hou-3 I got hold of this mini series after reading the outstanding novel by Julian Barnes on which it is based. The book is very deep and I didn't expect the series to follow it faithfully. Even so, the series is disappointing. It starts well, cutting quickly to Doyle's involvement in the miscarriage of justice and the way it freed him from the debilitating grief and guilt occasioned by his first wife's death. There was good period atmosphere, and some excellent location filming. But the second and third episodes went adrift. The complexity of the case seemed to defeat the scriptwriter who sought refuge in melodrama and to that end introduced some unhelpful and implausible additional plot lines. These included a murder, which made the case much more serious than the animal mutilations and anonymous letters which comprised the original crimes. The best I can say about it is that it occupies an evening in a reasonably entertaining way. But the novel is infinitely superior.

ctyankee1 I did not like this series. The two lead characters are both good actors one plays in Doc Martin/Martin Clunes and the other played as Sherlock Holmes/Charles Edwards in some other series/episodes.The language was hard to understand. Sir Arthur Doyle kept saying his client the Pastors son George Edalji was framed and disliked because of his race. Throughout the 3 part series Arthur uses this excuse for the Pastors son to be blamed and framed. There was talk of animals being mutilated, people getting threatening notes and more.In the end it had nothing to do with his race. It had to do with kids going to the same school and things that happened there.I was very disappointed.

dal1808 Martin Clunes is excellent as the eponymous Arthur, sporting a genuine Scots accent and a Victorian gentleman's sensibility. Wonderful writing and period scenery provide a convincing platform for the actors to bring the plot to life. I have no knowledge of the historical reality of the plot but the device of having the real life characters of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his secretary as the protagonists in a crime drama provides an interest over and above the validity of the story or the sophistication of the plot. The writing is very well done, with the dialogue couched in antique terms and rhythms. The plot is subtly exposed over time through conversation, rather than the trite expositions of modern crime series. This can easily be enjoyed as a period piece or as an excellent crime drama.

sherithorn This show is "based" on a real happening. That does not mean that everything in the show actually happened, only that an historical event was the starting point. This is entertainment so there is going to be some dramatic leeway but there are also actual events present in the show.I am a huge Sherlock Holmes fan but the title tells you that this is about his inventor, not Holmes, so I knew not to expect Holmes' methods or quirkiness. I also did not expect a "Dr. Watson" but was pleased to find out who the character was based on.This movie is entertaining; admittedly some of the acting is lacking, but all-in-all, it is something I highly recommend. This movie has humor, light drama, mystery, and some good actors. If you want "real" watch a documentary; for fun entertainment "Arthur & George" is a good bet.