I read Mervyn Peake's novels as a boy, and just reread them this summer (the centenary year of the author's birth). They're truly unique, and at its best Peake's writing is close to miraculous, able to capture sensations and states of mind I would never have imagined another human being had experienced, much less found ways to set down in words.So yes, I'm a fan of the books.And while I didn't expect a great deal from this TV version, I was surprised at just how awful it is. If the filmmakers had deliberately set out to create a total travesty, they could hardly have done a more thorough job. Production design, dialogue, acting, casting, costumes—everything is a horrible mishmash. This is like a cruel parody of Mervyn Peake's vision.At the heart of the books is Steerpike, whose villainous plots drive the story; and at the heart of this misbegotten movie is a truly terrible performance by Jonathan Rhys Meyers. He's badly miscast as Steerpike to start, and even for the watered-down, prettied-up Steerpike given us by this movie, his meager talents are far too inadequate. He seems to think he's playing a naughty Peter Pan, not one of the most complex and compelling villains since Macbeth.Nothing in this movie captures the mesmerizing language, byzantine plotting, grotesque characters, or haunting Gothic atmosphere of the Gormenghast books. Even the look and lay-out of the castle, so unforgettably described by Peake, is missing, and instead we see some second-rate designer's colorful world of whimsy. Gormenghast has been recycled as a generic children's fantasy flick, and that's a shame.

I first read the Gormenghast trilogy when I was a moody teenager and they carried an impact I still feel years later. It is a shame the video could not capture the languid atmosphere of the books but I suppose it can't be helped given the limitations of video. I was concerned that the presentation would contradict my own visualization of the characters, but to the contrary the presentation was dead-on. Rather than contradict the books, watching the video was more like seeing the same story but from a different perspective, focusing more on the characters and less on the environment.My main criticism is that the screenwriter (or director or producer, whoever controlled the script) didn't really understand one of the main messages of the books. This comes through in the mishandling of the key character of the Master of Ritual, called the Secretary in the video. Changing the title was a mistake. And so was the change in the character. In the books the first Master of Ritual is old, quiet Sourdust, who helps set the elegiac mood before Steerpike starts to interfere. Steerpike then kills him (accidentally) in the library fire (this is why Steerpike in his later delirium says the sisters make 5 -- Sourdust, Nanny Slagg, Cora, Clarice, Barquentine). (Steerpike did not kill and did not know what happened to Sepulchrave or Swelter, only Flay knew). Steerpike's fire brings nasty, cussing Barquentine into the book, and that is what first causes the mood to change. But in the video, it is nasty Barquentine from the start (although because he isn't named until much later, you think at first it is supposed to be Sourdust). Sourdust is simply deleted. The result is that in the video you always have the nasty element, and Steerpike has no responsibility for it. A key point of the books, however, is that Steerpike's ambition is what causes the mood of the castle to change. I should have thought the screenwriter would be more careful about cutting Steerpike's first murder. The author, Peake, knew what he was doing by starting with Sourdust and having Steerpike kill him.The title of Master of Ritual is important for another reason, a reason that should have prevented the director from changing the title to mere Secretary. It is such an important point: in that castle, Ritual is master, so the Master of Ritual is the true master of the castle. Steerpike wanted to be Master of Ritual because he knew that in that role he could control the law; it was where the real power was. As Master of Ritual he could surreptitiously change the rituals, because no one else could understand their intricacies. In this way he could set everyone dancing to his commands. The Groans were puppets of the Master of Ritual. In the books ritual is all-powerful. Recall that in the video Barquentine complained that Sepulchrave's breakfast was not part of the ritual. The meeting in the library came about only because of the breakfast, wherein Sepulchrave defied the control of ritual, to plan an act (the breakfast) intended to show his love for his son. Yet that led to the burning and Sepulchrave's madness and death. Sepulchrave's penalty for defying ritual was terrible. Steerpike wanted to marry Fushia and thus combine in himself both the control of the ritual, and be the central player in the ritual. But the dedication of the loyal servant of ritual, Barquentine (who burned Steerpike and made him mad) and the loyal servant of nobility, Flay (who relentlessly tracked Steerpike) along with the goodhearted, intelligent Prunesquallor and the heir, Titus, defeated Steerpike, preserved the ruling family, and thus preserved the ritual. Then Titus, having preserved the ritual, flees it, because he knows it is too powerful to defeat. I think a more understanding screenwriter would have developed these themes more clearly and still had a compelling drama.Lastly, I was disappointed in the flooding sequence and the hunt for Steerpike, which was very compressed in time and in visual scope; this should have been developed with sweep and steadily-building tension. I would have preferred they cut or compress the Bellgrove/ professor sequences entirely to devote the time to a really powerful climactic flood/hunt sequence.

Terrible acting, especially from Celia Imrie, who frankly has done some great work in the past. I sat through the whole of this but it wasn't till someway through I realised that she (as in her character) had not changed her expression once, poor acting not hiding the fact that this is really a gentle actress trying to be a tough old boot, and failing miserably. The acting highs are Meyers and Lee, who actually succeed in bringing some class to this peasant of a BBC production.The plot here is fairly simple, but the execution on screen was pure rubbish. It actually started well, the first episode left me eager to see the next, though I was already aware of some of its shortcomings. I was not prepared for the fact that the story had no consistency after this point, and I really felt the need to look at the clock to estimate how much more I had to sit through. I'm sure the book is better, as seldom can the book fair worse than the screenplay, but frankly i'm put off reading it by the thought of sitting through three or four days more of this predictable, clichéd run of the mill, less than mediocre, slapped together screenplay.

to a fan and repeat reader of the books, this was a very disappointing production. it really had none of the atmosphere, depth of characters, sense of age, menace or drama of the books. instead it was bright and comical, clumsy and light-weight - really inappropriate and even amateurish. the cast had incredible potential, but they were given nothing to work with.i only hope that peter jackson might take this on one day and do these books the justice they deserve.to a die-hard Gormenghast fan, i'd say see it by all means, but be prepared for a pretty big let-down!!