perrycommodore This is one of the best series I have watched, Sean Bean is excellent, as well as the gal in the beginning, Darragh is great also, fine acting, I wish there were more series like this made in the USA. I didn't realize the guy singing was the actor also, I love the theme song it stays with you. I like the history, I don't mind if its not completely accurate. I don't think anyone else could have played this part, it was made for Sean Bean. Some of the actors I have seen at present on TV or in movies, older now but still fine actors. Sean Bean is in HBO's Game of Thrones, good series, I may just have to subscribe to HBO again to watch the 2nd series.

satori9512011 A fairly entertaining series, but with a too little economic backing to carry it off properly, the events of 1808 was on such a scale that a realistic recreation is difficult. However when a force that consisted of 30 000 or 120 000 men is attempted recreated with 30 to 60 men some of the sense of it all loses its meaning. The only way to hide such inadequacies is to have a clever and inventive camera man sadly lacking here which gives the production a veneer of amateurishness it could well be without. Another problem is that the extras they have used are non-military ergo they don't know how to march, or fight, or shoot and all the battle scenes look thoroughly fake. That said the main characters in the series for most parts do a passable job; with a few exceptions who are about as involved as cheddar cheese. Sean Bean is an actor who I before this series, never have liked in any role he has played, but the role of Sharp suits him and he is believable in the role. As for the historical aspect to this series it is interesting to observe how liberal the English are with historical events, while simultaneously complaining over the Americans and Hollywood for falsifying history. I read the books the series is based on some years back and had an impression that they were more true to the actual events than this TV series, then again I might be suffering from a laps of amnesia. I cannot speak for the part of the series that unfolds itself in India but to anyone versed in European history it is a known fact that the French pulled out of Spain due to the troubles the Spanish guerrilla was causing them. The relentless fighting against an enemy they could not see was bleeding the French ranks and draining their resources, demoralizing their troops and when Napoleon in 1813 suffered great losses in Russia the French began pulling out their troops from Spain as they were needed for the defense of France against the advancing Russians. Since then the English have told us that they kicked the French out of Spain and in this series, even giving the impression that it was them, not the Russians; who marched into Paris having defeated Napoleon in 1814. Secondly, in the first part of this series the French intelligence service is depicted as completely inept compared to the English one. This is perhaps even more preposterous than taking credit for what the Russians and Spanish did, for French intelligence services was led by a man called Fouché and he had developed the most effective intelligence agency Europe had seen up till then, compared to this the English were amateurs (to use a French word, of which reconnoiter is another one). The third preposterous allegation from the series is that it was Wellington who single handed beat Napoleon at Waterloo. We have heard this lie so often now from the British that the man who really beat Naploeon at Wateroloo and ended his reign has almost been forgotten. But his name was Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher, count of Wahlstat. Unlike Wellington, Blücher had met Napoleon in the field before, at Jena and was for a long time the only one who got away from it with some honour intact. The 50 000 strong Prussian troops (the English had 30 000)was what got Wellington's boots out of the fire rescuing him from a battle he was losing. it was them who captured Napoleon and was the first to take Paris. As a reward the English has pretended he was not there at best he is a foot note. In spite of this the Series is as I said at the start an enjoyable little fairy-tale just like Harry Potter and well worth watching, for most parts it is better than the mindless rubbish one usually is served on TV; but like Harry Potter, not to be taken too serious - if you are looking for historical accuracy from the English I would rather suggest Black Adder.

katiepoppycat **SPOILER**As a fan of the books, I'd never actually seen the tv films until very recently. I wasn't disappointed. Sean Bean excels as the maverick Richard Sharpe, and there are some sterling supporting performances - my favourite being Hogan. In the light of LOTR and others, the battles probably don't seem as spectacular as they once may have done, but this doesn't detract from the action at all. The adaptation has been sensitively done, although Wellesley's promotion of Sharpe is a little spurious. Teresa is feisty and sexy, Harper is just as he should be, and Hagman is exactly as I imagined him to be in the book.My only criticism is that whoever was responsible for the scoring of this film deserves to be garrotted with the strings from their electric guitar. Historical dramas should not date, but that music certainly does. Nonetheless, tons of fun!

kokhar For those of you who AREN'T hearing impaired, this is a great series. The DVDs aren't exactly laden with exclusive features, but the Sharpe series is a compelling retelling of an exciting period of world history. And Sean Bean is, as always, great. Check them out!