I am reading the book now because I heard John Turturro talking about the book in a podcast. I remembered my Dad reading it in the 80s and I thought it would good nice to read it. I CANT WAIT to watch the show.
The best series this year. Unfortunately, in the uk its buried away on friday nights and there has been a couple of postponements. There will be a lot of people who wont have the patience to get through it as its slow moving.
The original was good, but had to cut a lot of character stuff, historical ambiente and sophistication that was in the book. If a mini-series has the time to show that, it deserves the chance.
Fermin Tenava personally i found the 80’s version captured the historical ambiance and vibe alot more.. the set was real no cgi or visuals effects, and culturally seemed to catch the manurisims and nuances..
Marklion Janecek Im talking about making remakes of movies that don’t need to be remade... i have never seen a remake better original version.. the grinch, willie wonka etc.. the new generation doesn’t know about the original versions any longer, and waters down any artistic nuances it contains.. new doesn’t always mean “improved”
@@atomicdawg100 I agree 99% originals are better than remakes. There are exceptions though, for example 'The Fly'. In the case of Name of the Rose, 1986 version is a masterpiece, but I like this series as well. I don't think you can really compare movie and TV series. I would not consider this a remake of the movie... But that's just my view.
perfect analogy with what happened during covid and the loss of knowledge and reason the mass adoption of fear and superstition of the government agenda.
John Turturro is excellent as the lead protagonist but he as an equal in the antagonist with Rupert Everett’s truly ruthless character. Michael Emerson is a bit underused.
These actors are overacting the characters...i didn't like it!the 86'movie was amazing!only William's acting was really good!others i believe they overacted!
Honnstly Eichinger and Bernd Schaefers had clashed with Umberto Ecco about the film making. Both had a different concept in mind as it is clear. Eichinger and Schaefers wanted to produce kind of a Medieval MURDER IN THE ORIENT EXPRESS while Umberto Ecco was more intersted in the Medieval set of mind, Philosphy, the Religious struggle of the time and the mangagement inrrigues in the monastery itself. The murder case was for him just a pracitcal focus point at the end when the monastery burns to get an elegant finish. You are right there. And so did Ecco when he was asked for his opinion to the movie. Other as Eichinger. That man showed no style at all and had badmouthed Ecco in any way possibe, as if he was born and raised in a barn Rather shocking to me since I really like Eichinger´s work
Someone needs to tell this host that under President Obama they were banning books that they deemed "Insensitive" I love how "entertainment/Hollywood points fingers without looking in the mirror first.
Hmmm why don't you think of the setting of the book? The 1400s in Northern Italy. Do you think there were any Africans, Asians, Latinos over there at that time???? NO. So STFU. Sick of this PC BS.
You are unaware of the actual history so calm down. There was an enormous amount of east west trade for centuries before and during the Middle Ages. The Black Death came from the East to Italy in 1348. Populations were not homogeneous - even though our popular histories have implied it was. There are brown/black skinned folks in medieval art and renaissance art. There were important Christian Kingdoms in Northeastern Africa. Humans have been wandering over the globe since the beginning of time sharing knowledge and life. Read up on it if you don't believe me. www.publicmedievalist.com/uncovering-african/ et al
Read some history, my friend. This is an historical novel. History is there how it was, not to make anybody happy. And middle age life in an european abby WAS 100% white male. Deal with it.
For full schedule, tickets & more videos go to BUILDseries.com
Follow us on social media @BUILDseriesNYC
Will have to check this out, loved Michael Emerson in Lost and Person of Interest.
I am reading the book now because I heard John Turturro talking about the book in a podcast. I remembered my Dad reading it in the 80s and I thought it would good nice to read it. I CANT WAIT to watch the show.
Which podcast? :)
This series is incredibly good
I wish the actors had talked more about the tv show, the novel and the 1986 movie!
The best series this year. Unfortunately, in the uk its buried away on friday nights and there has been a couple of postponements. There will be a lot of people who wont have the patience to get through it as its slow moving.
Excellent fascinating series and performances 💪🏼
Great film, captures the grottiness and brutality of the catholic church in that period.
Remakes generally kill the legacy of an original.. the original is a classic didnt need to be redone..
The original was good, but had to cut a lot of character stuff, historical ambiente and sophistication that was in the book. If a mini-series has the time to show that, it deserves the chance.
Fermin Tenava
personally i found the 80’s version captured the historical ambiance and vibe alot more.. the set was real no cgi or visuals effects, and culturally seemed to catch the manurisims and nuances..
@@atomicdawg100 only real original is the book ;)
Marklion Janecek
Im talking about making remakes of movies that don’t need to be remade... i have never seen a remake better original version.. the grinch, willie wonka etc.. the new generation doesn’t know about the original versions any longer, and waters down any artistic nuances it contains.. new doesn’t always mean “improved”
@@atomicdawg100 I agree
99% originals are better than remakes.
There are exceptions though, for example 'The Fly'.
In the case of Name of the Rose, 1986 version is a masterpiece, but I like this series as well. I don't think you can really compare movie and TV series. I would not consider this a remake of the movie... But that's just my view.
perfect analogy with what happened during covid and the loss of knowledge and reason the mass adoption of fear and superstition of the government agenda.
Did this program accidentally make “We Three Kings” their theme song??
"In America you can't burn books yet..." That sentence aged poorly...
John Turturro is excellent as the lead protagonist but he as an equal in the antagonist with Rupert Everett’s truly ruthless character.
Michael Emerson is a bit underused.
What about me
I loved the book, and was so disappointed by the Sean Connery movie. This looks like it will be a much better adaptation.
These actors are overacting the characters...i didn't like it!the 86'movie was amazing!only William's acting was really good!others i believe they overacted!
Honnstly Eichinger and Bernd Schaefers had clashed with Umberto Ecco about the film making. Both had a different concept in mind as it is clear.
Eichinger and Schaefers wanted to produce kind of a Medieval MURDER IN THE ORIENT EXPRESS while Umberto Ecco was more intersted in the Medieval set of mind, Philosphy, the Religious struggle of the time and the mangagement inrrigues in the monastery itself. The murder case was for him just a pracitcal focus point at the end when the monastery burns to get an elegant finish.
You are right there. And so did Ecco when he was asked for his opinion to the movie.
Other as Eichinger. That man showed no style at all and had badmouthed Ecco in any way possibe, as if he was born and raised in a barn Rather shocking to me since I really like Eichinger´s work
Hyper-bad casting.
I'll have to disagree with that, I liked it quite a lot for the most part although I'd cast a briton to play William of Baskerville
Someone needs to tell this host that under President Obama they were banning books that they deemed "Insensitive" I love how "entertainment/Hollywood points fingers without looking in the mirror first.
Leopard print dress girls voice doesnt match her face
Are we really still making films with all white male cast? Really??
Hmmm why don't you think of the setting of the book? The 1400s in Northern Italy. Do you think there were any Africans, Asians, Latinos over there at that time???? NO. So STFU. Sick of this PC BS.
You are unaware of the actual history so calm down. There was an enormous amount of east west trade for centuries before and during the Middle Ages. The Black Death came from the East to Italy in 1348. Populations were not homogeneous - even though our popular histories have implied it was. There are brown/black skinned folks in medieval art and renaissance art. There were important Christian Kingdoms in Northeastern Africa. Humans have been wandering over the globe since the beginning of time sharing knowledge and life. Read up on it if you don't believe me. www.publicmedievalist.com/uncovering-african/ et al
Read some history, my friend. This is an historical novel. History is there how it was, not to make anybody happy. And middle age life in an european abby WAS 100% white male. Deal with it.
@@Alephsus see previous comment. Medieval history is fascinating! :)
psmag.com/education/yes-there-were-poc-in-medieval-europe
Finding BLACK Medieval monks in the 13th century you must be mad
Political Correctnes has it´s value but you go over the edge here.