Dangerous Liaisons

The only reason to watch this mindless tripe is for Lesley Manville. So disappointing. It pays no respect to the source material, turning a story about rich, bored, wicked people destroying others for sport into romantic fluff. Do yourself a favor - read the book or the play, watch the 1988 film or 1989's Valmont. Even Cruel Intentions is a more worthy update of the story.

It looks beautiful. The costumes are gorgeous, the cinematography is first rate. Too bad it's all wasted on a silly, adolescent screenplay. Call it something else, because this show has nothing to do with Dangerous Liaisons.

There is very little character development throughout the first few episodes, the plot feels very rushed, and the premise is not very interesting. I feel like this adaptation does do the original story any justice. I want to like the characters and the plot, but the hurried way of telling the story spoils the narrative. The scenery and costume design are amazing, but little else of this show is. There are moments of intertwining story telling mixed with long periods of irrelevant dialog. I wanted to like this show because I like the era and the premise. I really liked Outlander and similar shows, but this is nothing like those shows.

First of all, it's not really an adaptation. If you read carefully even here on IMDB, you will find out that Harriet Warner, who have written the first episode, was merely inspired by the original story. So it's more like a story based on the characters rather than adaptation of the classics, which could be enough for some people to skip it. The story in the series is so different that it actually puzzled me at first: what am I even watching? Character names are known, there seems to be the same period as in the novel, but that's where resemblance ends and it is in a bad way.

Don't be fooled, that's just another attempt to make money on the story with fancy name with the hope that viewer had never read it. Because if you did, there's no other answer to the omnipresent question: why diverting so much from the original novel while keeping character names and the name of the story?

Picture is good and there seems to be an intrigue, but once again, this is not original de Laclos writing and competing with him while keeping the name of his novel seems insulting.

I have only seen the first episode of the show and will not continue with it. If you have never read the story, better read it or watch one of the many successful films: Dangerous Liaisons (1988), Cruel Intentions (1999) or more dated French version from 1960.

There is some excellent casting in this show but unfortunately the lead isn't one of them. Valmont isn't sexy or charming or attractive. He's smarmy and unappealing and not too bright. And he looks like a 16-year-old boy; not someone wealthy Parisian women would want in their beds.

Character development is seriously flawed. Personalities go from angelic to evil to meh back to angelic in the course of one episode. So much flip-flopping.

And why add the murder story line? Completely unnecessary and didn't really develop into anything plot wise. A bug dud. Same w/the kid being alive. Why? It went nowhere.

Six stars b/c I'm still entertained by just about any period piece. Shame on me.

I don't agree with the reviews that were discontent over the series departing from the original source material. I do not mind if a film strays from an original story as long as it's well written and directed. Sadly this series not only changed the story but replaced it with something much worse.

The dialogue was dull and boring, the story uninspired and convoluted, and the pace was painfully slow. It's a mystery as to how these shows get green lit. I really like the Starz network's historical dramas but this one was a major disappointment. I suppose the actors did the best they could with terrible dialogue but not even good actors could save this.