Gui uses Salvatore to get to Remigio and put him on trial, William gives his thoughts on both the show trial and the poverty debate between the Franciscans and the Church, Anna tries to rescue her ...
With the debate over, Gui condemns Remigio and the girl to be burnt at the stake, William and Adso try to solve the library's puzzle and catch the killer before it's too late, and Anna makes her ...
The peasant girl finds wounded Anna, Gui looks for allies and foes in the abbey, Adso breaks his vows, William debates comedy, the main debate about apostolic poverty turns violent, perverted monk ...
Dive back into your favorites as we round up all the best series returning to TV and streaming in 2021.
Charlize Theron returns as the villain Cipher in F9. IMDb takes a look at her celebrated career in film and television.
Related lists from IMDb editors
Related lists from IMDb users
Title: The Name of the Rose (2019– )
Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below.
In 1327, an enlightened friar and his young apprentice investigate a series of mysterious deaths at an abbey risking the wrath of a powerful Inquisitor. Television adaptation of Umberto Eco's novel 'The Name of the Rose'.
In short: there is a reason why the central character in Eco's work is named after Occam and nods to Sherlock Holmes. It has to do with presenting complexity and then dealing with it though Occam's maxim and Holmes' deductive reasoning. Yet, the writers of this mess of an adaption seem to have not understood Eco or Rose at all and simply opted for injecting and proliferating haphazard disorder to mimic it complexity when it is just -- mediocre plot device and script-writing and. Sorry but gibberish is not complexity because it meanders, and proliferation non sequiter subplots are not semiotics just because your brain has to also work when decoding nonsense . It goes without saying as well that labyrinth is meaningless if you just proliferate blind ally diversions and don't understand it is the great classics Eco is presenting as the guide, the key.
If you've got that liberal arts degree for undergrad and loved history and literature, like I did, (before having to turn to something that can make some money for grad) they you probably knew about this series planning and had enthusiastic and positive expectations. The original film version of Name of the Rose was not bad, it was a decent adaption of Umberto's Eco's intricate but certainly his most approachable book, but it certainly could be much better fleshed out in a mini series length.
In addition to being a fan of Eco, I certainly am as well of John Turturro.
Sadly this series just doesn't work given the source material and talent. It is a serious disappointment; in fact a jumbled mess. Instead of using miniseries length to flesh out the complexity, tease the symbolism, and give us more of Eco, the writers went off the rails as well, distracting packing in all kinds of PC nods to contemporary issues that are not in Eco's novel. And even for "a loose adaptation" there is a continual sense of disjointed and artificially forced elements and messages that are not in Eco's work. Most galling -- but also telling -- metaphor for the utter humorlessness in the makers of this adaption is dropping emphasis on Aristotle's Poetics; whose dramatic theory, and utilization of humor, is what Eco is using. In the book we are immersed IN the Poetics, the author has structured he work so we are, while the character searches for it, along with a solution to the crime mystery, and this is not even attempted in this miniseries.
I spent about two years working in Italy and I have a high tolerance for the messiness of Italian productions, be they film, TV or contracting of goods or services. Things there are beautiful and interesting, but often don't work well. OK. I did not go into this adaption of name of the Rose expecting complete rationality or order. But there are so many artificial jumps in plot that it nears incoherence. Especially since none of it is really true to the core of Eco's work which has to do with the sequestration of knowledge, such as sublime and complex classics, and not for example some hamhanded lesson on immigration, class struggle, or violence toward women. Eco already had a strong and important social message with poverty and a church that lost its way, or whose future was being fought over. By throwing in the kitchen sink of social commentary this gets diluted to nothing.
I give this a six star, even though it is a four, since part of Eco is there, even if, with united irony -- it is hidden by the script writers' own nonsense.