Description

James Wilby (Gosford Park) and Juliet Aubrey (Middlemarch)portray the reluctant royals who became king and queen of England whenEdward VIII gave up the throne for the woman he loved, on Bertie &Elizabeth. Albert, Duke of York, called Bertie, married Lady ElizabethBowes-Lyon in 1923 after a storybook courtship. Expecting a life ofgenteel obscurity, they were thrust into the limelight in 1936 whenBertie's older brother, Edward VIII, abdicated to marry thetwice-divorced American socialite Wallis Simpson. Shy, modest, and ahabitual stutterer, Bertie was crowned King George VI just as hiscountry faced the onslaught of World War II. With the help of hisdevoted Elizabeth, he rose magnificently to the challenge. Bertie &Elizabeth also stars Alan Bates (Love in a Cold Climate) as Bertie'sfather, King George V; Eileen Atkins (currently starring with Bates andWilby in Gosford Park) as his mother, Queen Mary; Charles Edwards asEdward VIII; Amber Rose Sealey as Wallis Simpson; David Ryall as Winston Churchill;Robert Hardy (Lucky Jim) as President Franklin Roosevelt; and CorinRedgrave (Persuasion) as General Bernard Montgomery. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

The love story of King George VI and the Queen Mum
There was never supposed to be a Queen Elizabeth II sitting on the throne of England, anymore than there is ever supposed to be a second Queen Victoria.When the Duke of York, the second son of King George V, married Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, the first commoner to marry into English royalty since Anne Boelyn, it was not of any concern because his older brother David would inherit the throne as Edward VIII.When the couple had their first daughter, they named her Elizabeth and I always thought it was because he wanted to honor his wife.So when Edward VIII gave up his throne for the woman he loved, the American divorce Wallis Simpson, the Duke of York became King George VI, his wife became Queen consort, and their daughter would one day be Queen Elizabeth II.

"Bertie and Elizabeth: The Reluctant Royals - The Story of King George VI & Queen Elizabeth" begins the story right before they meet in 1920 and ends it after his death in 1952.Of course, Elizabeth then became the "Queen Mum" and the most beloved woman in England and there is some indication of why in this Masterpiece Theater movie.During the Nazi Blitz during World War II when it was suggested that the Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret be taken to Canada for safety, it was the Queen consort who insisted that the family stay in London just like all of the other citizens who had no place to go.There is some indication of the affection their subjects had for the King and Queen, but mostly the scenes are set in the castles out of the public's sight.Of course, that is the attraction of such biopics.

James Wilby ("Gosford Park") and Juliet Aubrey ("Middlemarch") play Bertie and Elizabeth, with Alan Bates as King George V, Eileen Atkins as Queen Mary, Charles Edwards as Edward VIII and Amber Rose Sealey as Wallis Simpson (note: the two brothers are actually named Albert and Edward although they are called Bertie and David respectively by family and friends).This movie enhances the reputation of the title characters and they end up replacing the Duke and Duchess of Windsor as one of the great love stories of Twentieth Century.The Prince of Wales was a playboy who lied to his family, neglected his duties, and made fun of his brother's stutter.His future wife was a snob and when she puts down Elizabeth it is Wallis Simpson whose reputation takes a major hit. Of course, any and all such hits are historically justified by the objective evidence regarding the infamous couple.

Ultimately, this movie is a testament to how King George VI, considered a shy, dull-witted, colorless man married to a hopelessly plain wife, became heroic figures by their actions during the war.Edward VII and Wallis Simpson were style, but George VI and Elizabeth had substance.Even though she is another minor character in the story, the Princess Elizabeth (Elisabeth Dermot-Walsh), can still easily be seen as the product of her pragmatic parents.Queen Mary has a couple of nice scenes, as does Winston Churchill (David Ryall), but overall this is a history light version of these interesting times.That is because the emphasis is on the Reluctant Royals and the peculiar dynamics of the House of Windsor. Yet, even against that troubled backdrop the simple bonds of affection between the last King of England and the woman he loved.

A raher sugary telling of history.
This Film tells the story of the current Queen Elizabeth's parents. Many remember well her late Mother who died very recently aged 101, her Faher is remembered for taking over the role of King from his wayward Brother who abdicated in order to marry Wallace Simpson (the divorced American, shock horror!) It plays the couple as blissfully happy young people, madly in love and not interested in royal life.
It plays the Queen Mother as a sweet girl, badly treated by the nasty Mrs Simpson.
It places all the major historical events in context, the abdication, WW2, the birth of Princess Elizabeth (now the Queen) and Princess Margaret (the Queen's late Sister).
I'm just not sure it is as truthful as it could be, King George had a very bad stammer and was highly anxious of public speaking, he was damaged by the cruel treatment of his Father and no doubt by years at Public School; not one jot of that information is played out here. In contrast, many historians suggest that Lady Elizabeth Bowes Lyon, or the Queen Mother as she later was, was quite keen to not persue nor accept King George, preferring his Brother who later abdicated.
The reported poor relationship between she and Mrs Simpson (later the Duchess of Windsor) was 2 way street, the Duchess reportedly teased the Queen Mother about her robust figure and was aware of her jealously of her, and it was generally reported the Queen Mother treated the Duchess with comtempt and like a cheap harlot. Again the film glosses over this, maybe the makers had to be careful to keep lawyers off their back, this was screened in Britian just after the Queen Mother's death so it may help to explain it's historical engineering work and the general feeling that you are viewing a J M Barrie adaptaion, I was waiting throughout for Peter Pan to appear!; it really was that fancifull at times.
Not great but worth a look, the central actors are pretty wet and unconvincing too but that seems to be a script fault.

Great Costume Drama, But Historically A Bit Lacking
Bertie and Elizabeth is the story of the courtship and marriage of Prince Albert, Duke of York and second son of King George V, and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.This has historical significance in that Bertie and Elizabeth became King George VI and Queen Elizabeth in December 1936 upon the abdication of Bertie's older brother King Edward VIII, who became Duke of Windsor.George VI and his Queen led the British monarchy through World War II and the beginning of the dissolution of the British Empire before the King died in his sleep in 1952.

The first segments of this story are well done but a bit thinin historical detail.I would like to have seen more of the difficult relations between Bertie and his parents, and I feel personally that the character of Edward VIII was drawn to be crueler than he deserved. (While there is no doubt that the Duke of Windsor was self-absorbed, he was kinder to his siblings, particularly Bertie and his stuttering problems, than this film depicts.)I also think Elizabeth's character comes off as superficial too much of the time, and that Wallis Simpson is made out to be far nastier than she deserves (I don't have much use for the Duchess of Windsor, but most of her missteps were out of ignorance rather than malevolence.) I enjoyed the scenes showing Elizabeth's working to help her husband overcome his stammer, though I rather doubt they really spent much time on the floor of the doctor's office.

The Abdication scenes and the early years of George VI's reign are well done, particularly the Royal Visit to President Roosevelt in 1939, but things get skimpy again in the World War II years.I don't understand why Elizabeth's famous comment that she could at last look the East End in the face after Buckingham Palace was bombed was left out. I also don't quite see the point of spending so much time focussed on Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands and her wartime travails. Some of the characterizations ofgenerals and politicians are very well done indeed, particularly Montgomery and Churchill. (Its nice to be reminded of Churchill's sense of humor!!)The last few segments showing the King's final years are also nice.Queen Mary's shocked reactions are used to good effect to emphasize the advent of change in the late 1940s with the election of a Labour Government. (Clement Attlee is also very well done.) I also thought Elizabeth Dermot Walsh's portrayal of Princess Elizabeth (the present Queen) as a cool headed pragmatist extremely well done.

My only real disappointment with this film is that it istoo short.A six hour mini series would have covered the period with far more detail and historical accuracy.But this film does reveal the humanity and courage of a King who did his duty and of the Queen who loved and supported him.Its a nice reminder these Windsor-bashing days. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Good as a stand alone, not as an adaptation
If I had never read the Rosamunde Pilcher book, I would have adored the mini-series. I understand why so many parts had to be cut from the book, but some of the cuts and changes were not necessary and some changed the story. I was disappointed with the change in the Judith/Edward storyline and hated that they changed the ending.

The small changes were annoying too. Why add the evacuees to an already crowded cast, they added nothing to the story and why change the name of the butler?

I agree that the Dower house was much too grand in the movie, but loved seeing Nancharrow, it was exactly as I pictured it in my mind.

Don't expect the book!
If I had never read "Coming Home" I could have liked this film. It is, however, just not at all an adequate adaptation of Rosamunde Pilcher's excellent novel. The soul has been cut out of the story in order to make it fit tidily into a film. The acting and such are fine, as they go, but watching this is like watching a ghost of Pilcher's fine story, and it truly does not satisfy at all. Perhaps Pilcher's books really don't lend themselves to film adaptations. I found the adaptation of "The Shell Seekers" to be an appalling desecration of that book too. They should try to make them into a mini-series.

Coming Home is a wonderful movie!
I have not read Pilcher's book but I found the movie version of Coming Home excellent. I saw the whole film on WE Entertainment and could not tear myself away. Yes, this movie is surreal and at times hard to believe. But that's why movies are make -believe ! They are supposed to transport us from out hum-drum everyday lives into some place magical. This is a magical movie! Peter O'Toole is wonderful. Emily Mortimer is captivating ! Joanne Lumley shows us that she is more that ABSOLUTELY FABULOUS!
I cried and laughed at this movie. And at the end I smiled. That's what I look for in a movie. Something to make me feel good. So buy it. You won't regret it !

A pleasant surprise!
I have read "Coming Home" twice and have listened to the audio tape several times, so when I saw that the novel was available on video I was delighted...I finally found it on VHS on sale and ordered it, just to see for myself, and watched it this past week. What a joy! I loved every minute of it, and the fact that it didn't cover every page of the book didn't bother me at all. Even "Little Women" switched Amy and Beth's position in the family in the 1949 version but it was still a wonderful movie. I am very glad that I have "Coming Home" in my video collection and plan to watch it again soon.

Coming Home a must for everyone
I totally disagree with Kerrville TX USA when she slated Coming Home. It is a fabulous film and I would not be without it in my DVD collection. Since when has any film made been exactly like the book, I personally preferred the film to the book, if it had every single detail in the film as it did in the book you would be sat in front of the tv for hours on end.There is nothing worse than watching a film which goes on and on forever. Anyone who buys it would certainly NOT be wasting their money. Even if they are Rosamunde Pilchers biggest fan I am sure they would still love it if they had any taste. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Jane Austen goes Gothic in this darkly dramatic rendering of her Northanger Abbey, a novel that wasn't published until after her early and sudden death. Austen pokes fun at her peers in this story, inwhich her heroine, Catherine Morland (Katharine Schlesinger), is hopelessly addicted to macabre romance novels that wreak havoc on her imagination. She comes from a large, but loving family, and she's taken, as a companion, to the decadent society of Bath. There, she meetsthe duplicitous Thorpe siblings, Isabella (Cassie Stuart) and John (Jonathan Coy), and the kindly Tilneysister and brother, Eleanor (Ingrid Lacey) and Henry (Peter Firth). The Tilneys also have an elder brother,the snobbish soldier Frederick (Greg Hicks), and an oddly eerie father, General Tilney (Robert Hardy).Needless to say, all this provides plenty of fodder for fantasies and Catherine comes up with many, evenimagining all sorts of evils on a visit to the Tilney family home, Northanger Abbey. The soundtrack is more than a little melodramatic, but it's best to think of it as a humorous touch rather than a serious, punctuating one.--N.F. Mendoza ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Not so bad as all that
Yes, this is a rather liberal adaptation and interpretation of Jane Austen's novel, but it's far from being terrible.
For those familiar with the novel, the director does choose to stress some elements differently, and the film as a whole is, quite literally, sexed up, but it doesn't really step beyond the boundaries of artistic licence.
Northanger Abbey as a novel is already something of a curio, which is part of its charm. Almost twenty years on, this movie has become a curio too - it fits well with the book, and certainly enhanced my rereading of it.
At times the soundtrack and the softcore fantasy scenes are a little overpowering, but they definitely have their place.
The casting didn't exactly jibe with my mental images, but all the actors turn in creditable performances, and the two leads do a very good job of being 'almost' attractive.
If you know the book, don't be too hasty in dismissing this adaptation, it's a fun way to pass a couple of hours and you can always tear it apart at the end if you still feel the need to nitpick.
If you don't know the book, then sit back and enjoy an 80s period piece about a dreamy young girl who has too many of the wrong ideas in her head.
Overall, the film does a good job of recreating Austen's gently mocking pastiche of a story, and although I wouldn't rush out and buy it, this film is definitely worth watching.

Worst...Austen...ever
Having read all six of the works in Austen's published canon, Northanger Abbey as a book is a bit wanting (most likely a work of post-juvenalia, it lacks the mature style of her later--and better known for a reason--works; the narrative voice is very heavy-handed, and lacks the subtle, at times biting, sarcastic tone of works like Pride and Prejudice and and Emma).Having said that, this movie takes incredible liberties with the story she put on paper.The casting is terrible (in a so-bad-it's-funny-but-not-for-the-right-reasons sort of way), the direction is lacking (surely an adaptation of an Austen novel was never meant to be so melodramatic), the incidental music is over-the-top, and the whole thing is played out in a serious manner (not only is the adaptation and acting that bad, but they don't even try to give it a tongue-in-cheek spin).If you're looking for a follow-up to the BBC Pride and Prejudice miniseries from about 10 years ago, try the BBC version of Emma (not the Paltrow one), or the recent adaptation of Persuasion--despite the similarities in its title and the names of characters and places, you won't find real _Austen_ here.

Watchable but not the best film of Austen's books
I was looking forward to seeing a movie version of one of Jane Austen's novels that had not been filmed in the past decade but this one really frustrated me.While the images that play through Catherine's mind as she reads a new gothic novel are more vivid and stressed than in the book I guess that some of it was necessary in order to understand her fixation on the death of the hero's mother.But it was over done.

I also found that the characters of Cassie and her obnoxious brother were much overdone showing them more as wiley villains rather than the pathetic characters in the book who must marry for money and play the game to get it.Granted, they're not very nice people but the smirks, sneers and minxy smiles were too much.

The actors who played the Tilney's were fine and totally believable in their roles.I was please that they were portrayed will skill and understatement.But I was most disappointed in the portrayal of Catherine.Katherine Schlesinger was too pretty, too smiley and was not believable as one of many children on a country Anglican minister.

The visuals are wonderful though, of the countryside and of Bath (although I wonder if that's really what it looked like, the costuming terrific and the actors who played the Allen's perfect.And the conversation between Catherine and the Tilney's is very true to the original, especially of the day that they take a walk and a boat ride.

Would I recommend the movie?If you're a died in the wool Janeite, I would say no, but if you can get beyond the fact that it's not pure Austen and want to see a lovely story, then go for it.

Beware Jane Austen Purists!!
I read this novel because I am a Jane Austen fan, however I found that this version did not do the novel justice.The director took a great deal of "artistic license", of which none was for the best.I found the acting only mediocre and as I wrote before, the "artistic license" taken was for the deprivation of the movie.The scenery was, for the credit of the movie, beautiful.However, while reading the novel, I viewed both the characters and the surroundings in a much different light.Overall, I would not recommend this movie - I would however, with high regard recommend the book to you.

What happened here??
This is perhaps the worst adaptation of a Jane Austen novel I have ever seen.Mind you, what is there isn't all that bad - the casting and acting is acceptable, some things are actually nicely handled, but the content is almost thoroughly mutilated...some of the best (and most imporatant) parts of the novel are omitted!And the ending is just tacked on (after the massive cuts) - and I mean literally tacked on, since the problems that are brought up are not developed and resolved (as in the novel) - it just ends! Most unsatisfying.
Having seen this film several times over the years, I am left with the impression that something must have happened during production which caused them to terminate it prematurely..(ran out of time?lack of funds?)

Its a shame - had the novel been fully presented things would have been different.As is, it is disappointing and a poor representation of the original.Not recommended at all.

And lets not even begin to comment on the absolutely abysmal and inappropriate soundtrack... ... Read more

Description

British stage and screen legends Alan Bates (Gosford Park, Women in Love) and Sinéad Cusack (Stealing Beauty) star in an irresistible blend of romantic comedy and mystery. He is a professor obsessed with word games who is forced into early retirement; she is a policewoman suspended from the force for voicing suspicions about a superior officer. They team up to find a missing person and wind up discovering much more. Traveling through some of Britain’s most glorious countryside from South Wales to the Orkney Islands, they uncover a web of nefarious activity, dodge an aerial attack, and exchange some of the wittiest banter since Hepburn and Tracy.

Written by Alan Plater (The Barchester Chronicles, The Last of the Blonde Bombshells) and also featuring Bill Paterson, Mollie Sugden, and Miles Anderson, this story proves once again that with mystery and love—getting there is more than half the fun.

Reviews (57)

A fun and enjoyable adaptation of the Jane Austen novel...
I've read all of Jane Austen's books and am usually very critical of the film adaptations. I have to admit though that the adaptation of Northanger Abbey sort of grew on me after one or two viewings (yes, I've owned the tape for years). I've probably seen this film dozens of times and I really quite enjoy it. Katherine Schlesinger is perfectly cast as Catherine Morland (anyone who has read the book would most likely agree) and Peter Firth has the charm and playfulness to pull Henry Tilney off. True, the film does not pretend to be a faithful adaptation of the book(there are some quirky scenes that Catherine's wild imagination conjures up) but all the same it adds a certain "tongue-in-cheek" element to the story. The major points of the plot, however, are straight from the book and characterizations are pretty much on the dot (especially that of John and Isabella Thorpe). If you enjoy Jane Austen's books then you'll easily find Northanger Abbey a guilty pleasure.

Disappointing!
This novel is my least favorite of Austen's work. However, I did expect to pleased when I sat to watch this video. I was thoroughly disappointed. This film was just plain silly.

A Jane Austen fanatic who loves this movie
As a devoted fan of Jane Austen's novels, I must say I love this movie. Although it's not a slavish attempt at recreating the book, the characterizations are very true to the book, and the movie successful embodies several of the book's themes. In addition, it works beautifully as a movie. The actors who play the leads bring their roles to life beautifully, and the character actors are wonderful.

Worth a perusal
We all know that the BBC, with some funding from A&E, could do a great adaptation of this film (hint, hint)! But since they don't seem to be interested in doing that, fans of the Jane Austen novel this film is based on, will have to refer to this made-for-British-TV version for a quick Northanger Abbey 'fix'.

Which is not a bad way to describe the nature of this film. Its screenplay is the bare bones of JA's classic novel, which leaves much of her satire, -- not to mention her witty dialogue,-- out. What was an intriguing and entertaining satire on the popular Gothic novels of its time, was made into a dreamlike, slightly creepy, light romance. Entertaining for what it is; deeply satisfying it is not. However, there are good things about this film, that JA fans will enjoy.

The biggest of these is the strength of the film's cast. The acting is superb, and the actors well suited to their roles. Peter Firth is perfectly charming as Henry Tilney, and though deprived of some of JA's better lines from the novel, conveys those he has with just the right passion for a romantic hero. And the heroine, played wonderfully by Katharine Schlesinger, is just as the novel imagined, innocent and eager to greet the world, all wide eyes and innocence. The supporting cast is also fine, especially Googie Withers as Mrs. Allen, and the Thorpe siblings.

Other high points are the lush and colorful costumes, and the vivid and romantic setting. All the opulence of dress from the 1790's, the novel's timeframe, is preserved, including piles of curls on the head, and garrish make-up. The Roman bath scene is a unique and interesting look at what one of the popular health spas of yesterday were like. And in spite of the inappropriateness of substituting a castle for an abbey, who wouldn't want to be a guest in one like this, or think it a likely place for adventure and romance for the heroine of a Gothic tale, which Catherine Morland so wants to be?

There have been just complaints about this film. The soundtrack is a departure from the JA film norm, and takes some getting used to. John Thorpe is a leering villian, instead of a bumbling fool, as in the novel. The Gothic daydream scenes are sometimes jarring and even disturbing, different from the novel's lighter, satirical tone. But overall these little quirks, along with others, seem to work, within the peculiar context of the film's truncated, but still Gothic and romantic, world. Even the Marchioness's strange appearance adds a pinch of dream flavor to this Gothic soup.

This film is probably best viewed as its own entity, and not as an adaptation of the novel. For JA fans, a more faithful version is needed (please!) but this has strong parts enough for occasional viewing as a curiosity (or just to give the Pride and Prejudice dvd a rest)! Like the Gothic romance novels of Mrs. Radcliffe, which this film in part satirizes, it should be enjoyed by quick consumption, and like that list of laundry bills in a mysterious, old trunk, not too seriously.

A different feel from the book
I acknowledge that good films don't have to follow their original scripts exactly, but this one was lacking in the spirit Jane Austen wrote it in. The characters of General Tilney and Catherine Morland are preserved, but Catherine has strange and bloody fantasies that don't match up with her character in the novel. The saxophone that's wailing as you watch the pastoral English scenery makes you cringe, and the creepy soundtrack is better fitting for a horror movie. Eleanor Tilney acts at once assertive and submissive, unlike her original whose timidity and obedience helped show the depth of the general's control. And the marchioness with the Kiss makeup and the boy doing cartwheels were not created by Austen and came out of left field. More than anything, the gory and creepy feel doesn't match up with the lighthearted satirical tone of the novel, thereby missing the point of the story. The ending seems to fit into the type of out-there romantic and gothic writing that Austen intended to make fun of. Let's hope a better version is made someday. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The first suite of episodes in the Foyle's War series comes to athrilling conclusion with "Eagle Day," a tense and historically fascinatingstory in which Detective Chief Superintendent Christopher Foyle (MichaelKitchen) goes toe-to-toe with guardians of England's Official Secrets Act. For avery personal reason, too: Foyle's R.A.F. pilot son, Andrew (Julian Ovenden),first seen in episode 1 and an off-screen emotional presence for the detectivein subsequent programs, is falsely accused of stealing documents pertinent toBritain's fledgling, 1940 experiments with radar. An outraged Foyle knows thecharge is connected to a cover-up involving a murdered truck driver, a suicidalair force technician, and--of all things--a possible art theft. Series creatorAnthony Horowitz's script, as usual, reflects tremendous research: details aboutthe radar program, the Secrets Act, and why ice cream trucks disappeared from England's roads are not to be missed. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Terrific Conclusion to a terrific series
This is an excellent episode in a wonderful series. The period is fascinating and sets up all sorts of unusual and thought provoking issues about carrying on in a time of crisis. Outstanding writing directing and acting all around. Michael Kitchen is completely believable as the hard working police detective who is confronted with all sorts of crimes in a time when everyone is on edge. The whole series is a treat. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This second episode in the superb Foyle's War series finds Detective Superintendent Christopher Foyle (Michael Kitchen) settled into his unwanted fate solving "provincial murders" in the English countryside (while colleagues fight Hitler overseas via plum intelligence jobs). "The White Feather" begins with the arrest of a dim hotel maid for inexplicably treasonous sabotage, but quickly escalates with the murder of the young woman's pro-Nazi employer. Slithering around the action is an outspoken anti-Semite (Charles Dance) with a stolen, classified document and Foyle's troubled assistant, Sergeant Milner (Anthony Howell).

With this sophomore effort, Foyle's War gracefully falls into certain patterns of storytelling, relationships, dialogue, etc., but by no means does that signal complacency. Series creator-writer Anthony Horowitz, like Foyle (but unlike Foyle's superiors), knows these little mysteries may only be shards of Britain's wartime crisis--but what is the worth of justice if it doesn't prevail at home? --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (1)

A great series produced with serious attitude
very good series. wonder why the british film making is more human than those output from hollywood. this series is very very good. very natural, very peaceful, and very touching. foyale is a great detective, a very quiet force to do the justice. this is what a detective should be, not the hollywood high-school drop-outs styled detectives. beautifully done and quite moving sometimes. no exaggeration, no gun battles, no dirty words yelling, screaming, explosions, no special effects, no disturbing background music. everything just comes out right.
fantastic shooting with cinematic beauty. highly recommended. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Detective Chief Superintendent Christopher Foyle (Michael Kitchen), the sober yet heartening hero of the exemplary new mystery series Foyle's War, isn't so much a reserved Englishman as he is an all-around minimalist. He might not approve of lavish praise, but he's a man used to spinning gold from disappointment. Stuck investigating murders while lesser colleagues are given key intelligence posts to fight Hitler in 1940, a restless Foyle is faced with the brutal killing of a German woman in a coastal village. Was it misplaced revenge against all of Germany that did her in, a controversial family trust, or something else--something worse? While Foyle deliberates and stews in career frustration, he has a paradoxical, revivifying effect on several human casualties of war and on justice itself. A fine mystery and a welcome detective hero. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Foyle's Spoils of War
PBS's ExxonMobil Masterpiece Theatre introduces Foyle's War; a four-episode murder-mystery series set in historic Hastings, England (i.e. The Battle of Hastings) at the onset of World War II. This is a much welcome installment for PBS Mystery! devotees as corporate sponsors have, unfortunately, been few-and-far-between in recent years. Detective Chief Superintendent Christopher Foyle is perfectly portrayed by Michael Kitchen, a Masterpiece Theatre alumnus, and he lends an easy-going charm and compassion to the serious and determined Foyle, who calmly tracks down the assorted murderers.

"The German Woman" starts the series off with a flourish (and two murders). It boasts an enviable cast of redoubtable British actors (Edward Fox, Robert Hardy, David Horovitch, Dominic Mafham, Rosamund Pike, etc...) and contains wonderful production values, so that the period atmosphere of English village life is fully evoked. The plot concerns the murder of the German wife of a wealthy Englishman and, despite powerful anti-German sentiments, Foyle focuses on treating the case as he would any other murder inquiry -- by rooting out the murderer and bringing them to justice. This is Foyle's strength and his Achilles' heel. As Foyle is so intent on justice, his superiors will not release him from his civic duties -- much to his chagrin. Foyle would rather be supporting the war effort by fighting in the front lines. To complicate matters, Foyle's son, Andrew, has signed up with the RAF as a pilot. Foyle's world is quickly unfurling through events that he cannot control, yet, ironically, he must maintain control in his district -- else chaos ensues. This intelligent and thoughtful series, and especially this premier episode, is highly recommended for viewers who enjoy a well-crafted mystery. In addition, they will be transported back to an incredibly dangerous and courageous time in world history by this realistically produced series. ... Read more

Amazon.com

By this third episode of Foyle's War, series creator AnthonyHorowitz has his characters' fundamentals and British wartime milieu well inhand; he rewards himself by taking this remarkable program to a new high. ALesson in Murder concerns a cluster of terrible deaths--a jailhouse suicideprovoked by abusive police, the monstrous killing of a child, the murder of ajudge--directly or indirectly tied to a military draft board tainted by scandal.As Detective Chief Superintendent Christopher Foyle (Michael Kitchen)investigates the linkages, his two prized assistants, driver Sam (HoneysuckleWeeks) and Detective Milner (Anthony Howell), become personally involved with apair of naive wartime casualties. Hovering over everything is intensifying gloomover Germany's imminent declaration of war, a homefront crisis making heroes ofsome and scoundrels of others. Fortunately, steadfast Foyle is there to separateone from the other. --Tom Keogh ... Read more