MovieChat Forums > Jamaica Inn (2015) Discussion > Interesting Ratings Parallel: Parades E...

Interesting Ratings Parallel: Parades End and Jamaica Inn

posted 10 years ago by annlevtex
6 replies | jump to latest

One of the (overabundant) articles on the Sound Scandal mentioned that audiences had similar complaints about the dialogue in Parades End. Not the sound, but "mumbling actors."

Parades End also debuted to strong ratings, about 3M on its first night, which is high for BBC2.

But on the second night it lost 1/3 of its audience and never recovered. It was a 5-part series.

JI lost 1/4 the first night and by the third had fallen to 2/3 of its original audience.

And the complaints? The same. Mumbling, slow pace, and hard to follow.

Of course they were very different in every other way. Parades End is based on more "high-minded" source material and it had Cumberbatch, who seems to be a Thinking Man's actor, for lack of a better term.

It was more critically acclaimed but to be fair, the reviews of JI that emerged before it was broadcast were very positive. Then the media frenzy regarding the sound took over. And after that the reviews were mixed and most of the coverage was about the sound/mumbling and the blame game that followed.

But again, the viewers had the same or very similar complaints about Parades End and the audience drop was almost identical.

I thought that was interesting.

[–] kite_ryan 10 years ago

do you think it's actors's fault or technical problems?

[–] randommovies2002 10 years ago

The director's fault and the sound dept.

[–] randommovies2002 10 years ago

If you're referring to the DM, I wouldn't put much faith in their articles. They're the ones who have continually "reported" on the rented/re-used costumes in Downton Abbey as though it was the scandal of the decade.

The reason why PE's ratings dropped really wasn't about Cumberbatch's speech. (IMO, BC's dialect was a deliberate choice to emphasize his character's buttoned-up, straight-laced persona.) The real reason people dropped off is because they were expecting Downton Abbey and found that they were watching a program based on Modernist Literature. (Horrors!)

Parade's End requires a commitment from the viewer unlike the usual Sunday evening fair. It's not the kind of program one can just sit back and take in for the lovely costumes and romances. It requires concentration and thinking.

FMF's trilogy isn't a linear, chronological narrative. It switches back and forth between several periods in the life of the main character. In that respect, the series was much kinder to the viewer than FMF was to the reader. (The earlier miniseries, starring Judy Dench, was more like the novels in that respect and required even more of the viewer.) And that's not even getting into the meat of the story and characters.

90% of the complaints I read in various places mentioned Downton Abbey favorably in comparison to PE. IMO that says it all.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that another aspect of the criticism of Cumberbatch's speech choices is the animosity toward him for his very frank comments in the media about Downton Abbey. Prior to the broadcast, someone had compared PE to DA and Cumberbatch gave his opinion that PE has substance and DA does not. Many of the early comments against Cumberbatch (after the series started its broadcast) contained references to this. There were a lot of negative votes on IMDb before the episodes even aired. (This was before IMDb changed the voting function.)

[–] annlevtex 10 years ago

Yes, I remember that whole controversy regarding Cumberbatch's choice words for Downton.

I am not crazy about him, frankly, but that was another example of the media turning something relatively minor into a big scandal. People assumed it was sour grapes, which is pretty silly considering he was and is a very successful actor himself. The guy should be allowed to express his opinion of a TV show, for God's sake. But the public now treats that show as some sort of Sacred Cow.

I watched part of Parade's End and as you said, it requires a great deal more attention than Downton does, to say the least. I was impressed by the parts that I did see (particularly Rebecca Hall) but I wasn't compelled to keep watching. I was pretty busy at the time it aired. Maybe I'll get it on DVD and settle in when I have some quiet time.

I think some of the people who dropped Jamaica Inn didn't drop it because of the sound issues either. It was really not that difficult to understand any of the characters except Joss, IMO. But the dim lighting, slow pace, mud and overall gloom were just not appealing to a lot of viewers tuning in to a period drama. IMO anyway.

They didn't bother me. I enjoyed the moodiness. But I did wish Joss would speak up more.

As to what you said about the director being largely to blame, that seems to be a common theme. A lot have said that Harris was under her guidance and she should have told him to enunciate more clearly. And the sound department should have noticed that he was difficult to understand and that the dialogue in general was "muddy" and often drowned out by the music.

But the sound department tossed to hot potato to the actors, and so did the BBC (at first they blamed the sound people, but backtracked after they presumably got an earful, so to speak, from them).

The director was also responsible for the slow pace, frankly.

And she has not come out and said a single word in defense of the cast she directed. Neither has the BBC, for that matter. Everyone allowed Harris be the lightning rod. Which is why I am glad he won the BAFTA and got the chance to address it in public and defend his performance, even make light of the whole thing.

The director was a total weasel about it and so was the BBC.

[–] randommovies2002 10 years ago

that was another example of the media turning something relatively minor into a big scandal.

Like what the media (and, frankly, Julian Fellowes and the Downton producers) did with what Jean Marsh said about Downton prior to its s1 premiere. IMO, that negative press, which was played up a lot by tptb behind Downton Abbey, including ITV, really hurt the 2010 version of Upstairs, Downstairs. After all that negative publicity, followed by Downton premiering first (and becoming "the darling" of Sunday night viewing) UpDown (which was imo a far superior program) was never able to recover and was killed in the viewing figures.

Many believe BBC pressured Heidi Thomas to change the writing style of s2 of the new updown so as to mirror some of the tawdriness of Downton Abbey. This poor decision totally ruined some of the characters, cheapened updown, and precipitated Eileen Atkins' withdrawal from the series (Atkins being one of the creators of the original UpDown).

I think some of the people who dropped Jamaica Inn didn't drop it because of the sound issues either. It was really not that difficult to understand any of the characters except Joss, IMO. But the dim lighting, slow pace, mud and overall gloom were just not appealing to a lot of viewers tuning in to a period drama. IMO anyway.

That's a fair and reasonable assessment, with which I agree. I stuck it out, but I didn't find it particularly special in any way. In fact, there were a few aspects that I found rather disappointing. (Didn't care much for the way Mary was written.)

[–] annlevtex 10 years ago

I enjoyed it and thought it was well-done in many ways. But no, I agree it was not a high point of BBC period miniseries or anything. They made good use of the scenery. The music was actually very good and evocative, if you managed to find way to watch it so that the music stayed in the background instead of drowning out other sound. IDK why but on BBC Player the sound and music were well-balanced and much cleaner.

I have not read the book so IDK about how Mary was written. In the first episode she was too sullen and withdrawn, but she livened up after that. I think Jessica acted the part well, as written, and was able to hold the screen. She inhabited the role (as written) very convincingly. And the love story worked well: they had chemistry and I believed the attraction. I do think that like other aspects of the adaptation, it was played at a "low level," for lack of a better word. So it was not as smoldering as it could have been.

The director went for a "natural" pace and style, I think, and it didn't always work. I liked it but I think it could have been a lot better had she made different choices.