Childhood's End

This is a vision of a first encounter. In that the show succeeds brilliantly. If one were only to watch the first episode then one could be quite satisfied. I was. It was foolish of me to want the second episode so soon afterward. The second episode starts meandering into the realms of predictable, that is, all is not what it seems. The third episode does not satisfy. The viewer is left wondering why all sorts of things are happening and it's a huge why all the way to the end. It needed science to back the fiction, to join the dots, and for me, as a lover of science fiction, it fell short.

I think it's an important compliment to the overall canon of science fiction shows out there, after all, it was originally quite a good book. The photography, editing, acting and so forth, including the effects, all are done extremely well. There is a love story as well but we never understand how that is relevant except in a very loose way if one compares the fate of the lovers to the fate of the world. Again, a huge why? In fact fate, as a theme, seems here to be very close to what others would see as plot holes. I understand the higher message the show is aiming for and it's OK as science fiction, but it was cruel to expand what is basically a poetic idea suitable for a paperback into over three hours of visual drama. Two hours with less irrelevant flashbacks and a brave stab at an evolutionary science explanation for that 'why' would have improved everything.

I'm not in agreement with those that say this show didn't follow the book and that is what is missing. I read the book at least forty years ago but it couldn't have been all that bright as I only remembered the initial theme, the arrival.

It's definitely not a rip off, but I think there are lessons here. It's not far off the mark and if the people behind this production move on to another science fiction theme then I certainly will want to see it .

I loved the book back then when I first read it, and still remember how impressed I was. So was looking forward to watching the series.

My overall impression is - it should have been a movie. The first episode works, next two seem a bit dragged out.

Whoever wrote the plot didn't make a good job out of it because everything is patchy and I think for those who are not familiar with the book it may be hard to follow what is going on. Main negative is unnecessary romantic lines that are done just to fill time. And the message the book tries to send get lost somewhere in the process...

At the plus side, cast is great, visual effects are OK, there are many wonderful moments, 'Imagine' sequence is wonderfully done, and soundtrack is good all around. It's obvious filmmakers put a lot of thought in it and it shows.

So overall I recommend to watch it, but probably read the book first. It's better anyway.

This is a good adaptation of Arthur C. Clarke Childhood's End. Any flaws need to be placed at the feel of the original book as this mini-series attempts to follow the main points of the novel with reasonable accuracy. There are some changes, but it takes a re-read of the novel to confirm them and I must say the changes did not add anything to the story. But as I last read the novel in the late 70's, this did not bother me so much when I watched it. Now I have re-read the novel my opinion may be different, so my advice is don't read the novel until after you have seen this. My only major grip is with the original story as this evolution of the species does not feel right, especially he way it occurs. I understand the point Clarke was making and he was attempting to push the concept of change for the good of the species, but it jarred with me when I read the book and the same when I viewed this series. But putting that aside this series has great special effects and good acting and the wonderful dialog of Clarke, with that combination nothing could go wrong.

There's a lot going on in Childhood's End. Some of this story is about how religion and people's conception of it might change after first contact, and some of it opens up the question of whether or not humans are really ready for it.

This is science fiction as it should be. The story itself doesn't take a definitive stance on whether or not the aliens were right to do what they did, but treats their motivations as being so inherently alien that it's difficult for a human to judge them. It allows the viewer to make up their own mind and challenges them to think about it.

It's unfortunate that so few people have seen this. It's really worth seeing, especially if you're already a fan of the genre.

Now that the Syfy Channel has released Arthur C. Clarke's "Childhood's End" as a six hour miniseries, it is fair to compare it to the classic novel, but it should be judged on its own merits. I am pleased to say that all but one half hour is quite exciting and suspenseful. That half hour, which is near the end, suffers from bad editing.

The story combines science fiction with what could be called elements of supernaturalism, depending up on how you interpret it. Regardless, the story is captivating. With every revelation, there are even greater mysteries to be revealed--something that is unusual in fiction.

I don't want to reveal much of the story and rob anyone of the powerful surprises in "Childhood's End" and the thrill of living the story through the characters, but the story starts with occurrences that affect the lives of everyone on Earth. The narrative follows the lives of a small number of people, showing how their lives are changed and the challenges they face. Clarke's story is rife with religious imagery and symbolism. While he was an atheist, his earlier stories are filled with supernatural elements. "Childhood's End" includes some that are reminiscent of "2001: A Space Odyssey"--the work he is best known for.

How does one grade a work that is 85% awesome? That's a matter of opinion. But I hope the show gets plenty of viewers, because it is provocative--even sixty years after it was written. And it might encourage some to read about Clarke's notable career as a writer.