One can understand the BBC's desire to remake "Cider with Rosie" and "Lady Chatterley's Lover", and perhaps even "An Inspector Calls", although the last has at least two fine filmed versions, but their decision to remake "The Go-Between" was a misguided one.Jospeh Losey's 1971 version is one of those rare occasions in which everything seemed to be right - a top notch cast, beautiful cinematography, a terrific Michel Legrand score and a superb Harold Pinter screenplay. L.P. Hartley himself was moved to tears after seeing the film. So then why remake it? How could it possibly fare in comparison?This television version does not even begin to complete with its predecessor. Adrian Hodge shows little faith in his audience forgoing any subtlety in his dialogue and general characterisation. The cast are a pale and uncharismatic bunch. Seek out Hartley's novel and Losey's film – they are masterpieces. Skip this one.

The acting of Jack in this movie is outstanding - he should be at the top of the credits.I also found this adaptation to be far superior to the original, much more attention grabbing.There is a danger of believing that originals are always the best but this is not always the case.Lesley Manville portrayed the mother superbly and captured the horrible nature of many women of her age and position - people who did absolutely nothing for a living.10/10

This was a major disappointment compared to the novel and original film. Like most modern period dramas, it is style over substance, with stunning photography masking a misguided script and some unconvincing acting.The earlier 1971 movie was a flawless adaptation, with Harold Pinter's script tending to say less with more, upping the tension with the slow, languid pace reflecting the heat of the summer and limited, meaningful dialog. Here, unnecessary lines are inserted as will, many not even in the novel, such as Leo's embarrassment about his old and ragged summer clothes after Marian accuses him of lying – this is just a cheap way of garnering sympathy for the boy, and not reflective of the times it was set. Such things would have been left unsaid. It is the same through the program; everything needs to be spelt out, rather than leaving it to the actors to subtly convey.There are poor minor plot additions such as Ted seeming defensive about being poor – certainly not true to the book, and a far cry from Alan Bates and his worldly self confidence. Here he attempts to be brooding and moody, as oppose to charismatic and cheery but with a fiery temper, and it makes him far less likable and far less obvious why Marian would risk everything for him. Mariam herself is only passably acted, with Julie Christie an impossible act to follow. Marian's father being away is another pointless adjustment, and the production misses his steady, world weary presence, especially in the smoking room scene that was so integral to the first film. Trimmingham also loses some of his aristocratic dignity and military bearing, and the writer inexplicably takes away his fantastic line that gives him such honour and pathos: "Nothing is ever a ladies fault, Leo".Leo himself puts in a fairly lifeless, strangely camp performance, with a certain charm combined with adolescent awkwardness which is very different from the more honest, believable performance in the film. Less attention paid to the central theme of oppressive heat, the film seems to move much quicker and out of sequence. It's also more outwardly emotional, compared to the stoicism of the film and novel, where passions are repressed and below the surface. The vital moments here are filled with shrieks and histrionics. The final meeting is too warm and pleasant – it should have that edge of regret, memory, pain and nostalgia mixed together, the dialog has been watered down, the hint of bitterness discarded.Unfortunately it suffers greatly by comparison, because taken by itself it is a very solid, beautifully shot production. The filming is breathtaking, with so many lovely touches including the reflection in the water scene and that wonderful final shot of older Leo against the hall and endless lawn. For people who haven't seen the original or read the book this may seem a far better film that the one I have described.

Leo recounts his life, the Summer of 1900 had a huge impact on his life, when as a 12 year old he went to stay with School friend Marcus and his family. Since that Summer Leo has lived in the Shadows of the past. Leo is enchanted by the beautiful Marian, she recognises that Leo is from a humble background, and as they are surrounded by such wealth she takes pity on him and treats him to new clothes. Her motive for doing so though was to sneak off and meet with someone. Whilst out playing Leo heads to the farm owed by Ted Burgess, Leo falls and gets patched up by Ted, Leo offers a favour in return, he is to carry a message back to Marian. Young Leo becomes the go between for the two who are conducting a secret love affair,carrying messages back and forth. Marion's engagement to the Wealthy Viscount Trimingham is announced and the love triangle seems doomed.A true tale of class and forbidden love, this was a glowing adaptation, it's been a long time since I saw the 70's version, but this was excellent. A definite bright future ahead for young Jack Hollington (Leo) he managed to outshine a totally wonderful cast, he was just incredible, a hugely talented young man. It's brilliant acted by all, but Lesley Manville should get a special mention as the cold Mrs Maudsley.Favourite scene for me had to be the discussion between Leo and Marian, when as a confused youngster he can't understand why Marian couldn't marry her true love Ted. It was just wonderful.The scene of Mrs Maudsley bullying Leo into divulging the secret place of assignation between Marian and Ted was tough to watch.You cannot help watch this and help feel sad for Leo, manipulated by both Marian and Ted, both used him badly, Trimingham treated him very well and knew all along what was going on, never once turning on Leo.Bravo BBC 9/10