Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Konterr Brilliant and touching

Stephan Hammond It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

meghac23 Make no mistake-this is a very very bad adaptation of the classic novel. The 1982 version starring Antony Andrews and Jane Seymour was far more superior to this one. Lets start with the actors. In the book Sir Percy is 31 or 32, Maguerite is 25 and Chauvelin is close to 40. But in the movie each of these characters appear to have aged by two decades. In the novel Sir Percy is a good natured fop who speaks lazily, but Richard E Grant plays him with he energy of an adolescent in a basketball game. And he appears to recite his lines. And Elizabeth McGovern as Marguerite-the most beautiful and cleverest woman in Europe? Not happening. You really want to watch a great adaptation, go for the 1982 one of the same name.

poe426 Richard Grant, with his irreverent poetry and in-your-face attitude toward the villains, is absolutely, 100% perfect as THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL. The production values are likewise outstanding in this mini-series. If there's one complaint I have, it's that the initial episode lacked one all-important ingredient: SUSPENSE. At no time did we ever really get the impression that Percy was in any real danger; the lack of suspense therefore works against the idea of a man who must remain masked lest he risk his head... (And, not to nitpick, but I must admit that the fact that EVERYONE speaks with an English accent sorta threw me: time and again I found myself hoping someone would silence the arrogant Brits looking to kill our hero... and then I would realize that they were supposed to be FRENCH... A minor quibble, perhaps, but a quibble, nonetheless- like white men in blackface or "Romans" and "Greeks" who speak with English accents in teleseries after teleseries...) A great show. Too bad it didn't last.

iatheia I have read almost all the books by now, and have seen the musical production in two different languages. I absolutely adored everything that I have been acquainted previously. But lately I've been running out of resources to sustain my fancy. I still have couple of books left, but they are either in transit or they are the sequels which I am not in a hurry to read. So an idea dawned on me - Sink me! There are movies which I have not watched! Thus, I must watch them immediately.The first five minutes of these series were... acceptable. In fact, I quite enjoyed the variation of the reason for the denunciation, however different it had seemed. It went all downhill from there, though. Chauvelin was too... foppish? And, I daresay, too old for this role. Not nearly that dark and dashing figure with his dreadful either-or. (And what was that with random bed scene featuring him? It was way too creepy - wasn't his only love the Madame Guillotine, and his only interest - his job, and his only obsession - Sir Percy?) Marguerite... Prettiest woman in France? Cleverest woman in Europe? I think not. Although, whatever compelled her to break into the study of Sir Percy I haven't the faintest idea. And whatever my Lord Tony has done to deserve this death? Yes, every member of the League did pledge his life to Sir Percy, but he would have never endangered any of them nor would have run away like a coward when his dear friend faces mortal danger. And if by any means he had to mourn his companion, he would have done that, mourn, not just move on as if nothing had happened. Which brings me to another point, Sir Percy. His portrayal was most dreadful. He was neither a lazy fop, nor a gallant and elusive hero who is a master of transformations. Nor did he care too much about cravats (his pronunciation of that word alone made my ears bleed) And with his own hands he had never killed anyone. So what was that with him randomly walking around and slaughtering people?The costumes were just too flashy for that time period as well. This is post-revolutionary France we are talking about! Not pre-revolutionary. People in dresses like that stand out in a crowd quite easily. It was all just... gah!Although, I must admit, after I watched other parts my opinion did change slightly. Watching it as a separate work, independent of Scarlet Pimpernel series, it was tolerable. Just your other average hero in the mask. But for what they tried to pass it, it is still miserable.

Abedsbrother Okay, first off: I have read several of the books by Baroness Orczy.That, if you catch my meaning, is not THIS.THIS being the three episode set with Richard Grant. I thought some parts excellent, some cheesy - but good cheese. Grant himself I thought excellent as the Pimpernel. He plays the witty fop perfectly - not lazily, but one who travels, and seeks new things to be witty about. When the serious things begin, he sobers up, and you get to see the real Pimpernel. Grant rarely lets the drama of the situation weigh him down, consistently has fun with his role. Though not emphasized, his sword-play is quite passable, too.Elisabeth McGovern as Marguerite is the questionable one here. At some points, you think she is perfect for the role; at others, you wonder how they chose her to play the part. Her British accent is passable when she remembers it; and - my biggest gripe - I did not think her pretty enough for the role. She is an attractive actress, yes, but not the knockout Marguerite was supposed to be - The Most Beautiful Woman in France? I think not. Her acting is on the whole good, however, as is her stage presence, so much can and is overlooked.My biggest surprise was Martin Shaw as Chauvelin. Shaw took the role and made more of it than either Raymond Massey or Ian McKellen, combining the past lover with man striving to be in constant control of the situation. His gift for sarcasm, whether natural or invented for this role, is put to good use here. He actually seems almost human at times, trying to serve himself, and France (yes, I did get that feeling). By contrast, McKellen's Chauvelin cannot get his mind off Marguerite, and Massey's (excellent) portrayal seems one dimensional (not his fault). Martin Shaw was one of the strongest points of this production.The supporting cast was equally good. Emilia Fox (I think that's the right spelling) portrays an excellent bad girl in Episode I, While the bad guy of Episode III is superb - almost stole the show from Grant. EPisode II features another excellent bad girl who meets a surprising end. Sets and costuming are what befit a BBC production, and the camera work is excellent: frequent use of distance and panorama make it seem something other than a TV movie. Storyline and plot - it makes sense taken by itself, and provides a good, exciting romp through the world of Revolutionary France. Not close to the book, but it doesn't need to be close to the book to be effective. If you're an Orczy purist, don't bother with it. If, like me, you're looking for good period drama with a flair for action and comedy, this is excellent. And well-worth seeing, and re-seeing. Enjoy.