlife

[–] PVarjak 13 years ago

It's not a question as to whether the 13 eps. have anything 'wasted.' It's a financial and dramatic decision. Sometimes it actually IMPROVES the movie/TV version to be streamlined somewhat. Plus, you cut my quote too tightly. I mentioned a few episodes, but in 90 minute chunks. That adds a lot of time.

Of course cliff collapses are somewhat common. So much so that it's a relatively common device in novels like this. But it STILL would be apparent. They would be able to figure the spot out, see the fallen rock and soil and put 2 and 2 together. But the point about the horse makes some sense. The two combined make it all the more unlikely that Robert committed suicide.

[–] silverwhistle 13 years ago

Plus, you cut my quote too tightly. I mentioned a few episodes, but in 90 minute chunks. That adds a lot of time.

I had read your post in full, but didn't see the need to repeat all of it. I also suggest you read the book and/or watch the 1974 adaptation before deciding whether cutting improves an adaptation.

But the point about the horse makes some sense. The two combined make it all the more unlikely that Robert committed suicide.

Indeed. It's definitely an accident in the book, but the issue is what people are willing to believe: how rumour works, given that people know about his financial, legal and political problems. Some don't want to believe it's a simple accident.

Seingner Conrat, tot per vostr'amor chan
http://www.silverwhistle.co.uk/knightlife