Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Steineded How sad is this?

BeSummers Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

unlt Despite her small role Penelope Keith steals the show in this adaptation of a period drama that tells the story of the upheavals of war on the home front. She is the ultimate educated and feminist aunt whose character is only spoilt by an idiotic ignorance of David McCallum's advances on Keira Knightly.Unfortunately, Keith's character dies early on in this 199 minute drama and the key concept of the changes of war barely touch the social realities of this story's very privileged characters.Emily Mortimer is an excellent actor but is badly miscast as an elder version of Knightly whose talents could easily have allowed her to continue in the role to at least the age of 18. Lumley's heartache is barely given a glance in the story and there is virtually no opportunity for O'Toole to demonstrate his acting talents. The adult Loveday Carey-Lewis, played by Katie Ryder Richardson changes little from her childhood counterpart with the result that her character has mo more maturity than that of a ten year old! Moreover, the aftermath of the sex scene between Paul Bettany and Mortimer does not create the desired effect of rendering Bettany's character as an uncaring rogue. Instead Mortimer's inflated romantic notions only fuel a dislike for a character that is utterly inept and badly in need of a lesson on life!Bettany, while brilliant, commits an unconvincing suicide but at the very least we catch a glimpse of the brutality of war on a generation of young men.I found myself wishing that the story had been told from the point of view of Mortimer's sister and the young artist, Gus, played by Heikko Deutschmann, but this is on account of my personal preference for a dark story lines.Overall the drama is entertaining but if you are looking for a more profound experience, look elsewhere.

trpdean I quite disliked this for some time - it struck me as a soap opera not meant for the likes of this 50 year old male lawyer -- but it grew on me as the series went on.Are there stereotyped characters? You bet. Is there as great a reverence for a grand home as you'll ever see outside Scarlett O'Hara's Tara? Yup.But the acting nevertheless raises the level of this - and because of them, the characters' tragedies and their loves -- the sort of thing that many grand families did indeed go through in the Second World War -- do move us.The story is of two girls who become friends at boarding school in 1937 and their lives from that time to 1947. One of the two is a sweet rather naive middle to upper middle class girl, the older of two sisters, whose family lives in Singapore (father's an executive with a shipping company). The other friend is a deliberately anti-conventional youngest of three children of a grand family from Cornwall.With only two aunts and an uncle still in England (one of whom dies her first year at school and the other pair posted to Gibraltar within six months of her beginning school) the sweet girl (played by now superstar Keira Knightley and as an older girl played by the fine actress Emily Mortimer) is more or less made part of the grand family by her friend.From that point and throughout the War, this romantic tale is of separations, mistaken loves, deaths, love affairs. The end of the War brings both mystery and sadness about the sweet girl's family in Singapore.As head of that grand family, Peter O'Toole is (characteristically) mysterious -- and Joanna Lumley playing his much younger wife, does a very nice job of making us care. All concerned - particularly including Peter Batty as the only son of the grand family - are quite effective.The acting, as well as the fine costumes, sets, props, lift this above the category of mere soap opera that I originally thought it to be.Incidentally, ignore eye's comments below -- he wrongly describes much of the plot!

gaiter88 Like so many things this was not as good as the book. It was simply unrealistic to hope to fit a thousand page book into a three hour drama, and the story that they tell here in this TV drama suffers as a result. The cutting of large chunks of the story and other small alterations make for an average script.On the acting front there is a mishmash of performances. Peter O'Toole and Joanna Lumley are well casted, even if the latter does at points over do it a bit. There are also early promising performances for Kiera Knightley and Paul Bettany, but the pivotal roles of the Judith and Loveday characters just don't work.In the spirit of fairness it is worth mentioning some of the lovely scenery shown, and the good attempt on the period costume and props. However what annoyed me the most was that they partially changed the ending from the book to allow for the sequel.If you haven't read the book this will appear as slightly dated average world war two drama with some familiar faces in it. But if you are a fan of the Pilcher novel then I'm afraid this slightly tacky adaptation does not live up to the book, and paints a more simpler and cruder picture of what is a truly lovely story.

notmicro "Coming Home" could make a very engrossing 6-8 hour mini-series; unfortunately this production is all surface fairy-tale gloss with none of the depth and intent of the book. Vast and important chunks of the original story are missing; most of the remnants are turned upside-down and inside-out, and given a relentlessly sentimental greeting-card treatment. The author's serious attempt to portray life as she knew it as a young woman before, during, and after WWII is almost completely lost. A group of very interesting and capable actors is pretty much wasted. Its difficult to understand why the producers took the approach they did; one gets the impression that they must not have liked the original book much.