(Not Really a) Review: First Impressions of The Crown

For today's review I'm going to try something new. Instead of reviewing a whole series, I'll give my first impressions of The Crown's first two episodes.

This week I finally got around to watching The Crown, a docudrama series about Queen Elizabeth II. It took me ages to watch it because frankly, I'm generally not interested in series set after 1900. Besides, making biopics of living people is pretty weird. (I have to wonder what the royal family think of the series!) When I started it, I didn't expect much. I was surprised, pleasantly and unpleasantly.

Instead of a proper review, this is just going to be a list of everything I liked or didn't like, in something approaching chronological order.

• Of all the ways I expected this series to start, "the king coughing up blood" was not among them 😮

• My thoughts when King George was talking to Philip: "One of those men in the background looks sort of familiar. ...Wait. Is that-- Willoughby!" Similarly, my reaction to Queen Mary was an excited squeal of "Miss Deborah!". Queen Mary's personality has some resemblances to Miss Deborah's, too. I half-expected her to say "The uproar is temporary" or "Speculation is the enemy of calm" 😄

• While we're on the subject of my reactions to actors, I laughed at the idea of the Eleventh Doctor marrying Little Dorrit 😆 And I knew I'd seen King George somewhere before, but I couldn't think where. Then I saw the credits, and it struck me. "Moriarty? Moriarty?"

• Winston Churchill needs to be taken down a peg or twenty. Insulting Philip's mother at the wedding? Making sure his own entrance at the wedding is as conspicuous as possible? *facepalm*

• ...Is there any period drama actor who isn't in this series?

• The series' creators really need to learn that it's possible to make a compelling drama without crudity or nudity. I was not expecting any of that 😠

• Princess Margaret and Townsend are easily my least favourite characters in the series. I wish they hadn't been included in it. I fastforward their scenes to get to the actually interesting parts.

• Why do they hunt those poor birds? 😟 That's something I've never liked in period dramas.

• The scene of Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip meeting an elephant is awesome and terrifying! I have to wonder if it ever really happened, though.

• Ouch, ouch, ouch 😭 I wasn't expecting King George's death to be so heartbreaking 😭

• I remember reading that it's royal protocol to always bring black clothes on trips in case someone dies. So why did someone forget to pack a black dress for Queen Elizabeth? Was it not protocol at the time, or is the series taking dramatic license?

• Queen Mary bowing to Queen Elizabeth is honestly the most eerie, tragic thing I've seen for a looooong time 😢

Overall I think the good outweighs the bad in this series. So far, at least. When I finish watching series one I might write a proper review of it. In the meantime, this will have to do.

Is it available online?: It's originally a Netflix series, so I'm pretty sure it's available there.

Rating: 7/10.

Review: General and I

This is the fourth Asian drama I've watched all the way through. (Fifth if you count films. And I started another series, but gave it up after two episodes.) So I think I can now reasonably claim to be a fan of Asian drama 😊

General and I (孤芳不自赏, Gū Fāng Bú Zì Shǎng, roughly "A Lonesome Fragrance Waiting to be Appreciated") is a 2016 series based on a novel by Feng Nong. It's set at some unspecified (possibly fictional?) point in China's history. I don't know enough Chinese history to make a guess at when.

I only recognised one actor:
Madina Memet (Lan Shang in Ice Fantasy) as Yang Feng

MyDramaList says Sha Deng (Consort Zhang) was in Ice Fantasy too, but her character was so minor that I still can't remember who she played.

Anyway, on to the plot. There are four kingdoms, all more or less at war with each other. Our heroine, Bai Ping Ting, is from Yan Kingdom. Our hero, Chu Bei Jie, is from Jin Kingdom. Of course they meet and fall in love. But it isn't just a Romeo-and-Juliet-style plot. It has dozens of complicated side plots revolving around politics, revenge, attempted assassinations, and battles. Eventually the main characters get a happy ending. The same can't be said for some other characters.

There are so many characters and subplots that by the time I reached episode forty, I had to keep a list of who was who. Otherwise I'd have been completely lost.

To summarise: we start with He Xia and Bai Ping Ting. He Xia is a prince of Yan Kingdom, and Bai Ping Ting is his maidservant. He Xia goes on the run when he's betrayed and (he thinks) his father is murdered. Bai Ping Ting acts as a diversion and is found by Chu Bei Jie. Chu Bei Jie is a general of Jin Kingdom and the secret half-brother of the king. The aforementioned king is being plotted against by one of his concubines. Meanwhile He Xia has found his way to Bai Lan Kingdom and married Princess Yao Tian, and some of her officials start plotting against him.

And that's just the start of the story. It makes some of Dickens' novels look almost straightforward in comparison.

One of the main problems with the series is how many subplots there are. The resolution of one plot feels very rushed to make way for the next one. I fully expected Consort Zhang to be a major villain for most of the series. Instead her plans are foiled about half-way through and she disappears from the story, with only a brief scene of her death to show what happened to her.

Similarly, the entire subplot of Lady Thirteen and Jiao Yan Casino has very little bearing on the main story. It seems to exist only to show what Chu Bei Jie was doing in the years when he thought Bai Ping Ting was dead (and there are plenty of questions left unanswered about what happened in those years).

I may or may not have shrieked with excitement at the final scene 😊 But after the excitement and delight at the happy ending wore off, it left me with plenty of questions. What happened to Dong Zhuo after He Xia's death? What about Yang Feng, Ze Yin and their people? What will Shuang Er do now that her husband is dead and she isn't empress any more? What will Bai Lan State do now that their entire royal family is dead? And where did Lady Thirteen go? The series ties up some loose ends, but it forgot about others.

Bai Ping Ting's last words to Lady Thirteen makes me think that a sequel is/was planned. If so, it hasn't been made yet. When the last episode ends the viewer is left to wonder about the fates of some characters.

Speaking of characters, now would be a good time to say what I thought about some of them.

Bai Ping Ting

I love how clever Bai Ping Ting is, and how she can usually get herself and her friends out of trouble. To say nothing of how adorable she and Chu Bei Jie are together 😍 Her near-constant smile is slightly off-putting, though, especially in scenes where no one in their right mind would smile. Was that a deliberate acting choice, or is it just the actress's natural resting face?

Chu Bei Jie

At first I really didn't like Chu Bei Jie. He was indirectly responsible for the deaths of He Xia's parents, the incident that starts the main plot and leads to He Xia becoming a villain. But gradually I came to like him more. His interactions with his son are so cute and funny 😄

He Xia (left) and Dong Zhuo (right)

He Xia is one of those characters who I feel sorry for and despise at the same time. At the start of the series he's betrayed, orphaned, and forced to go on the run. By the time he dies, he's usurped a throne, started a war, caused the deaths of his wife and unborn child, and destroyed at least two kingdoms. Yet I still cried at his death 😢

Dong Zhuo, He Xia's servant and really the only person who stays loyal to him the whole time, is less outright villainous and more dragged into this mess through no fault of his own. I feel sorry for him without despising him, though I wish he'd done something to stop He Xia before it was too late.

Yao Tian

I spent most of the series longing to slap some sense into Yao Tian. She marries He Xia and lets him have more and more power, she ignores common sense and people who try to warn her against this, and then she watches her kingdom crumbling as a result of it. What an idiot! But even in spite of her terrible decisions, I kept hoping she would finally wake up and kick He Xia out. She doesn't. Instead she kills herself because of him 😢

The series has its flaws; some of it is drawn out too long and other parts are rushed. I'm disappointed that it ended with the coronation and didn't show anything that happened afterwards. Bei Jie and Ping Ting are now ruling an empire that has just been through several wars, and a neighbouring kingdom is facing a succession crisis that's bound to cause more chaos. Yes, they've got a happy ending, but it's not going to be easy. I'd have liked to see some of that shown.

Overall, though, I enjoyed watching this series! The music is great, the story is mostly great, and the acting is usually good 😊

Is it available online?: Yes, on YouTube with English subtitles.

Rating: 7/10.

Review: Emily's Quest

The first two books of the Emily trilogy are very good. The last one, on the other hand...

Emily's Quest is the third book in L. M. Montgomery's trilogy about Emily of New Moon. It was first published in 1927.

Emily and her friends are now grown up. Emily stays at New Moon and writes more books, Teddy goes off to study art, Ilse and Perry go... somewhere (I really didn't like either of them in this book, so I didn't pay much attention to their scenes), and Dean Priest is still hanging around Emily. She falls in love with Teddy, but his apparent disinterest -- and an unfortunate accident -- leads to her becoming engaged to Dean. After she supernaturally saves Teddy's life (it's a long story) Emily breaks off her engagement and dedicates her time to writing while angsting over Teddy. And the charm of the first two novels is conspicuous by its absence.

Compared to L. M. Montgomery's other works, this book feels very unfinished. It reads less like a novel and more like a collection of scene outlines. Montgomery, usually an excellent and descriptive writer, plunges headlong into telling instead of showing, and it doesn't work too well.

Ilse, who started out a likable character, has now become a shallow, flighty brat who makes me want to break a slate over her head. Among other things, she gets engaged to a man she doesn't love, then abandons him literally minutes before the wedding to go and declare her love for the man she's mocked and derided for years.

Teddy never had much personality. Here he might as well be a piece of cardboard. And his mother is an absolute lunatic. We're supposed to feel sorry for her when she reveals her past. But that past includes poisoning her husband's dog and emotionally abusing her son for years, including keeping letters from him out of jealousy. I didn't shed any tears when Mrs. Kent finally dies. If only she'd died earlier. In the first book, for instance!

Perry made so little impression on me that I can't remember a single thing about him beyond his marriage to Ilse. Same goes for all Emily's other suitors -- except Dean, who's even more creepy than before. Any sympathy I felt for him disappeared the minute he admitted to lying about Emily's book.

Emily herself has become the Edwardian equivalent of an emo teen. Mopes around the house, angsts constantly, spends all her time feeling sorry for herself... What happened to the Emily of the first two books, who had some moments of depression but didn't spend an entire book going "woe is me"?

At least Aunt Elizabeth, Aunt Laura and Cousin Jimmy are still recognisable. They provide some of the book's scarce comedy when they read the reviews of Emily's book. Cousin Jimmy's (paraphrased) line "I know what those words mean separately, but put together they don't make any sense" perfectly sums up many "professional" book reviews 😄

Even the writing is more choppy and vague than L. M. Montgomery's usually is. Reading it I get the feeling that for some reason she didn't have time to revise and edit it, and sent the publisher a first or second draft. It's still miles better than my first drafts, but nowhere near the quality of her other works.

Overall this book is a disappointment, and not a satisfactory end to the series 😔

Is it available online?: Yes, on Gutenberg.

Rating: 4/10.

Review: Calamity Jane (1953)

Today I've decided to review one of the late, great Doris Day's films. So obviously I picked my favourite of her films 😃

Calamity Jane is a 1953 musical loosely (very loosely) based on the life of the historical Calamity Jane, involving a probably-fictitious romance with Wild Bill Hickok. It was adapted into a 1961 stage musical of the same name.

I only recognised the main two actors:
Doris Day (Jo in The Man Who Knew Too Much 1956) as Calamity Jane
Howard Keel (Adam Pontipee in Seven Brides for Seven Brothers) as Wild Bill Hickok

A lot of musicals start with a memorable opening song. This is no exception: it starts with "The Deadwood Stage", which is both extremely memorable and pretty funny. Calamity's snippy remarks about different people always make me laugh, especially when she says someone stole his clothes from a washing line 😆

We're introduced to Calamity Jane herself, a not entirely honest braggart with a high opinion of herself; Wild Bill Hickok, "the man the sheriff watches" who isn't too impressed with Calamity; Danny Gilmartin, a lieutenant who Calamity thinks loves her; and Francis Fryer, an actor who (thanks to a misunderstanding about the spelling of his name) is believed to be a woman, and who reluctantly has to pretend to be a woman. Said pretense is, shall we say, unconvincing 😆 It sets in motion a chain of events that leads to Calamity bringing a woman she thinks is a famous actress to perform in Deadwood. Turns out the "famous actress" is actually the actress's maid, Katie Brown. Hilarity ensues, of course.

Calamity Jane and Wild Bill Hickok
(I tried to find a better picture, but these ones made me laugh the most, so I decided to use them.)

Calamity and Katie
(I admit, I only chose this picture because of Katie's hat. I'm not entirely sure it's a hat and not a bird that decided to land on her head.)

The story is very silly, but it makes up for that by being genuinely funny and having catchy songs. My favourite song is probably "Just Blew in From the Windy City", for Calamity tap-dancing as much as for the song itself... and for the whole song being filmed with very few cuts. It must have taken so much practice and effort to get that right!

For years this musical has been one of my favourites. I definitely recommend it if you want plenty of laughs, and don't mind implausible plots!

Is it available online?: Yes, on ok.ru.

Rating: 8/10.

Review: Charmed Life

I was expecting this book to be something like Howl's Moving Castle. In some ways it is. And in some ways it isn't.

Charmed Life is a 1977 book by Diana Wynne Jones, the first in the Chrestomanci series. As far as I can tell, it's never been adapted to film. Which is a pity, because if it was adapted well it would make a good film.

The main character is Eric "Cat" Chant, an orphaned boy who, with his sister Gwendolen, goes to stay with the mysterious Chrestomanci, a powerful wizard. Gwendolen is an aspiring witch and wants Chrestomanci to teach her. Cat doesn't think he has any magical powers at all. Then Gwendolen disappears, and is replaced with a lookalike named Janet. Cat and Janet try to keep Chrestomanci from learning about this.

When the book starts it's a comical but occasionally morbid story about witches, magic, and doubles from other worlds. But as it progresses, it becomes darker and darker. The discovery that Gwendolen stole Cat's lives to gain more power is the most disturbing thing in it 😨 The climax, when she returns with a group of her "friends", is almost as frightening. But at the same time, there are some comical moments. The animated window-people in the church had me in stitches 😄

I haven't read any of the sequels yet, but I enjoyed this book so much that I hope to read the whole series.

Is it available online?: I don't think so.

Rating: 9/10.

Review: How to Train Your Dragon (novel)

The film of HTTYD is one of my favourite films ever. The book, on the other hand, is decidedly underwhelming.

How to Train Your Dragon, written by Cressida Cowell, was published in 2003, the first in a series of twelve books (though apparently there was a prequel that had some of the same characters, but no dragons). It's the inspiration for the much better-known and generally just better 2010 animated film and the franchise that spawned.

Our hero is Hiccup Horrendous Haddock III, a young Viking who has to train a dragon as for a coming-of-age ceremony. Yes, here he has to train a dragon, instead of kill one. The dragon he ends up with is Toothless, who isn't a Night Fury, isn't big enough to ride, and isn't very likeable. And Hiccup and Toothless end up killing a gigantic dragon that threatens the village, but it bears little resemblance to the climactic battle of the film.

This is one of the rare cases where an adaptation is an improvement on the source material. I spent most of the book thoroughly bored and unable to like any of the characters. The film, on the other hand, is never boring and keeps me cheering on Hiccup and Toothless from beginning to end.

Maybe the problem is that the book is clearly written for young children, and I was a teenager when I first read it. The film isn't really a children's film, despite what certain people believe of all animated films. Yes, it's mostly aimed at children, but anyone can enjoy it no matter how old they are. That trait is conspicuously absent from the book.

Or maybe I didn't enjoy the book because I watched the film first, and expected the book to be much the same. Anyone who expects that will be bitterly disappointed.

If you don't expect too much and try to overlook the book's failings, you'll probably enjoy it more than I did. But if you want to see Hiccup and Toothless's story play out like in the film, you'll definitely not like this book.

Is it available online?: I don't think so.

Rating: 3/10.

Review: Emily Climbs

This review was sitting in drafts for days, ready to be posted today... And planning my Camp NaNo July project is taking so much of my time that I almost forgot about it. Oops.

Emily Climbs is the second in the Emily of New Moon trilogy. If the first book was the more cynical equivalent of Anne of Green Gables, then this one is the more cynical equivalent of Anne of the Island.

Emily and her friends go off to high school, but Aunt Elizabeth only allows her to go on one condition: she must agree never to write fiction while she's there. Anyone who was born with the urge to write will understand how difficult it is for Emily to obey this order. Nor do some people around her make her time at high school any easier. She has to stay with Aunt Ruth, a woman so stubborn and unsympathetic she makes Aunt Elizabeth look jolly. And she constantly clashes with Evelyn, one of her schoolmates. Aunt Ruth improves later on (wonder of wonders!). Evelyn doesn't. And along the way Emily has a series of adventures that are decidedly more eerie than anything Anne encountered.

The incident of Emily being locked in the church with a madman wouldn't be out of place in a horror novel. Nor would Mrs. Kent. That woman gives me the chills 😨 And then there's the case of the missing child, a tragedy that's averted thanks to Emily's "flash" -- something that is even more frightening here than in the first book. All this is topped off with a more mundane but infuriatingly unjust incident: Emily and her friends are embroiled in a completely fictional scandal, and Emily is shunned because of it.

Still, the book has some humour. Large portions of it are from Emily's diary, and she makes no bones about what she thinks of certain people. Then there's the incident of the overturned ink-bottle, something that anyone who's spilled something messy can relate to. And the question of who owns a certain troublesome dog is the funniest part of the book.

I enjoyed this book even more than the first one, and I definitely recommend it!

Is it available online?: Yes, on Gutenberg.

Rating: 10/10.

Review: The Silmarillion

If you thought The Lord of the Rings is depressing, just wait until you read The Silmarillion.

The Silmarillion is chronologically the first book in Tolkien's Legendarium, but it was published after his death. So far it has never been adapted to film. Unlike The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings, it doesn't have a main character... or a happy ending. It's essentially a history book of Middle Earth. Three of the stories in it have been published in separate books as well: The Children of Húrin, Beren and Lúthien, and The Fall of Gondolin. So far I haven't read any of those three.

Tolkien never intended to publish The Silmarillion (or "Silm", as some fans have renamed it). His son compiled it from notes he made before his death. The result is more like a series of encyclopedia articles than a book. No one gets much page-time or character development -- with a few notable exceptions (*cough*Beren and Lúthien*cough*). On the one hand this gives fans plenty of gaps to fill with fanfic. On the other, it's incredibly frustrating to be left with so many unanswered questions.

It's divided into several different sections, each covering a different part of Middle Earth's history. The first ones are about the creation of the world, how one of the Valar turned evil, and how the Elves left Valinor for Middle Earth. The rest of it is about what they did in Middle Earth.

We get to meet a young version of Galadriel, along with her brothers, her cousins, and her uncles. We're introduced to Lúthien, and finally learn who everyone compared Arwen to in The Lord of the Rings. We learn how Celebrimbor (unintentionally) helped Sauron make the rings. We meet a very young Elrond and his brother, and Gil-Galad, and Glorfindel, to say nothing of dozens of other characters who aren't mentioned again in LOTR. And we get to see most of them die.

Seriously, this book is full of death. From Míriel's death that causes so much unhappiness for so many people, to Gil-Galad's death fighting Sauron, there's practically a death on every page. This is not the sort of book to choose if you want some light, cheerful reading.

As if the deaths weren't depressing enough, there's plenty of horrible moments in the book. Ungoliant, the giant spider, is even more terrifying than Shelob. Aredhel's fate gives me chills, as does what happens to Húrin and his family. And the Fall of Númenor is truly the stuff of nightmares 😨 Some things are even more frightening because of how they're spoken of in an eerily matter-of-fact way -- the events leading up to the Fall of Gondolin, for instance.

The main problem with this book is that there's very little light to help get through the darkness. The Lord of the Rings is utterly terrifying in some parts, but no matter how dark things get there's always some hope. The Silmarillion has virtually no hope. It's basically summed up as "bad things happen. People suffer. Bad things get worse. People suffer more. Bad things get even worse. People suffer even more".

As a look into Middle Earth's history, this is a fascinating book. But as a story on its own, it's not exactly great. If Tolkien had been able to write more of it before he died, it might have been better. As it is, it's more a list of events than an actual novel. I hope there'll be an adaptation of it eventually; it might work better on-screen than on-page.

Is it available online?: No, I don't think so.

Rating: 6/10.

Review: The Great Gatsby (Takarazuka, 1991)

The Great Gatsby is a novel I've never been able to like. Its film adaptations are even worse. I had fairly low expectations when I watched this musical. Did it surpass them? ...Yes. Sort of.

This version of The Great Gatsby is a 1991 musical performed by Japan's all-female Takarazuka Revue. It sticks fairly close to the book, with some notable differences. This is one case where I would really have preferred an adaptation wasn't close to the book.

Frankly, I wasn't interested in the story of this musical at all. I watched it for only one reason: I read a translation of a book written by Keaki Mori (who plays Gatsby here), and decided I wanted to see some of her performances. This was the only one I could find. So I watched it even though I don't like the story. Yes, I know how stupid that sounds. No, I don't actually regret it.

Actresses I recognised:
Maki Ichiro (Death in Elisabeth 1996) as Nick
Fubuki Takane (Franz Joseph in Elisabeth 1996) as Meyer Wolfsheim
Yuu Todoroki (many, many roles, including Lucheni in Elisabeth 1996 and Ravic in Arch of Triumph) as Biloxi
Tatsuki Kouju (Rupert in The Prisoner of Zenda 2000) as Raul
Youka Wao (Erik in Phantom 2004) as Eddie

TakaWiki says Mari Hanafusa was also somewhere in the cast. I tried to spot her, but failed. Maybe she was only in the revue (which wasn't included on the recording I watched). Or maybe it's another case of my poor recognisation skills.

Anyway, on to the story.

The recording begins with an interview/introduction with Keaki Mori, presumably about the show. I listened to about a minute, trying to understand something. After that I realised it was hopeless to listen to any more, so I skipped it.

The musical itself starts with Nick arriving in the middle of one of Gatsby's parties. At once one of the problems with the show becomes apparent. The songs, with a few exceptions, are unmemorable. This is a recurring problem with Takarazuka's original musicals. I don't know if they don't have very talented songwriters, or if the songwriters just can't be bothered to do better when the show will probably finish its run(s) and never be revived, but very few original songs stick in the viewer's mind. None of this musical's songs are painful to listen to. But a day after watching it, I could only remember a few bars from two songs, and couldn't remember anything about the others.

Either this recording is poor quality, or the camera wasn't the best. Everything looks blurry. If this was a show from, say, 2011 that would be a major annoyance, but allowances can be made for a show from 1991. What's worse than the picture quality is how the cameraman never seems to be sure what to focus on. It's especially glaring in Gatsby and Nick's first conversation, when the camera focuses on Nick then abruptly jumps to follow him when he moves, and then focuses on Gatsby while Nick is still talking. The viewer is left with the impression that this was filmed by a rather amateur cameraman. Takarazuka has been filming performances since at least the 1970s; surely by the 90s they should have known what they were doing.

What the Dickens is happening in Gatsby's first appearance? A policeman is about to shoot someone, it looks like the party is going to turn into a fight, and then Gatsby just wanders on-stage. Huh? I don't remember any of that happening in the book. Did the director want to give Gatsby a more exciting entrance than just sitting beside Nick?

Gatsby

Nick

Just about everyone in the book drives me up the wall. Here few characters are as immediately infuriating. Even Tom and Myrtle, who usually make me want to scream and throw things, are almost bearable... at first. Daisy in the book started out pitiable then quickly became infuriating. Here she's more pitiable for much longer.

Daisy

I laughed at Nick's terror when Daisy hands him the baby 😆 That's one of the few comical moments in a pretty depressing show.

The staging of the flashback confused me at first. One minute Nick and Jordan are on the phone, the next Daisy and a bunch of new characters have appeared. It took a while to realise what was happening. Once I did realise it, though, I was amazed to find I actually felt sorry for Daisy and Gatsby when they were forced to part.

Probably dialogue explained what was happening in the (very long!) scene in a bar, but I could only guess at parts of it. It was clear enough when Gatsby was convincing Nick to help him, but what were all those other characters doing? 🤷

Any sympathy I had for Daisy very quickly disappears when she meets Gatsby again and is more interested in his expensive house and clothes than in him. Daisy's a spoilt brat, Gatsby's a naïve idiot, Nick's standing by and doing nothing, Tom and Myrtle are just revolting... That's the main reason I can't stand The Great Gatsby in any version. When I read or watch something, I want to find at least one likeable character.

Tom confronting Gatsby lost some of its impact for me because I didn't understand what he was saying, but I got the general idea. Unfortunately I didn't get the general idea of that scene at the golf course.

The musical, unlike the book, isn't confined to only Nick's point of view. We actually get to see Gatsby's death here. I don't think Gatsby and George had a prolonged confrontation in the book, but I suppose the director didn't want to kill off the top star's character as abruptly as in the book.

Gatsby's death and its aftermath is the only part of the book where I actually feel sorry for any of the characters, and even then it's more a sort of melancholy, depressed feeling than sympathy. The show's ending elicits the same feeling. The final scene left me scratching my head, though. What on earth is the point of a long line of people standing between Gatsby and his younger self? 😕

Overall the show is just average. Honestly I expected it to be unbearable, and was pleasantly surprised to find it wasn't that bad. It has some decent moments. If I liked the book more, I would probably like the show more.

Is it available online?: Yes, but better not say where.

Rating: 5/10.