I too am part of the large group who think this made-for-TV movie is a disaster. I lasted longer than most, however. I actually watched all but the last hour of Part 2. Eventually, I couldn't take more of the same thing. It was beautifully filmed, but the acting was so wooden, the story so dull. What was with Cote de Pablo? Was her expression painted on? And I think it is Mido Hamada who has one of the most forced smiles I have ever seen. Showin' off new choppers, Mido? Finally, Sam Neill was so disappointing in this role. But the character is such a boring one to begin with. I shouldn't fault the actor with simply delivering what was given. I found the way the story was presented to be thoroughly confusing. I couldn't get interested in the characters, and the minute I started to "get" one of them, the plot switched to another character, and I was out in the dark once again. Now, don't get me wrong. I like an "adult" drama, maybe even verging on soap opera, but this one is a prime example of poorly written, acted, and directed schlock. At the start of the last "love in the cistern" scene, I actually broke out laughing. And in one of them, the continuity was so bad, I grimaced: the actors kept flipping from left to right side of each other with absolutely no transition or movement whatsoever. Was this supposed to be some artsy filming? Because it looked kind of deliberate, or I should say, blatant. Didn't work for me. What was the point?
