Follows two women in two different eras both in search of the Holy Grail.Follows two women in two different eras both in search of the Holy Grail.Follows two women in two different eras both in search of the Holy Grail.
Browse episodes
Featured reviews
A TV miniseries adaptation of the Kate Mosse novel LABYRINTH. I made a point of reading the book before watching this, and I found out that I didn't think very much of it at all. The miniseries would be an improvement, right? Well, it is, but it's certainly not a "great" piece of entertainment, saddled as it is with various flaws and contradictions.
The good news is that although it follows the same basic plotting as the novel, pretty much every scene and sequence is changed slightly, enhanced to be more entertaining for TV audiences. Thus it's also a lot more explicit, with some bloodshed and nudity thrown in for adult viewers.
It's better than the book because it doesn't drag so much, preferring to get on with the narrative instead of throwing in the three-pages of travelogue stuff that lets Mosse's writing down. The enhanced levels of violence make this hard-hitting in places, but the calibre of the acting is a disappointment. Some of the established supporting actors are okay - John Hurt, Tom Curran, even Tom Felton in a Orlando-Bloom-in-Kingdom-of-Heaven type role, but the leads are weak, particularly Vanessa Kirby. Who ever thought she'd be experienced enough to carry the central role?
There are still problems with the story, namely the sub-DA VINCI CODE antics of the modern-day tale (which could have been removed completely), although the historical stuff is more interesting. Some of the direction is also a little cheesy, especially when it descends into sub-Shakespeare melodrama at the climax. Still, I suspect those unfamiliar with the story will enjoy it more than I did...
The good news is that although it follows the same basic plotting as the novel, pretty much every scene and sequence is changed slightly, enhanced to be more entertaining for TV audiences. Thus it's also a lot more explicit, with some bloodshed and nudity thrown in for adult viewers.
It's better than the book because it doesn't drag so much, preferring to get on with the narrative instead of throwing in the three-pages of travelogue stuff that lets Mosse's writing down. The enhanced levels of violence make this hard-hitting in places, but the calibre of the acting is a disappointment. Some of the established supporting actors are okay - John Hurt, Tom Curran, even Tom Felton in a Orlando-Bloom-in-Kingdom-of-Heaven type role, but the leads are weak, particularly Vanessa Kirby. Who ever thought she'd be experienced enough to carry the central role?
There are still problems with the story, namely the sub-DA VINCI CODE antics of the modern-day tale (which could have been removed completely), although the historical stuff is more interesting. Some of the direction is also a little cheesy, especially when it descends into sub-Shakespeare melodrama at the climax. Still, I suspect those unfamiliar with the story will enjoy it more than I did...
My wife had read the book and while she said it wasn't one of the author's best, it was good enough, so I gave this a go. I've found that sometimes weaker books from an author make better films than stronger ones, and while I was a little dubious of the subject matter, I thought I'd give it a go anyway.
What I got was a heap of fairly risible trash, with phoned in performances, some remarkably passionless bonking, a retread of the familiar "It's all a Catholic plot!" Grail stuff, and a curiously strong desire to persecute Cathars. Not on religious grounds, mind you, just for being annoying. It's a pain when you're several hundred years too late to join in the fun :(. I'm just rather disappointed, overall. It's full of actors that I like, so I disregarded the rather uncomplimentary heads-up from the Radio Times and plowed on with it, only to come out at the end with, well, nothing.
What I got was a heap of fairly risible trash, with phoned in performances, some remarkably passionless bonking, a retread of the familiar "It's all a Catholic plot!" Grail stuff, and a curiously strong desire to persecute Cathars. Not on religious grounds, mind you, just for being annoying. It's a pain when you're several hundred years too late to join in the fun :(. I'm just rather disappointed, overall. It's full of actors that I like, so I disregarded the rather uncomplimentary heads-up from the Radio Times and plowed on with it, only to come out at the end with, well, nothing.
Love the Cathars, would be happy to have one for a neighbour. The concept of liberal Christians that believed in equality for all, accumulation of wealth was bad, sex was healthy and believed in reincarnation is very interesting. The fact that, in the 12/13th century, philosophically they were kicking the roman catholic churches butt says a lot. Tying that in with the holy grail and mixing it in with factual historical references gave this mini series a lot of scope. The reference to carrying our past with us in our blood is very reminiscent of Frank Herbert's Dune and the inference of a genetic memory.
However, the heavy handedness of the direction and use of cliché characters and tropes that did not make sense left me squirming in my seat. Especially in part 1 and the end of part II in the medieval period it felt as if the Cathars had some rabid twitter account saying "Dear bad guys guys want to know all our secrets?....". Yes we know it's the good guys against the bad guys but how come the bad guys seem to know more about what their counterparts are doing than they do? Damn you twitter account!!!
Speaking of which, I felt sorry for Katie McGrath who portrayed a cardboard cut out of her Morgana character in the Merlin series. She's a good looking woman and a fine actress but did she seriously have to lose her clothes so often? She was only one of many flat characters with trite dialogue. There is one scene where she can see someone shake his head in response to a question she asks when she is looking away from him. At this point I was also shaking my head as the dialogue/monologue leading up to this point felt like a quick fix to try to explain her motivation for being such a nasty piece of work and failing miserably.
When it came to the end it felt that I had only seen half the production. It felt as if a whole group of scenes had been cut out and re-spliced leaving me trying to figure how we got to F from A without B, C, D and E. If I'm being kind I would like to think that due to external pressures that a real cracker of a production is out there waiting to be shown at a future date.
As it was I found myself just becoming more frustrated as things made less and less sense. Even the role of the grail in the end becomes diminished except potentially as lesson teacher to humanity.
On the plus side Jessica Brown Findlay playing the medieval heroine was the closest to a fully formed character in the whole story and I'd like to see her in more roles. Production was good especially in the medieval scenes and the filming felt clean and slick. I now feel enlightened as I've had a chance to meet the Cathars, not to be confused with the Kardashians. Giving it 5 out of 10 as I feel like I only saw half of what could have been.
However, the heavy handedness of the direction and use of cliché characters and tropes that did not make sense left me squirming in my seat. Especially in part 1 and the end of part II in the medieval period it felt as if the Cathars had some rabid twitter account saying "Dear bad guys guys want to know all our secrets?....". Yes we know it's the good guys against the bad guys but how come the bad guys seem to know more about what their counterparts are doing than they do? Damn you twitter account!!!
Speaking of which, I felt sorry for Katie McGrath who portrayed a cardboard cut out of her Morgana character in the Merlin series. She's a good looking woman and a fine actress but did she seriously have to lose her clothes so often? She was only one of many flat characters with trite dialogue. There is one scene where she can see someone shake his head in response to a question she asks when she is looking away from him. At this point I was also shaking my head as the dialogue/monologue leading up to this point felt like a quick fix to try to explain her motivation for being such a nasty piece of work and failing miserably.
When it came to the end it felt that I had only seen half the production. It felt as if a whole group of scenes had been cut out and re-spliced leaving me trying to figure how we got to F from A without B, C, D and E. If I'm being kind I would like to think that due to external pressures that a real cracker of a production is out there waiting to be shown at a future date.
As it was I found myself just becoming more frustrated as things made less and less sense. Even the role of the grail in the end becomes diminished except potentially as lesson teacher to humanity.
On the plus side Jessica Brown Findlay playing the medieval heroine was the closest to a fully formed character in the whole story and I'd like to see her in more roles. Production was good especially in the medieval scenes and the filming felt clean and slick. I now feel enlightened as I've had a chance to meet the Cathars, not to be confused with the Kardashians. Giving it 5 out of 10 as I feel like I only saw half of what could have been.
"Labyrinth" is an entertaining mini-series disclosing two stories, one in 1209 and the other in 2012, in France. Alais Pelletier Du Mas (Jessica Brown Findlay) is followed in the Middle Ages, when the Crusade attack the City of Carcassonne where she lives with her father and her evil stepsister. In the present days (2012), her descendant Alice Tanner (Vanessa Kirby), who is a teacher working with her archeologist friend in a dig, is chased by a mysterious ring that is looking for three ancient books and a ring to achieve power and eternal life through the Holy Grail. The historical event and the fictional present are entwinned and is attractive for a television mini-series. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Labirinto" ("Labyrinth")
Title (Brazil): "Labirinto" ("Labyrinth")
It's quite possible that the low reviews for this series are influenced by its religious themes. Yet the producers must have been aware of the risk. Religion can be a polarizing subject. Any misstep-real or perceived-could lead to backlash.
However, I see the religious elements as metaphors, similar to how the shark in Jaws represented more than just a predator. This series, like Jaws, is ultimately about human experience. Themes of fear, guilt, redemption, and existential questioning resonate on multiple levels. When viewed this way, the characters' struggles feel more real and profound.
I give the series a 6.5 not only for the engaging characters, but also for the courage shown by the series creators.
However, I see the religious elements as metaphors, similar to how the shark in Jaws represented more than just a predator. This series, like Jaws, is ultimately about human experience. Themes of fear, guilt, redemption, and existential questioning resonate on multiple levels. When viewed this way, the characters' struggles feel more real and profound.
I give the series a 6.5 not only for the engaging characters, but also for the courage shown by the series creators.
Did you know
- TriviaIn episode 2, Kate Mosse, the author of the book on which the mini-series is based, makes a cameo as a tour guide.
- How many seasons does Labyrinth have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Kate Mosse's Labyrinth
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content