ecogirlveghead Great costumes, wonderful scenery, great art direction. Unfortunately, this movie suffers from uneven acting and a lack of attention to period detail. The actor playing Carver is creepy, but he is lacking charisma and screen presence - he's kind of a sad little bully and there's no way Lorna would be unwillingly attracted to him (as she was in the book). The actress playing Lorna is sweet, lovely, and appealing but she too, doesn't draw me in.I agree with other reviewers about the variety of accents - I wish they had spent more time getting the accents of the time and place correct and consistent.Also, its really, really silly and takes away from the believability of the whole thing that one of the 17th century female villagers is wearing glasses. Some of the dialogue is way too obviously modern too: "All work and no play makes Johnny a dull boy." "I'm not marrying some ignorant farmer," says his sister. "Not if he sees you first." Sounds like a conversation at the local high school. The sad,dramatic music is played way too much and too loudly and distracts from the scenes - overpowering music is a pet-peeve of mine. Honestly, while the movie was playing, I spent more time reading reviews here - it simply wasn't that compelling.Its almost like this movie was made for teenagers (who like romance). This is too bad because even teenagers like period detail and can understand quality movie making. They appear to have made some parts of this movie too quickly and had to skim over some elements - or some of the people working on it had experience and others were still very green. Somehow this one just misses the mark.

Gitta Verbraak As a huge fan of period dramas I came across this one and was looking forward to watching it. However, I found that this adaptation lacks the finesse you find other period dramas. The story was rather predictable (but maybe that's the novel) and I found that the characters lacked depth and the actors and dialogue often lacked emotion. Yes, Lorna (Amelia Warner) is very pretty but she was not captivating. The music (the lover's leitmotiv), even though very nice, was a bit too overbearing and prominent.Having said this, the scenery was beautiful, as were the costumes. It had loads of potential but, in my opinion, it lacked that little something that made me want to watch this again, let alone add this to my favourites and consider watching it once a year, as I do with many period drama miniseries (Jane Austen, Elizabeth Gaskell).

Hans C. Frederick There are times when a story should contain more than just the plot,and the facts.There are things such as mood,tone,and symbolism that add up to make a story more than just a rousing tale.And,due to the lack of an appropriate villain,that's what this adaptation is missing. "Lorna Doone"is moe than just a story about valorous English rurals fighting an oppressive gang of outlaws.It's also a nostalgic look,seen from the perspective of the Industrial Revolution,at a rustic way of life which has vanished.It's also a positive affirmation of what was referred to,during the Victorian period,as"muscular Christianity."And,it's also the sotry of a gallant,but inarticulate and lonely man's struggle,to find love,and romance with an attractive woman,consumating in a sharing sexual union. John Ridd,the hero of this work,is a bright,physically strong,but unguided and silent man,whose struggle is at least as much within himself as it is with others.And to symbolize this arduous and difficult journey,her requires a worthy opponent. Carver Doone,therefore,is John's alter-ego,and must provide a dark,Satanic antagonist,of formidable nature and significant evil.John MUST conquer his own shadow personality,as personified by Carver.And,on a more realistic level,Carver must be strong,virile,and physically attractive,as a worthy contender for Lorna's love. The actor playing Carver,in this production,is certainly evil,vicious,rodent like,and psychopathic.But he lacks grandeur,authority,presence,and that elemental quality to provide a characterization accurate with the book.Sean Bean did a much better job.

steer0pike The movie was a bit predictable, however aside from that, I thought the acting was great. The movie created a feeling for the countryside and farming life, showing how close the family was bonded together. The story takes place in 17th century England, and is a typical love story, filled with revenge and jealousy. The actress who played Lorna is lovely. Lorna Doone also has an excellent soundtrack as well as pleasant scenery.