Man in an Orange Shirt

After watching episode one i couldn't wait for part 2 or hopefully more. A great cast and a good script make for a good night TV, and they truly were. There is so much LGTB stuff out there but not so much of a good quality, here how ever a very enjoyable story split over 2 generations with all the trimmings of the periods they portray. The only negative (little) point is that in part 2 it felt a little short telling the story of the relationship between grandmother and grandson, something was missing. Overall a great miniseries and I hope there will be more like this.

All together they are very beautiful stories. Unfortunately they are placed into two 1 hour parts. They needed about double the time to marinate in more storytelling. Each of the individual relationships were so complex I was left wanting to see them develop more gradually. Despite this, the excellent cast (and the director) do all that they can to avoid it all coming off clumsily. There is a lot of beauty on the screen, especially with part 1 of the two.

They were able to make me care about the characters and the parallels between the two accounts, but I think it could have been much richer by delving deeper into each of their stories.

I never miss "Masterpiece" because it is probably my favorite current, ongoing series, and it never manages to disappoint. "Man in an Orange Shirt" is probably the most frank and explicit of all of its offerings to date, it will not be for everyone, but it packs a powerful punch and shows the whole picture of what it meant to be gay when it was illegal in Britain, and presents an equally involving story set in the present. It would take very strong, charismatic actors to make this work on all levels, and they are first-rate: Oliver Jackson-Cohen (from "Lark Rise to Candleford," "Mr. Selfridge") and James McArdle in the post-war story, and Julian Morris and David Gyasi in the modern day. I was extremely impressed by the performances by Vanessa Redgrave as the older Flora and Australian-born Joanna Vanderham ("The Paradise," "Dancing on the Edge") as the younger Flora. Redgrave is still a force to be reckoned with--she is, first and foremost, a Redgrave--and the explosive scene with her grandson Adam is painfully delivered and deeply felt. Vanderham is poignant and unforgettable in driving home the point that her life has been ruined by the marriage "of convenience." There are excellent supporting roles by Frances De La Tour ("The Collection") as Mrs. March, portraying a woman trying to be strong under near-impossible circumstances; Laura Carmichael (Edith in "Downton Abbey") always enjoyable as Flora's sister Daphne; and Julian Sands ("A Room With a View") as the arrogant partner of Steve. I appreciated the fact that "Masterpiece" chose to air the entire film in one night. I am hoping that all viewers who saw this ground-breaking production learned something, if not tolerance, then understanding and perhaps even sympathy for a human experience that is no longer stuck in the closet and called "the love that dare not speak its name." I see Emmy nominations on the horizon.

There was missing information and plot development in both stories so both should have been 90 to two hours long each.

In first one, there should have been some explanation as to the circumstance of how the grandson came to live with the grandmother and also what happened to his parents. Did the parents die in a car or airplane crash? Of a disease? It just left the viewer hanging.

There is a shot of the son in his school uniform and in a military uniform, but nothing else. I'd also like to know why the grandfather, Michael, died at 60.

For the second story, you can see some connection between Adam and Steve but there needed to be more plot as to that connection. Also, more background as to why Adam was hesitant in getting involved with Steve because all he says is "I can't" but he doesn't explain why. The jarring scene with the grandmother's harsh homophobia seems to come out of nowhere in terms of her reaction. She already had her suspicions of her grandson but then to react the way she did, didn't really make a lot of sense other than pent up anger from decades ago.

Then, at the end the second story the grandmother shows up at the cottage but there is no explanation given as to her remorse and what made her come about/change her mind about her homophobia.

Anyway, I liked both stories and watched them twice as I thought I missed some key information as stated above, but I did not because the information wasn't there.

It is far to be perfect. and that does to critic it very easy. but it gives the right story, using the right actors. and that saves a lot it. because it is a film about secrets, love and relationship. at first sigh, two films. different. with a common point. in fact, it is a film about family. from different perspectives. with wise manner to explore sensitivities, decisions, solitudes. sure, a BBC film is , always, decent to remarkable. but, in this case, the manner to define the honesty, the link between men from same family, in different periods, defining their "sin" in different ways, is more than admirable. and the end, the end has the status of changement about many things from the film. not as revelation. but as the detail giving precise form to sihouettes. so, I admitt : I love it !.