I'm a big fan of the book, the play and some of the film adaptations. Every story seems to get the prequel treatment now even when it's unnecessary. In the "Les Liaisons Dangereuses" book and in most of the adaptations, Merteuil and Valmont are bored aristocrats who get their kicks from sexually manipulating innocent people and the harmful consequences of their actions. It was de Laclos's commentary on the apathetic French aristocracy that eventually led to the French revolution (it's said Marie Antoinette had her own copy of the book carefully hidden among her effects).
Here their origin is supposedly two young people living in poverty and forced into prostitution. Totally made up for this tv series. For me, it doesn't work at all. And Camille's reaction to Valmont doing almost the exact same thing and blackmailing his older broken-hearted paramour is reaching in terms of motivation and explaining how Camille will eventually become de Laclos's Marquis de Merteuil. Another thing that I noticed in this first episode is the actors have no chemistry. When the series starts we're told that they're in love, not shown how they fell in love. The audience is supposed to believe that Camille and Valmont are in love because they have sex a few times. Alright then. And Camille's maid servant doesn't like Valmont for a reason we aren't privy to, so she sets about to break them up because the script calls for it.
Also, the historically inaccurate casting decisions are silly. Yes, I understand wanting more "diverse" casting. But here it's very out of place and seems shoe-horned in. Setting it in modern times would've made sense in this respect but period dramas on Starz seem to be hot now so they want to have their cake and eat it too.
It is nice to see Lesley Manville in a prominent role, as she played the original Cecile de Volanges in the RSC production in 1985 with Alan Rickman (RIP) and Lindsay Duncan. And the great Clare Higgins is the brothel madam who is owed a debt by Camille. Christopher Hampton, who adapted the book to the Royal Shakespeare Company production in the 1980s and also wrote the Oscar-winning screenplay for the film has an Executive Producer credit. I really wonder how much creative input he has on this series.
Now I'm basing this on the first episode of the series. Could it get better? Of course. Will it get better? We shall see. I do hope it will influence more people to read the novel, read the Hampton play or watch any of the other adaptations.
POSTSCRIPT 12/27/22
Well, turns out it got even worse. Reviewer MaryRock90 and several others have nailed all the problems with the series and not surprised Starz went back on their decision to renew for a 2nd season and just outright cancelled it instead. There are entertaining and clever ways to do a prequel series about Valmont and Merteuil but the team behind this one had no idea how to do any of that. If this idea had been proposed 30 or 40 years ago in the heyday of Masterpiece Theatre and A&E period dramas it could've been something really interesting and special with competent professionals behind it. Alas, it wasn't to be.
Here their origin is supposedly two young people living in poverty and forced into prostitution. Totally made up for this tv series. For me, it doesn't work at all. And Camille's reaction to Valmont doing almost the exact same thing and blackmailing his older broken-hearted paramour is reaching in terms of motivation and explaining how Camille will eventually become de Laclos's Marquis de Merteuil. Another thing that I noticed in this first episode is the actors have no chemistry. When the series starts we're told that they're in love, not shown how they fell in love. The audience is supposed to believe that Camille and Valmont are in love because they have sex a few times. Alright then. And Camille's maid servant doesn't like Valmont for a reason we aren't privy to, so she sets about to break them up because the script calls for it.
Also, the historically inaccurate casting decisions are silly. Yes, I understand wanting more "diverse" casting. But here it's very out of place and seems shoe-horned in. Setting it in modern times would've made sense in this respect but period dramas on Starz seem to be hot now so they want to have their cake and eat it too.
It is nice to see Lesley Manville in a prominent role, as she played the original Cecile de Volanges in the RSC production in 1985 with Alan Rickman (RIP) and Lindsay Duncan. And the great Clare Higgins is the brothel madam who is owed a debt by Camille. Christopher Hampton, who adapted the book to the Royal Shakespeare Company production in the 1980s and also wrote the Oscar-winning screenplay for the film has an Executive Producer credit. I really wonder how much creative input he has on this series.
Now I'm basing this on the first episode of the series. Could it get better? Of course. Will it get better? We shall see. I do hope it will influence more people to read the novel, read the Hampton play or watch any of the other adaptations.
POSTSCRIPT 12/27/22
Well, turns out it got even worse. Reviewer MaryRock90 and several others have nailed all the problems with the series and not surprised Starz went back on their decision to renew for a 2nd season and just outright cancelled it instead. There are entertaining and clever ways to do a prequel series about Valmont and Merteuil but the team behind this one had no idea how to do any of that. If this idea had been proposed 30 or 40 years ago in the heyday of Masterpiece Theatre and A&E period dramas it could've been something really interesting and special with competent professionals behind it. Alas, it wasn't to be.