Talk:The Pillars of the Earth (miniseries)

	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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Critical Reception[edit]

Is there any reason there's no section about the show's critical reception? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.87.87 (talk) 06:21, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It received three nominations at the 68th Golden Globe Awards. 1x Best mini-series or TV film and 2x Best performance in a mini-series or TV film 83.255.65.21 (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Production[edit]

Is there anything else we can post? --O.neill.kid (talk) 23:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can there please be a small line somewhere mentionning the wonderful scene showing Aliena plainly and obviously breastfeeding her baby? That has GOT to be a first for TV -- you could see her breast and almost see the baby's "latch." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.39.171 (talk) 07:11, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would say no. A) It is not a "first"; B) this was not on regular broadcast television, and being outside of regular broadcast television, this is even more-so not a "first." — al-Shimoni (talk) 05:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plot[edit]

Can we summarize the plot and post it in this article instead of linking to the book? --O.neill.kid (talk) 23:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a rudimentary synopsis section to help provide context to the "differences" section. —Mrwojo (talk) 20:10, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely needs a conventional (much more detailed) synopsis for each episode. The rudimentary synopsis assumes a pre-understanding of the storyline. I've watched only the first episode so far; it's so fast-paced that I looked to Wikipedia for a better understanding of what I had just seen. The rudimentary synopsis, while appreciated, must be expanded if it is to be helpful for this purpose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChicagoLarry (talk • contribs) 07:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed and individual episode plots were written by myself about 1 year ago.Jabberjawjapan (talk) 03:56, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Differences?[edit]

A few concerns about the reliability of the "differences" section. In the section on the differences from the book is included "The repentance of Waleran and Remigius, who ask Prior Philip to accept them as ordinary monks." as being in the series and not in the book. However, I do not recall ever seeing this in the mini-series, nor do I know where it could fit into the mini-series' story. Some of the other "differences" seemed questionable. Were all these "differences" added to the article before the series was even finished airing? An example of something that really makes me wonder this is the statement "This was obvious from the cast list, which has only a child actor for Jonathan" added to one of the differences. Although the difference this quote is attached to is correct, it looks like someone was doing original research before the fact, rather than waiting to see if that statement that the above quote was attached to was indeed true. — al-Shimoni (talk) 04:58, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same concerns but it's been so long since I read the book and I've not yet finished watching the miniseries so I was leaving it alone for now. The original research point is spot on; I think we can likely kill that. Additionally, a fair amount of the rest of the differences come across like trivia at best and OR in many cases. Millahnna (talk) 13:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another difference is that Remigius doesn't ask Philip for permission to come back to the monastery but speaks to Ellen and reveals that he once loved another monk and that's how Waleran had power over him. Then they conspirate against Waleran and find a letter that did not appear in the book. Rerynia (talk) 12:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I read the book last fall, and just watched the miniseries a couple weeks ago. There were definitely some very major differences. Especially different was the fictional account of the sinking of the White Ship. In the book, the Hamleighs and Bigod were not on the ship and thus did not assassinate Prince William. Which in turn meant Jack's father did not write a letter to King Henry detailing his witnessing the crime. In the book, Jack's father was more of a "clueless" witness who didn't really understand what happened, but knew enough to be able to incriminate the guilty parties if the right people asked him the right questions.

@al-Shimoni: I think whomever put in the part about Remigius and Bigod asking for Phillip's forgiveness in the TV series was confused, that actually occurred in the book.

There are many more differences and because of that I'm not even sure how to approach a section like this.

- Entrybreak (talk) 16:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tpoe-300x415.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Tpoe-300x415.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Tpoe-300x415.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent information?[edit]

There seems to be some confusion about the number of episodes and running times. The article gives the number of episodes as 8, the running time as 60 minutes, and the 'full running time' as 428 minutes. But 8 x 60 is 480. Other sources give different information. IMDB, which is listed among the 'external sources', gives the number of episodes as 9, and the running time as 60 minutes, which would give a total of 540 minutes. The official website for the series, also in 'external links', gives the number of episodes and running time as 8 x 50 or 4 x 100, which gives a total of 400. Some of these discrepancies, such as the differing number of episodes, may be explained by the complicated broadcast history described in the 'Broadcast' section of the article. Differences in running time might be due to whether commercial breaks, etc, are included or not. It may seem a trivial point to raise, but I recently bought the (UK) DVD set of the full series, and I wanted to check that it was actually complete. The DVD set contains 8 episodes, and the cover gives the 'feature run time' as 7 hours 1 minute approximately'. This would roughly be consistent with the total running time of 428 minutes stated in the article, as DVDs often run slightly 'fast'. I have watched 2 episodes so far, and these come in at a little over 50 minutes each. It would not be consistent with 480, let alone 540. If in fact the standard running time, excluding breaks, is closer to 50 minutes, I suggest this should be substituted for 60.109.148.246.5 (talk) 23:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]