But in the book there is also rather curious parallel between Sylvia and Valentine at a certain moment: during his first lenghy conversation with Valentine Christopher is taken aback a couple of times by Valentine's saying about him something very similar to what he heard fromr Sylvia. I was very intrigued by this. Also, I discovered something interesting about the age shift: in the book in 1912 Christopher is 26, Valentine 22 and Sylvia 30. In the film the gap between Christopher and Valentine seems to be wider (did they tell she is 18? I am not sure), therefore, inevitabily, she seems more naive and less an equal partner.

Oh, she definitely seduced him on the train: she feared that she was pregnant and was looking for a way out of scandal. And he is well aware that she did it for this precise motive (well, he wasn't on the train, but it didn't take him long do guess). However, in the novel he is also convinced 
that his unhappiness in marriage is also kind of punishment for his sin ("carnal knowledge" of his wife before marrying her). This motive is not present in the movie, but it does seem logical, considering Christopher's mentality and morality.

Ok, will you summarise it, if there is something interesting?

I re-watched the hotel scene from the 4th episode yesterday (yes, I need 5 minutes of BC before going to sleep, you see) and I admired once again both actors: BC is outstanding, but so is RH. And I love it that he still is taken by her, in spite of his love for Valentine and all the rest: in the book it is no more the case, so the movie has a score against the original, in my eyes at least

So, here's my summary from TV Spielfilm:

A question of honour - neither good nor bad but strange times: The love drama Parade's End proves how  brilliant period drama can be. Without any soap or kitsch.

Especially BBC is a master in adapting historical subjects for the screen. With PE the author Tom Stoppard and the director Susanne White manage to translate a story set before and during WW1 into modern images and dramaturgy. 

Christopher embodies tradition and decency but also stubbornness. Sylvia is the symbol of modern times (I don't agree with this) but also of greed, pleasure, and vitality. 

The series is not for easy consumption (quote BC). 

Many characters are not clearly defined but of a shimmering ambiguity. The director has coloured the champagne hedonism of the upper classes with a desperation alluding to the end of the empire. In nearly 300 minutes there are a lot of exquisite images. But White doesn't leave any doubt that sometimes there's only a pan shot between beauty and horror. 

 

Well the screening of Parade's End on French TV has hardly been a resounding success with an average of between 1.7 % and 2% share of viewers for each episode. How disappointing!

So I've started to do research for my new book set in the Edwardian Age. And I once again realise how well PE portrays society in these times by the hypocrisy and cruelty of the class system, the political and social tensions, the situation of women. Compare this with DA's often glorifying and at best overconscentious efforts to depict a golden age that wasn't golden. At least not for most people.

Another thing that struck me when watching the last part of PE was the bathroom scene with Sylvia after having slept with Gerald Drake again. She's shown to have used a contraceptive appliance while talking to him about his brutality and leaving her pregnant years ago. It's a wonderful scene - composition, design, dialogue, everything feels right about it. And it strikes me as realistic and shows how difficult and crucial the question of contraception was for women at that time. 

Yes, I'll do that. I loved the scene in the teachers' room when they discuss the book. 

This is really good:

http://emmadelosnardos.tumblr.com/post/32165693396/tietjens-head-injury-in-parades-end-im-still

Emmy nomination for Benedict for his role in this.

As much as I liked him in this, I think Rebecca Hall deserved the nomination more.