kefka_1
Joined Feb 2008
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews1
kefka_1's rating
I love BBC Historical Dramas, there historical accuracy is normally far greater than any other channel/studio. But the 1971 date shows, all the Indians are played by white actors with bad makeup and silly almost comical "Indian" accents. While the 1992 film version had many flaws, its portrayal of the natives was very well done(As well the time period in general). This miscasting is very distracting though out, Magua for example in the 92 film as played by Wes Studi was much better(than this version's) simply because his look was so convincing, he looked like a deadly Huron warrior while Philip Madoc looks like some dude in a silly Indian outfit going to a costume party. Beside the unrealistic Indians, all the sets are absurdly poor, for example Fort Henry is a joke. The poor hand to hand fighting scenes(which there are quite a few) are just as bad as the sets if not worse, clearly no one is being shot or cut or hurt in anyway. I understand that the budget for this production must have been limited(very limited), but that does not excuse the fact that the illusion is broken over and over again, we are constantly reminded that we are watching people play at being Indians,soldiers and scouts, not the real thing.
Even with all these flaws, I still found LOTM to be a solid production, as with any BBC production the writing was fairly good and I was reasonably entertained. This is the worst BBC Historical Drama I have seen, but still quite watchable(hard for anything to beat I,Claudius,Elizabeth R,Sharp,etc anyway).
For those others that gave LOTM such high ratings, I think nostalgia is the main reason not the merits of this series.
Even with all these flaws, I still found LOTM to be a solid production, as with any BBC production the writing was fairly good and I was reasonably entertained. This is the worst BBC Historical Drama I have seen, but still quite watchable(hard for anything to beat I,Claudius,Elizabeth R,Sharp,etc anyway).
For those others that gave LOTM such high ratings, I think nostalgia is the main reason not the merits of this series.