This is generally brilliant entertainment even if the political bits are clichéd and pointless esp the Spanish War scenes. But Rosamund Pike (as Fanny) is utterly spellbinding . You'll rarely encounter such photogenic beauty on film. The camera adores her and so do I. Some may find this comment lacking in gravitas or even frivolous. But forgive me - I'm in love !! Of course "Love in a Cold Climate" has more going for it. It's a superb insight into the foibles and eccentricities of that most fortunate of social groupings - the English aristocracy of the inter-war period where fascism masqueraded as inherited privilege.And the whole period is lavishly recreated and technically superb. Alan Bates is great fun as the sewer hating head of house who makes ingenious use of a bureau drawer to soothe his volatile temper.But all else matters not a jot. What stands this costume piece apart is the astonishing radiance of the exquisite Rosamund Pike. I wholeheartedly recommend this study of happy English whimsy.

One could say that this attempt to adapt Nancy Mitford's two most notable works for television just suffers by comparison to the very successful 1980s attempt, but it would not be true. The fact is this miniseries is simply atrocious.The problem lies with one word - literary. Mitford's works are superficially about extreme characters (full of charm and idiosyncrasies), but are, at their core, about language and how it reflects the times, relationships, and society. Her stories - The Pursuit of Love and Love in a Cold Climate - unfold gently, and, while the books are luxurious in their story telling, not one word is redundant.So, while adaption of other authors' works can involve stripping everything away until you have the plot, and then building up from there, an adaption of a Mitford work must involve taking the whole piece and then carefully trying to determine what may safely be removed. The creators and writers of the 1980s series understood this perfectly, and those of the 2001 series did not.As a result, in the 2001 version, events and characters seem disconnected and - with no histories (which in the previous version were often offered via the endless discussions that occurred between characters) - certain characters are inexplicably mean, frivolous or stupid. The actors, who have nothing to work with, seem to flounder, and often look embarrassed (they were hired to do a Pride and Prejudice, and find they are doing a cola commercial). Only Alan Bates reaches the end of the this adaption with no, or little, egg on his face. I bet many involved in this terrible project have chosen to leave it off, or at least downplay it on, their resumes.

Aside from them not including the characters of Emily (the aunt that actually raised Fanny) and Davey (who plays an even more important part), I think the casting is excellent. Sure Rosamund Pike looks nothing like what Mitford described Fanny as but she does embody the nature of Fanny. I can't think of who better to play Matthew and Sadie but Alan Bates and Celia Imrie. Davey played a very important part in the novels, and in this version they merely lump his part into Lord Merlin; and he was also the one of funniest part of the novels with his hypochondria. They also dismissed the eldest Radlett daughter, Louisa, as really she marries straight off but is the one who had the disastrous coming out ball. I thought it was a fun production nonetheless.

Having read both of the books that this mini series is based on and recalling the excellent 1980 mini series, I looked forward to this new version with enthusiasm.I have to say that on the whole I found it very disappointing. It certainly covered the bones of the story, but due to its short length, missed out on much of the humour in the original stories. It certainly looked good, casting was excellent, the period was conveyed very convincingly - but, because virtually none of the characters were properly introduced, I kept wondering "just who is this person". Anyone unfamiliar with the story would have found it confusing most of the time.This was obviously not a cheap production, what a pity they didn't spend a bit more and do better justice to one of the classics of twentieth century fiction.