Aristocrats (TV Mini Series 1999) Poster

(1999)

User Reviews

Review this title
19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Last episode cast change?
dtdenver-987-92554622 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I was thoroughly enjoying this series (on DVD from the library until - Huh? Who are these people? Completely different cast to portray the older versions in Part 6. I couldn't even watch it because I had no idea, even with closed captioning, who they were! Perhaps it was the BBC insistence on realism that they wouldn't put "old" makeup on young actors but it was quite a let-down.

Otherwise, as usual, BBC does a first-rate job with period detail. It's refreshing to see TV be about the story, rather than the celebrities who can't act and are too vain to ever look like a character other than themselves.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Thoughts from a Jane Austen fan...
StarDragyn16 March 2013
The first episode of this is somewhat similar to a Jane Austen style story, though it is set in the mid-late 1700s rather than early 1800s. After the first episode or two, it becomes generally more serious and more broad. The costumes are very different from Austen films (being set in the preceding era), but they are very beautiful and very accurate to the time period. The dresses are much more glamorous, even though the men look rather sillier in my opinion.

I'm not sure how close this telling matches to the actual history of this family--I'm assuming there are at least some discrepancies--but even thinking it is at least based on real people and real stories makes it much more interesting to watch. To think that this wasn't simply invented by an author (no offense to Austen!) makes me much more tolerant of any lags or disagreeableness in "plot", since it's not supposed to be a contrived one. There are many, many characters, which may be hard for some people to keep track of who's who, and many decades are covered, so time sometimes passes in large chunks.

The film is a drama and deals with some very serious issues, to a greater extent than Austen ever delved into. Much of it is somber, but not really depressing. The movie is less of a source of "entertainment" than Austen films, but it is a great look at another era and the story is intriguing enough to keep you wondering what will happen next. It does not leave you so much with the blissful smile of contentment and happily ever after that an Austen story provides, but I felt like I had gotten to know and feel for the main characters, and learned some things about history in the process. It's a great choice if you're interested in venturing into another time period, rather than the Regency (Austen) or the far more common Victorian (Dickens, etc) eras.

This movie would be especially good for passing a lazy, rainy afternoon, when you'll feel more content with this milder sort of entertainment than what your expectations might be for a Friday night. Just get a cup of tea or cocoa and let yourself drift back to another time and world for a while.
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
What happened to the fifth sister?
hallchristoph12 June 2001
Warning: Spoilers
What happened to the fifth sister is obvious to those who saw the five part version transmitted by BBC Television. She died of tuberculosis.

In the US Aristocrats was seen as a three parter on WGBH with a considerably shorter running length. Somethings had to go and since the story was primarily about four sisters the story of the fifth was told as shorthand.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Absorbing tale of love & intrigue
ingemann200026 January 2004
It's some time ago I saw this mini-series, adapted by Tillyard herself and based on her marvellous biography about the Lennox sisters. The biography is one of the best I've ever read, so my expectations were pretty high. Fortunately I was not disappointed. Like in most English literary adaptations all the details, settings and costumes were perfect, and the story about the Lennox sisters have everything you could wish for: love, court intrigue, tragedies etc. It's so absorbing that you almost forget that it isn't fiction, but real people with real and dramatic lives! All the actors were great, especially Jodhi May as the unfortunate Sarah Lennox. If you didn't get enough of the series, then read the biography!
29 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A little confusing
jeanmkulski-901251 January 2019
American here who loves all things BBC and ITV, mostly period dramas. This was fair but there were so many brothers and sisters then husbands and wives and then MORE children, eventually I was so confused about who everyone belonged to. As they aged it was worse. I won't spoil anything but there is one original sister who is so darn miserable and I assume it was the intention that her character have ZERO personality. The character became hard to watch. It IS good but I urge you to pay close attention to the original siblings, there's about 10 and they average about 8 children each with all the drama that goes with them and you'll be lost.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Faaabulous
style-231 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
"I remained convinced that our prestigious family with its significant connections could still hold sway over history." Thus spake Emily, Duchess of Leinster, in 1798, shortly before her son, the notorious and dashing Irish revolutionary, Edward Fitzgerald, was executed for the murder of a British soldier. The world they knew was rapidly changing, and, indeed, there was little, if *anything*, the Duchess or her aristocratic family held sway over anymore, except each other. But a few short years before, she and her sisters were among the most admired and privileged women on earth. The five sisters, Caroline, Emily, Louisa, Sarah and Cecilia, were the great-granddaughters of Charles II with his mistress, Louise de Keroualle, the Duchess of Portsmouth. Their grandfather, the king's illegitimate son, was Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond. His son, also Charles, became the 2nd Duke of Richmond. The 2nd Duke married an Irish woman, of whose background, both were deeply ashamed of and desperately tried to conceal. When their eldest daughter Caroline, an intelligent woman with a thirst for sophisticated pleasures, eloped with Henry Fox, 1st Baron Holland, the Duke and Duchess were mortified at her insubordination – marrying a politician against the wishes of her father brought swift judgement upon Caroline, and she was banished from her family. Caroline missed her family greatly and grieved over their estrangement, but from her home, Holland House (the same one on the Holland House liquor labels), she kept discreet correspondence with her sisters. When second eldest daughter, Emily, begged her parents to allow her to marry James Fitzgerald, 20th Earl of Kildare, an Irish statesman, the parents were aghast at the possibility of Irish blood (re-)entering their bloodline, but fearing another estrangement, they agreed to the marriage, partially because it was evident that the Earl deeply loved Emily, and partially because the Earl was extraordinarily wealthy. She had a son, Edward Fitzgerald, a celebrated United Irishman, whose dedication to Irish freedom would have been incomprehensible to his grandparents. Louisa, the third sister, married Thomas Conolly, a kind and loving man, had a brood of children and lived happily ever after. Fourth sister, Sarah, married badly, had an affair, a baby, a divorce, and complete social ostracism all in short order. Fifth sister, Cecilia, died in her teens. There was also a brother who became 3rd Duke of Richmond.

Meticulously adapted from Stella Tillyard's masterpiece by the same name, *Aristocrats* is a story of magnificent scope and grandeur, but told without the usual gassy adoration of the British upper class. Its basis is not embellished reports and embroidered tales, but the massive archives of correspondence and household and historical records left behind by these women. It is as much a story of the sisters' love for each other and their families, as it is a historical drama, but the viewer never forgets that it is through the eyes of these women that we see the epic unfold. As with many epics, it makes short work of some of history's more momentous occasions, but that serves to keep the story focused on the sisters. The production values are top notch. With an excellent screenplay by Harriet O'Carroll, superb direction, and outstanding craftsmanship throughout, *Aristocrats* is as splendid a production as it is a story.
28 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Harlequin romance covers and political intrigue...
JonathanWalford15 August 2008
I had a problem with this production -- it didn't know what it wanted to be. Was it a faithful account of a true story or was it a Goergian soap opera with harlequin romance cover bedroom scenes? The worst problem was the inconsistency - the period drama with the social commentary was dropped by the end of the series, which had turned into a story of political intrigue, involving characters we knew little about.

I enjoyed the series but did not love it. The first two episodes that I thought were going to set the tone for the balance of the series, turned out to have little to do with the rest of the storyline. After the first two episodes, the series became less focused with too many characters and little impact on the storyline.

I am sure the book is much better and on a positive, this series does encourage me to go out and read more about these sisters and what really happened. This film was a great introduction to the story but it was far from satisfying.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I loved this mini-series.
lauri926 November 1999
Warning: Spoilers
I really loved this movie. It has everything I am looking for, romance, intrigue and beautiful scenery.

The only thing I didn't understand was what Cecilia died of. I am planning to read the book to find out.

All the actors and actresses including Jodhi May should congratulate themselves on a job well done!
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Confusing
mitchmcc4 November 2020
As another reviewer noted, there are so many children that it is very difficult to keep up with who is who, and this problem increases as the series moves on... Also, although every series that purports to show time passing has to deal with making the actors age, in this one, the oldest daughter looks exactly the same after about 20 years!

The costumes and settings are certainly BBC-worthy, although as a Yank I could not tell if they are accurate or not.

The plots are also confusing, but that is party because the English history of that era was pretty complicated, with the factions, and uprisings, etc.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Downton Abbey Spark?
shiggins-8521311 February 2020
Super series for anyone interested in the history of the period of enlightenment. Read the book for a better insight.

The Second Duke of Richmond is played by Julian Fellows. The format and the music seem so redolent of Downton Abbey. Anyone else see it as a forerunner of Fellow"s Downton?

I'm surprised Fellows didn't tack a raft of mini series onto The Aristocrats. The Lennox offspring, legitimate and otherwise, weave through much of British and overseas history, which now, sadly, has abruptly ended with Brexit and the demise of an entire nation.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Wonderful
bjcaudill18210 September 2020
Wonderful adaption of the book. Lennox sisters lived wonderful life. Emily Lennox later Emily FitzGerald family lived intriguing life especially years later with her ancestors. Much controversy. Cant wait hear about that.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Mostly wonderful set-up with no wrap-up
irish2314 September 2007
No mini-series has made me want to read the book more. The source material seems absolutely fascinating, and so many allusions and sometimes confusing references were made in the series that one realizes only a book can flesh out the intricacies of the complete story.

This was a compelling series up to the end disc, when previously minor flaws became too great to ignore. The writer can't seem to decide if the story is about 4 sisters and their relationship to each other; their interactions with social norms & how they abided by, flaunted, or bent them; the plight of the aristocracy itself during a time of social turmoil; or how great a stand one should take on great political/moral issues and what consequences that may have.

This is obviously far too much for any 6-part series to take on, even by so venerable an institution as the BBC. Casting, acting, direction, sets, and costumes are outstanding, as always. But the story...the story raises little questions here and there that don't get resolved. One's willing to overlook that because everything else is so compelling. But the final disc (2 episodes), where the timeline has progressed into the sisters' later years, really starts to fall apart. Characters we barely know suddenly take up the bulk of screen time and the 4- pronged story arc starts to fray.

It was such a disappointing end to an otherwise wonderful period piece. I can't wait to read the book.
20 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
History continues
parsifalssister30 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Rather true to the Lennox family history; many have described it as excellent in many ways, and it was. However, changing gears in the last of the six-part series with totally different performers as well as story lines, took the vote down one or two pegs for me.

I was fascinated by the relationships between and among the different family factions and how they resolved each over the course of the series. Some of the characters were more sympathetic than others, and I especially took a fancy to Edward, Emily's son and Capt. Napier, Sarah's second husband.

I will go after the book as it appears that even now we have aristocrats in the Lennox line these many years later and I'd like to know more about a family that created renegades, generals, politicians and romance.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Empty Characters, Strange Pacing
VReviews13 August 2010
Based on a true story, Aristocrats follows an English aristocratic family, who claims royal blood and status via Charles II bastard lineage. The convoluted time-line in fits and starts, takes place prior to the American Revolution on through to the Irish uprising in 1798.

The story starts out interestingly enough, but at about part 3 of 6 you begin to wonder if there is a point to the story. The last 3 parts are simply depressing. More than anything, the time-line begins to rapidly fly by without any specific storyline accountability nor historical grounding. The casting is odd in general. In particular, as the characters age, the casting changes are really horrible choices that offer no consistency or context of character and plot.

If you've nothing else, you may find this a mild diversion. But all in all, this doesn't measure up to the BBC's standards.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mr Fox looks like a toad!
kirsty_uk21 January 2001
Sarah describes her sisters.

Caroline is clever, Emily is like a mother to me, Louisa is an angel and Cecilia is a child. I am a disappointment.

This is based on a true story and is actually very good viewing. It has six parts, showing the sisters as children and finally as old ladies.

Apart from Cecilia, all the sisters stories are based around their loves and family.

Emily is the narrator of the story as it proceeds.

The costumes and wigs are wonderful and the music is good too. All the sisters give great performances.
17 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Sloppy, Boring and period costumes often wrong
beuserfriendly3 February 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Episode 6 -- for example, all the main characters are replaced by different actors to represent them as senior citizens -- But the old geezers are dressed in clothes that went out of fashion about 30-40 years earlier. . . .
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What about Cecilia? And what about Sarah's daughter?
BB_GiRl22 August 2001
Warning: Spoilers
I've read some comments on this mini-series and I agree with each and every word I read. This is a great mini-series, the actors are fantastic, the story is delightful but there are some plot holes... Cecilia dies of (I think) tuberculosis and we get to see her lying on her death bed with Caroline by her side. But more than that, what the hell happened with Sarah's daughter? The one she had with Lord William... We understand that she had two boys with Cap. Napier but what happened to her daughter? We never see her again... But, even with a a few plot holes, this mini-series is, nevertheless one of the best I've seen!
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
an excellent adaptation
eedwardslittler13 April 2003
Warning: Spoilers
firstly i feel that this is an excellent adaptation of the excellent book by stella tillyard of which ive read. if you enjoyed this but havent read the book then i suggest you buy it!! also, to answer the previous questions raised- cecilia in the 3rd episode (i think) is diagnosed with consumption and is diying on a bed with caroline at her side. when caroline asks if she can do anything for cecilia, she replies for caroline to be reconciled with emily. caroline turns away in pain and turn back to find cecilia has died. also, sarah lennox did not have such great looks or a great personality she had an 'alluring air' about her as described by mr fox. she always felt tainted, unloved ect after the whole prince of wales incident.
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
But what about the fifth sister?
PaulineDorchester25 October 1999
This was fabulous. It gets 9 out of 10. What keeps it out of the 10 category is the fact that two big questions are raised in part 2 that part 3 (the conclusion) fails to answer.

First of all, what happens to the fifth sister, Cecilia? She first appears in part one as the late-in-life child of the second Duke of Richmond and his duchess. Still a baby when they die, she is sent to Ireland with Louisa and Sarah to be reared by Emily and her husband.

In part 2, the reappears as a teenager. When the family learns that Sarah, now married and back in England, is pregnant, she wants to go and help with the new baby. Emily is afraid that she is too weak to travel, having just recovered from an unspecified illness, but she lets her go anyway.

The next time we see her she looks very ill indeed, but nobody pays any attention. Emily has come to England to argue with Caroline about who should be blamed for Sarah's bad situation, with Louisa along to mediate. As they quarrel, Cecilia leaves the room, and we see what they miss: she's coughing up blood. When come into the hall, still shouting, they fail to notice that she has collapsed in a corridor.

So what happened??? That's the last we see or hear of Cecilia? Did she die? If so, didn't the sisters get back together at least for the funeral?

Maybe I need to read the book.

The other question is: since Sarah, at least as played by Jodhi May, seems to have lacked something in the personality department, how did she manage to inflame the passions of so many men?
6 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed