Famous Five TV Series 2023 - 2024, BBC

[Bertie]

Interesting thoughts, Debbie.

I agree about Wentworth, Julian and Dick.

Though I actually found Anne to be quite annoying in the first half of the film - complaining about things and sounding quite spoilt and coddled. She got better as it went along, but I definitely didn't find her the best character.

I didn't think it out of character for George to talk about 'slapping' people rather than punch them or anything. I thought she did slap people in the books - I'm pretty sure she slapped Edgar anyway in Five Run Away Together. I thought they made George's character strong enough - yes, they could have had her a bit more fiery at times but then, on the other hand, they made her pretty much the dominant leader, not Julian. So, overall, it was Julian's character that I felt was much more weakened. And Dick's as well, in terms of pluck - what they added to his character in terms of increased brains, they seemed to take away in terms of bravery!

[FiveFanDownunder]

Finally managed to catch this adaptation over here in Australia this week.

I absolutely loved it.

Not saying it's perfect by any means, and I've been following along with the discussions here, with a few left to catch up on. It was very much a Famous Five and the Raiders of the Lost Ark at points, but I went along for the ride quite happily.

I did have the same though re Anne with her first few lines sounding a bit of a whine, but that did seem to settle. I liked the childish, playful things she was doing on camera for some of those times when the dialogue was with others, playing with puppets etc, and knocking over chess pieces ( playing Dick, who we can safely assume would have been winning ). This made me smile and added a little authenticity. This makes three from three television Annes that have made me mushy over the years. Maybe I just needed a younger sister???

What I did feel was most pleasing was how it was so thoroughly focused on the children, no adults anywhere to be seen in so many of the scenes and the problem solving, planning etc was all theirs. This is completely how it felt to me reading Famous Fives over the years.

It was also absolutely smashing when the children were offered mountains of food ( chiefly cake ) in that scene in the library. I felt I was in familiar territory there.

Casting was fantastic.

I wonder if any of the seventies series fans felt the same as I did; early on in the piece Aunt Fanny calls up the stairs to George, with the same sing-song 'Ge-orge' that Sue Best gave us all those years ago. I felt this was definitely a nod to the 78 series. Later on, and in several of the trailers, there's a shot of Julian piggy-backing Anne, her legs out straight, and this one is a dead ringer for the 90s series, I think in the opening credits, all the way down to the shoes. I'd like to think the production did this deliberately, but of course, I'm not sure.

Regarding the scene where Timmy barks twice and two vicious dogs and handlers turn on their heels, I saw this as a bit of a joke in plain sight; perhaps as a way of addressing what we all know to be true of the books, that element of fantasy where children do better work solving crime than the police, impossible problems are solved in time for tea, children stand up to the adults and go off by themselves and rough it for weeks on end without a care in the world. I've always been happy to go along with these ideas, ever since about 1979 or so

I wonder if they will make any more? I certainly hope they do.

Best wishes for the New Year to all Blyton folk near and far.

[Anita Bensoussane]

Interesting posts. I agree with everyone about Julian being sidelined.

FiveFanDownunder, I also liked the nods to the 1970s and 1990s series and felt that they were deliberate. And yes, I agree about the scene with Timmy and the two dogs being "a bit of a joke in plain sight" - though I wasn't sure whether to laugh or groan!

[FiveFanDownunder]

I understand Anita, it is hard perhaps to know how respectfully these things are done. I'd like to think that it's all in the right spirit and not condescending.

On another note, now that the first episode of this series is out, should we rename this discussion thread to 'Famous Five 2023 Series' or something similar, as I suppose discussion will, like the other series, be ongoing. Admittedly, the other series were ITV made, but this might make things easier? I don't mind at all, but I am expecting a locations update from Tim re this series soon enough! I must admit I am curious to go digging ....

[Anita Bensoussane]

I've renamed the thread 'Famous Five TV Series 2023 - 2024, BBC'. It would probably have been fairly easy to find anyway, but that gives a few more key words.

[Nick]

Reflecting on the episode, my emotions oscillate between enthusiasm and ambivalence, crafting a nuanced perspective. While certain elements sparked positivity, others left me with reservations. In the grand scheme, my overall outlook tends towards the affirmative, and I eagerly anticipate the revelations promised by the next installment.

A commendable highlight was the discerning approach to casting by the writing team and director. Diverse casting, when handled with care, enriches narratives. The portrayal of George stood out as a triumph, capturing the character's essence seamlessly. Although Julian and Dick might benefit from further development, their current presentation didn't substantially detract from the series. It's worth noting that diverse casting, exemplified by the BBC's "Murder is Easy," serves as a cautionary tale. When virtue signaling, posturing and lecturing takes precedence over plot and good writing, as witnessed in that instance, it can undermine the overall quality of a production resulting in a total mess.

Jack Gleeson's flamboyant yet brilliant performance injected a vibrant energy into the narrative, leaving an indelible mark. The cinematography and location choices, featuring visually stunning shots such as George sailing to Kirrin and the rugged charm of Kirrin Island, were undeniably exceptional.

However, the storyline occasionally seemed to draw more inspiration from Indiana Jones than the quintessential charm of the Famous Five, resulting in a noticeable shift in tone. Certain plot elements, like George's mother's dismissive response to George informing her that she had been locked up and maniac and the conveniently located crypt by the underground, felt somewhat contrived, disrupting the natural flow of the narrative.

In conclusion, despite these mixed sentiments, my optimism prevails, and I eagerly await the next episode. The potential for evolving character arcs and unfolding storylines keeps my curiosity alive, fostering hope for continued captivation and surprises in the episodes to come.

[Jack400]

Frankly I disagree with all but, perhaps the last two paragraphs.

[Bertie]

Interesting thoughts, Nick.

I think a lot of the different reaction to TV adaptations depends on how tolerant (or, aware) the viewer is to seemingly avoidable or unnecessary changes to the original work. If you're the type who don't mind it, provided it still makes an entertaining show, then I guess you'll just judge the show as a stand alone thing, not as Blyton, Dickens, Wodehouse, etc. Likewise, those who don't know the original work well probably won't even be aware of many of the changes (or liberties) that are apparent to those who do.

However if you're not particularly tolerant to TV shows taking the name of an original work that you love, and are excited to watch, only to see all kinds of unnecessary changes made (almost all for the worst compared to the source material), then it's tough to take a step back and view it in its own right. Because it's not 'in it's own right', really. Otherwise they'd have written about new characters. Part of benefitting from latching on to the name of Blyton, Dickens, etc, comes the 'negative' that that world, dialogue, stories are very much alive and known by heart by some people who won't enjoy seeing them messed with in an inferior way.

I guess there's enough existing fans who fall into the first category, along with 'new' viewers who don't really know the original work, that makes it well worth doing ratings wise despite the existing fans who fall into the second category who would prefer a much more accurate portrayal.

As I've said elsewhere on the thread, I found it watchable, and will definitely be watching the next one - but would have found it much more enjoyable had it stuck more to the original story and dialogue, and had it felt less like an Enid Blyton does Indiana Jones and The Goonies mix.

[Debbie]

I agree with Bertie.

I was thinking though that in a lot of ways this style of film would have fitted better with the Adventure series. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see an authentic view of those, but I think the plot would feel less out of place with that series.
So why choose the Famous Five? The obvious answer is that they're better known.
Which then makes it look like they weren't interested in the books except to use the name to get viewers.

[Morgan Jones]

I won’t duplicate what others have said, but I agree with many of the points raised.

All in all though, it wasn’t my kind of thing - the scenery and Jack Gleeson’s portrayal of the eccentric villain being two of the limited positives in my opinion.

I wasn’t too keen on the ending - George’s parents are poor yet she and her cousins discover where a small fortune is hidden but make a pact not to say anything and let her parents continue to struggle! I know Uncle Quentin hinted at the end that seeing George happy was more important than having money, so perhaps that was the lesson we were meant to take away, but it did seem pretty selfish of the Five to make such a decision.

To be honest, it felt like a very long ninety minutes.

[RDMorrell]

Just briefly on George slapping people, she definitely slapped Edgar in Five Run Away Together. I think he was taunting the Five in some way, and they were trying to find out where something was. In any case, Edgar said, "Find out yourself", and that's when George leapt at him and slapped his face hard, leaving quite a red mark. I also recall that he tried to slap her back, but Julian got in his way (he might have even told Edgar that he shouldn't hit a girl, but I'm not sure now).

I don't think she slaps anyone else in the series though. Junior in Five on Finniston Farm is similarly obnoxious to Edgar, and I think George plays one or two tricks on him, but she doesn't slap or otherwise hit him. But anyway, given that George did slap Edgar in Five Run Away Together, it's not so implausible for the George in this TV series to say she slapped the last person who called her a girl. I do agree though that she wasn't quite feisty or fiery enough. In fact, there were times - at least, early on - when Anne seemed more feisty than George!

[Bertie]

RDMorrell, yeah I mentioned the Edgar slapping at some point - and that's the only time I can remember as well. But then I can't remember any instance where she does more, such as a full punch, so having her supposedly having slapped the person seems fine.

I'd say Anne came across more as a spoilt, privileged whiner in the early part of the show, rather than 'feisty'. And, throughout, George was setting the pace and calling the shots, so I don't think they particularly downplayed her strength of character or anything - it was Julian's role that was downplayed. He was sidelined, presumably so they had a 'strong, dominant (now black) woman' as the leader, as a positive role model, etc, and not Julian as per the books.

[Jack400]

I totally agree with you, Bertie. I do however remain puzzled by those who regard the "baddies" as anything other than deeply annoying, pantomime farces. This seems to be a theme in all FF children's films/ programmes.

[Wolfgang]

In "Five fall into adventure" George was prepared to battle Josefine, but Dick prevented her thinking Josefine was a boy.

[dsr]

I've watched most of the first episode, but the characters just don't say "Julian, Dick, George, Anne". They could be any children. They bear little resemblence to Enid Blyton's characters.Which would be fine if they were random children in a random children's adventure, but they aren't.

A couple of other irritations - I know it's a staple of children's literature that mechanical traps will still work perfectly after 900 years with zero maintenance, but it's a long way from realistic. And where did the water come from in the cave trap? A 900 year old reservoir? They're above sea level.

And why on earth would Dick crawl into the crypt to pass the sword out? It makes no sense. I like my stories to have a consistent internal logic even if it has a science-fictiony element to it.