I'm a big fan of British series, but James Norton is a poor actor. He seems to have two major moods. He's either the lighthearted and optimistic vicar or the morose, self-pitying and alcoholic depressive. The latter seems more true to the character which makes his religious life seem like an act. With a more skilled actor, these two aspects might have been meshed together to show an interesting and complex human being, but Norton doesn't have the skill to portray such a man. There is very little subtlety and nuance in his performances, so he is always unconvincing. But he is physically a beautiful man which makes him watchable.There is another issue for me and that is the subplot of Grantchester's romance with his childhood friend who is married. To me, this is like fingernails on a blackboard. This attachment doesn't fit into his life, nor does it fit the show. Whenever there's a scene with her I just want to make her go away. This actress as well is mediocre and it's hard to believe that she's the focus of such intense passion. She's kind of a blah human being.For me, the saving grace of this show is Robson Green. He's a magical actor who's been wonderful in every show he's been in (my favorite being "Wire in the Blood"). Without him, this show wouldn't be worth watching.

For example just once it would be neat if a priest actually believed that when someone does something as evil and selfish as taking their own life they should not be put to rest in consecrated ground. Wouldn't that be a surprise? Or how about one that actually believed that unmarried sex, or sodomy is a sin? Seems like for TV priests the only thing that is sinful is to not be sufficiently politically correct. I am not saying there is anything wrong with sex before marriage, or being gay, or anything else that makes people happy and hurts no one. However, if someone could care less about the Bible(or only the parts they like), perhaps they should be something other then a priest. Other then that...the show is mediocre, and frequently insults your intelligence. This is nothing but some liberal morality play pretending to be a coizy mystery. Nothing cozy about it.

I reasonably enjoyed the first 2 seasons, but I'm done with this series now. I don't need to waste any precious time watching sleaze - as in the inspector cheating on his lovely wife & family with the tramp. And after all this time of Sidney "sitting on the pot" where Amanda is concerned (she's always been throwing herself at him, while he's acted unmotivated), suddenly they've got to have one of those (YAWN) typical, modern, crass slam-bang scenes - UGH. On a separate note, as much as I LOVE Leonard, who has always been my favorite character, it's obvious the painful path they are going to force him to grind through this season, and I can't stand to see his sweetheart self put through that.How depressing it is that the days when one could rely on PBS for quality programming are over. Nowadays PBS network seems clearly intent on including trashy content (another example, "Indian Summers" - just how much "doggy style" was it necessary to include????) in an effort to reel in a young modern audience. Meanwhile, they will be losing viewers such as myself, who have been enthusiastic & loyal supporters since PBS began!

I like Grantchester for the period costumes and the Cambridgeshire setting, the plots are rather tame but what I do dislike about it is that the attitudes that it portrays are so anachronistic. The scriptwriters are becoming more determined to add in 21st century attitudes and to be politically correct, and this is completely out of place for a drama set in the 1950s. I had a rolling eyes moment when Chambers and Keating greeted each other with a hug - for heaven's sake, British men didn't even do that in the 1980s, let alone the 1950s! A handshake would have been a sign of affection but a hug - absolutely not. I really can't see a vicar that I would have known in my youth (in the 1970s) let himself go to that extent, I'm thinking in particular or the 'simulated sex on the dance floor scene' - even non-clergy wouldn't have behaved like that in the 1950s. People just didn't behave like that in public.Another reviewer felt that Grantchester was better than Jeremy Brett's Sherlock; I think absolutely not. I know my British history in great depth and that version of Sherlock had an authentic feel of Victorian Britain. Grantchester viewers could be left thinking that the 1950s were not much different to today, just different clothes, and that certainly isn't true.