Talk:The Durrells

Greece Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: British / Episode coverage Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

The Durrells in Corfu

What may be the same series began airing on PBS in recent hours. I speculate it's simply a matter of assuming we Yanks have little to no idea that there was more than one Durell, and that Corfu would present another, and perhaps a more compelling, reason for interest, to a Yank audience presumably less immediately receptive than the British one.
--Jerzy•t 03:19, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article already notes the series is broadcast in the US, on PBS as you describe. It appears to have been slightly retitled. -- Whats new?^(talk) 05:12, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious review

I've flagged the Stevens review in the Reception section as dubious in a couple of places; I don't remember Louisa Durrell as being “gin-sozzled” in this or any other adaptation of the story, or in the books; does anyone know differently?
Also, “Carry On humour” is a bit wide of the mark; our page on that franchise describes it as “low-budget” comedy, “in the British comic tradition of the music hall and bawdy seaside postcards” and relying on “innuendo and the sending-up of British institutions and customs”. I don't remember that, either, in The Durrells.
So, does anyone else feel the review is accurate, or should it be deleted as being not worth the paper it was written in? Swanny18 (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Mail, so a grain of salt is always in order. I think in the first episode, which this reviewed, she did get drunk with the Captain, or some such thing. But it doesn't characterize her across the season well at all. --Drmargi (talk) 20:49, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Louisa does mention in series 2, episode 2 that she used to like drinking gin, so I suppose there is some support for the review somewhere. I don't recall whether she mentions a habit for drinking gin or we see her doing so in episode 1 of series 1. If it's a problem, I could find an alternative review to find. Phinbart (talk) 21:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The review is of the first episode, so long, long before the dialogue you mention. --Drmargi (talk) 22:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is important to keep in mind that most people in Corfu at that time used to drink booze because a lot of the water there wasn't especially potable. And a great many English folk of the time used to drink like fish. While the character does mention in the second series that she used to like drinking gin a little too much, we haven't seen her getting drunk. I'd say any mention of her being anything like a drunk should be out. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 23:51, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plainly, this discussion amounts to a consensus that "gin-sozzled" and "carry-on" are both specious and 'over the top', or encyclopedically unfair to the series. Bjenks (talk) 00:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The important scene is the one where in episode 1 she gets the gin bottle out of the cupboard and pours a glass then looks at the clock and drinks the gin literally the second the clock strikes 1. This single act tells a whole story. Vince Calegon (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Each season's year

I haven't seen, in the viewing of each series, a year attached to any particular episode. Is it cited within the article that each season is a particular year? I hope to hear back in a week about this. If not, I'll remove them after that week expires. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 23:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

season 2 episode 1 summary

while I am grateful for the episode summaries posted on the article page , I take issue with a claim made in one remarkably complicated sentence starting at
discovering Vasilia has contaminated their food ...
a "discovery" that I didn't find that much support for when I viewed the episode . Since wikipedia is "encyclopedic" , I searched google with this text :
Vasilia poison food Durrells Corfu
and the top 4 returned discussion pages (g1, g2, g3, g4) all (more or less) agreed that the food poisoning was at least plausibly (as Vasilia said) due to heat-induced spoilage of the Scotch Eggs . Therefore , I suggest that (at least) the word "discovering" be changed to (the less definite) "suspecting" , to conform more closely to "published" internet reviews .

If the author of that complicated sentence would undertake to break it into smaller sentences , I believe it would also improve "readability" as well ...

70.106.140.185 (talk) 01:46, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Homeric battle

"A Homeric battle ..." is this an encyclopedia article, or a twelve-year-old's book report? What does this have to do with Homer? It appears that the writer has never read anything by Homer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.53.152 (talk) 14:57, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The episode summaries for the first season are atrocious, and the second season are preposterously long and meandering sentences. The whole thing needs a re-write. The comment regarding Homer is no doubt lifted from a TV Guide or back of a DVD edition as it's the sort of hyperbole used there.Joefishuk (talk) 18:36, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'Artistic Licence'

The artifice of Lawrence being unmarried and living with the family was not invented for the television show; that was part of the books it was based on. Gerald even recounts a conversation about it with Lawrence in a preface to his second book; a conversation which may in itself have been mostly fabrication.

The TV adaptation does vary considerably from the books in plot and storylines (for instance, the family never move from the first villa they rent), both to integrate material from all three books into a more coherent sequence of events, and to shift the focus away from Gerald to the rest of the family - particularly Louisa. It also incorporates material from letters, biographies and interviews with the real family from years later. For instance, the story of Margo upsetting a monk with her sunbathing was recounted by Gerald Durrell in a documentary entitled "Garden of the Gods" made for the BBC in 1967. Joefishuk (talk) 18:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, this series is largely fiction. Just one clarification: the story of Margo and the monk also appears in Birds, Beasts, and Relatives, chapter 2, "The Bay of Olives". Buxareu (talk) 13:25, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]