Klondike

I watched it all and didn't mind it,know some of the producers who do a good job productionwise. There are errors, lots of them, like wolves chasing after humans, very rare. Also mounties, or North West Mounted Police were not against native Indians like American cavalry, in fact they were incorporated with the intention of keeping American whiskey traders in Montana.

There was not a lot of killing as portrayed here (stolen from Deadwood), in fact very little as the Mounties kept it clean. The idea of the Indians being hung is a little far fetched also. As with all things like this, the mounties didn't allow any murders, etc. Remember, this is Canada, not California gold rush or Black Hills gold rush where killing and lawbreaking was the norm. Women couldn't get into a beer parlour in 1969 without a male escort. Yeah, beer PARLOUR, not bar.

In truth, Klondike was not even close to Deadwood in crime. Eh? But anyways, a nice 3 episodes, not very true, but what the heck, neither was The Butler.

I typically love historical epics, and I'm fascinated about stories of the West and gold rushes etc. However, "Klondike" blew it in so many ways, I'm not sure I can enumerate them all.

The camera work, scenery and set design was marvellous, and definitely needs acknowledging. The rest? Well it was great to see Robb Stark again, and he comes out unscathed. The remainder of the characters are cardboard cutouts and I felt no sympathy for them, good or bad. Tim Roth was embarrassing.

The plot was simple enough, but was cut to shreds by jumping around here and there, which makes me think the editor should never work in Hollywood again.

I could go on, but, you get the point, I'm sure. I don't normally write critical reviews, so the fact that I'm doing so means this was missing it all, really wide of the mark. Mediocre - 5/10.

My wife and I were frustrated by all the factors other reviewers have pointed out...the "Hollywoodization" of the costuming and make up of the women, the inclusion of modern issues, race, anti Jewish, women's suffrage. The implausibility of the wolf attack, river near-drowning, etc.. Stupid mistakes historically I don't think cigarettes were invented until the early 1900's, as well as the events mentioned by others. It always surprises and annoys me when otherwise great production values are undercut with stupid and/or lazy mistakes.

All that being said, we did enjoy the production...great scenery and sets, the story line was interesting even though it was TV/movie formula with dark lighting and poor sound. Visually it was interesting...the series could easily have been shortened by a couple hours. I turned on the Captions which made the dialog easy to follow, and I enjoyed a number of quotes which, I'd love to be able to remember. They weren't authentic to the times I'm sure, but were little gems.

In conclusion, we put our critiques aside and watched the series and enjoyed it for what is was, not what it could have been.

Klondike was much-hyped on Discovery, and looked interesting. As a period-piece, it works on some levels, offering a gritty look at the Gold-rush era in the Yukon. However, the story-telling and logic of the plot is sadly wanting. It's almost as if the scriptwriters didn't want to use any clichés in their dialogue - so, they wrote obscure, pompous phrases that are not clichés - but they don't make any sense either. I wouldn't say that the acting is flawed - Tim Roth is brilliant as a psycho land baron-villain - but the lines they are given just don't explain the plot or what the characters are supposed to be thinking.

We watched 'Alaska-Ultimate Survivor' during which we saw how real-life survival experts dealt with frigid cold, especially after unexpected encounters with icy water. The Director should have watched that series before setting up some of his shots. (Once your core temperature drops, so do you).

There was also some explicit 'skin' scenes, thrown in to further narcotize the viewers who may have been nodding off. Unnecessary. Try writing a realistic script instead, Ridley Scott!

Have just watched the first episode and enjoyed it. When I watch a drama I'm not concerned if the historical accuracy is not perfect I'm more concerned that the actors can act (they can). Some reviewers seem to be upset that a Scotsman and an Australian play the leads complaining that the accents aren't believable, but who can say how someone talked over 100 years ago, language changes FACT. Yes the language they use is modern screen writers write for there target audience (as they always have). Enough of a rant if you want to be entertained and get an impression of the conditions in Dawson City watch, if you want 100% historical accuracy either invent a time machine and travel back to the 1890's or watch a documentary.