SummaryReelzChannel picks up the sequel to the Starz's 2010 production Pillars of the Earth based on the novel of the same name by Ken Follett. The story begins in 1300, during the Hundred Years' War in the fictional English town of Kingsbridge.
SummaryReelzChannel picks up the sequel to the Starz's 2010 production Pillars of the Earth based on the novel of the same name by Ken Follett. The story begins in 1300, during the Hundred Years' War in the fictional English town of Kingsbridge.
World Without End is, to use a Python word, silly much of the time. But in a piece this big and busy, individual elements can stand out as enjoyable even when the whole is less than the sum of those parts.
Good show if you like medieval stuff, this show is about as good as we medieval fans are going to get in this day and age. I am looking forward to a season 2, 3, and 4 or so on. I personally have enjoyed the show a great deal, but I am a older man with a love for medieval times.
Not a bad show, but not really a good show either. It has it's entertainment value, and parts of it are quite well done, but what really killed it for me was the lack of depth from almost all of the characters. The bad guys have not even a scrap of morality, and seem to have basically no internal struggle with the tyrannical actions they take. They are un-relatable in every way, and more annoying than anything else. Overall though, it's worth checking out if you like good versus evil, loosely historical based epics, but keep your expectations relatively low.
In this miniseries without end, there's not a single character with a shade of gray in his or her moral complexion. They're either all saintly or thoroughly despicable, and while I've looked ahead and know it doesn't arrive until the sixth hour, the plague can't come soon enough to suit me.
watched pillars, thought it was pretty weak. read pillars thought it was weak also. ken follet, in my opinion writes poor characters,as matt rouche(critic) explains there is no moral ambiguity. to me his characters are hugely unrealistic through both pillars and world. follets strength is in realising the true hardships of a time, and some meticulous use of research that make his books somewhat informative. unfortunately characters are really important on the screen, and they fall short of the mark. so what you get is some good sets, made real by some attention to middle ages history then fill this world with fairy tale good and evil characters. i didnt know how to take it. to me this series triesto do two different genres, and ends up doing neither particularly well. i realise ken follett is very popular, and im not saying he has no talent, but for me his fame is unwarrented. average books, average tv shows.
It's very sad. the better of the first two Kingsbridge Novels (didn't read the third yet), and they destroyed most of what was interesting about the Characters and cut nearly all of the interesting parts of the Story (and changed interesting and original storyparts like the Thomas Langley storyline to a ridiculus showcase).
I am very sad about that show and what it made of the novel ... Pillars of the world was much better