Roush Review: A Return to ‘Sanditon’ Leaves Much to be Desired
Review
It is a well-known fact that Jane Austen and PBS‘s Masterpiece go together like the proverbial tea and crumpets. Which is why it was such a shock for fans to be left hanging two years ago when the series version of Sanditon — based on Austen’s final, unfinished novel — was canceled by its British producers before its first season even aired on PBS in the winter of 2020.
If the original unfinished manuscript left Austen fans wanting more, dismayed viewers were additionally vexed by the unhappy ending Sanditon‘s producers had contrived for its heroine, Charlotte Heywood (the disarming Rose Williams). She and everyone else were left heartbroken when her studly love interest Sidney Parker (Theo James) was forced to marry another to rescue his unlucky brother Tom (Kris Marshall) from financial ruin.
(Credit: Joss Barratt/Red Planet)
As fan outcry mounted over the truncated run, Masterpiece was able to strike a deal with BritBox UK for two additional seasons, a rare win for fans of prematurely canceled series. But in the long tradition of being careful what you wish for, Sanditon returns in a diminished state. The thrill of first love is gone — and so, alas, is much of the fun — as Season 2 opens with dashing Sidney permanently out of the picture. (James opted not to return.)
Charlotte has returned to the burgeoning seaside resort with her impressionable younger sister, Alison (Rosie Graham), who’s much more eager to chase romance than her once-burned sibling. They’re both in for a disappointingly derivative journey.
(Credit: Joss Barratt/Red Planet)
Alison becomes embroiled in a triangle ripping off Cyrano de Bergerac, in which callow young Army Captain Carter (Maxim Ays) woos her using the words and experience of the more worldly and poetic Scottish Capt. Fraser (Frank Blake) — yes, Outlander fans, Fraser — to impress her. Charlotte, meanwhile, juggles two underwhelming new men in her life: a stiff Army Colonel, Francis Lennox (Tom Weston-Jones), and the gloomy widower Alexander Colbourne (pallid Ben Lloyd-Hughes), for whom she goes to work as a governess to his tomboy daughter and willful orphaned niece. Her employer is something of a cross between Jane Eyre‘s tormented Mr. Rochester and The Sound of Music‘s Capt. Von Trapp. (He even keeps the estate’s piano under lock and key lest the girls under his watch experience any inadvertent joy.)
There is an attempt to ground Sanditon in political relevance, when characters including heiress Georgiana Lambe (a dour Crystal Clarke) take a stand against slavery and the sugar trade, but Sanditon sours with its uninspired plotting, including the melodrama of a heavy-handed conspiracy to drive reformed Season 1 villainess Esther (Charlotte Spencer) mad. As if to overcompensate, most of the cast — including the usually reliable Anne Reid as town dowager Lady Denham — overacts shamelessly, turning this Austen homage into a handsome but wearying period cartoon.
Let’s hope Season 3 improves, but much as it pains me to say, I wonder if they’d have been better off quitting while they were ahead.
Sanditon, Season 2 Premiere, Sunday, March 20, 9/8c, PBS (check local listings at pbs.org)
Rose Williams
Anne Reid
Kris Marshall
Kate Ashfield
Jack Fox
Charlotte Spencer
Crystal Clarke
Lily Sacofsky
Turlough Convery
Alexandra Roach
Mark Stanley
Matthew Needham
Elizabeth Berrington
Kayleigh-Paige Rees
Adrian Rawlins
Sarah Belcher
Mollie Holder
Tom Weston-Jones
Frank Blake
Maxim Ays
Eloise Webb
Flora Mitchell
Ben Lloyd-Hughes
Alexander Vlahos
Rosie Graham
⨁Full Cast & Crew
Conversation102 Comments
Please read the TV Insider Community Guidelines.
Comments are closed on this story.
-
O
Oh, dear, a bit harsh. Having seen the first episode in pre-screening, and as a fan of the show, I dare say many of us feel different. After all, the female period drama-loving, Austen enthusiasts, who campaigned to bring back a canceled show are quite thankful that PBS Masterpiece stepped up to resurrect the discarded story despite the departure of the male lead. As far as "underwhelming" new men (gracious, can we please forget about Theo James as the standard of all male leads?), it's all in the eyes of the beholder, sir, and I find them quite acceptable. I stand quite assured that the series will remain a favorite with those who have waited for the continuation of Charlotte's story. It might not be great television in your eyes, but it's great period drama in ours.
99
-
O
We did campaign but we campaigned to finish the love story between Charlotte and Sidney. Not new underwhelming male leads.
45
-
B
As a female period drama loving, Austen enthusiast who campaigned for 19 months, I disagree with you. Which is fine. At the end of the day, it's just telly, but the fans who invested in this story are deeply divided on the wisdom of continuing it in this manner.
14
-
-
P
Oh dear! Looks like you are not a fan. Fear not. There are plenty of Sanditon fans out here and some of us have seen episode 1, and thus far, it has grabbed my attention once again. We are happy MasterpiecePBS grabbed the reins and went forward with additional seasons despite the many obstacles thrown their way.
92
-
C
I have just got to make this comment about Theo James and his arrogance. I've read in a couple places that interviews with the writers, including Andrew Davies, claimed that they had every intention of continuing the story of Charlotte and Sidney with an Austen HEA. I then read the comments made by James who said the ending of his character in Season 1 was what he felt was the right thing to do. Seems to me maybe he should have taken the writers' plans into consideration before accepting the role in the first place, instead of deciding the end of his character's relationship with Charlotte was a good thing and ended as it should. Who is he to decide? Arrogant much, Mr. James?
83
-
O
Absolutely. Why sign on for show and not see it through? The show should have been left alone if it couldn’t have been given the proper dialogue and chemistry between actors.
Even recasting Sydney would’ve been better than these bland unoriginal suitors
3
-
-
G
I'm disappointed you didn't like this season, Matt. I've followed your columns for years and you've helped me find some of my all-time favorite shows (Veronica Mars comes to mind.) But having seen the first episode of season 1, the only critique I had was that some of the scenes felt too short and rushed. But that's understandable, considering they needed to not only catch us up on the characters from season 1 but also introduce us to the new characters. I'm looking forward to re-watching the first episode this week, and can't wait to see what else these two new seasons bring!
83
-
P
Well bless your heart. You are obviously not the demographic that the show is geared toward so why on Earth you were chosen to review it is beyond me. And not sure if your unnecessary harsh attitude was because you had to review Sanditon instead of The Batman or something but I have seen the first episode and absolutely loved it. And I most certainly did not think anyone was overacting. Luckily there are enough of us that are the base demographic that will love it and hopefully the wonderful cast and creators will listen to vast majority of us who love it and not you few squeaky wheels.
80
-
O
He actually reviewed the first season as well & gave it a good review ☆☆☆☆. So your argument makes no sense.
34
-
O
I saw episode 1 of season 2. The review was spot on from what I saw. The only new face even remotely close to the hero we lost is Lennox but from what I understand, he will be the bad guy. So it’s a no go for me. I have no interest in watching another episode.
24
-
G
'Will love' says everything. You don't need to be target audience to review something. He loved season 1.
8
-
-
B
I don’t think your review is fair. We fans worked hard to bring back Sanditon and we are looking forward to enjoying the fruits of our labor and the writing of Justin Young. Andrew Davies wrote episode 6 of season 2 and was a collaborator throughout the series. Your “dour” review is riddled with misogynistic undertones. “Tomboy” is not a term to be used anymore, as girls (and children) have a full spectrum range of personalities and activity enjoyment. And Crystal Clarke is not “dour”, her character has been through a lot and is fighting for the very lives of enslaved people. I find your entire review to be paltry, superficial, myopic, and misogynistic.
80
-
P
Not surprising. This is not Austin after all. I do love Lady Denham. Theo James is notoriously unreliable. Was happy with the original and shocked at the outcry for MORE. Sometimes the end is the end and not all stories end happily ever after.
77
-
P
I loved Season 2. The writers created characters and storylines true to Austen’s cannon and they explored her familiar themes of the open emotions of Romanticism and its counterpart, the restraint of logic and reason. It was fantastic to have a new Austen with fun twists and turns. Spot on!
76
-
P
Dear Matt, your review is simplistic, out of touch, and impatient. I only watched Season 2 (S2) because Sidney Parker is dead and stays dead. The codependent and abusive relationships in S1 (notably Charlotte/Sidney; Esther/Edward; Edward/Clara) should never be glorified. S2's acting is nuanced and superb in the nonverbal -- maybe you are used to in-your-face action or having every moment spelled out? Perhaps you should view S2 as it is: a transition between Season 1 and Season 3. S2 was only 6 episodes (6 hours on PBS) versus 8 episodes for Season 1. Relax and enjoy the journey.
74
-
R
I relaxed so much I fell asleep watching season 2. How could you not see that Colbourne was the abuser to both Charlotte and the children? Season 2 was like watching a boring soap opera with recycled storylines and way too much of a wanna-be Lydia Bennet. BLH’s acting was sub par. His non verbal acting was one-note with some occasional expressions that resembles constipation. Theo James acting was amazing. His non verbal game was absolutely stellar. It evoked so much emotion. Maybe you didn’t quite understand season 1. Sidney was a very damaged and jaded man who believed he was undeserving of love and terrified to let anyone in again. Sidney’s story arch was about growth and redemption motivated by love for Charlotte and his family. Season 1 was captivating. Season 2 was forgettable. Matt’s review was spot-on. Sorry if that disappoints you, but there it is.
17
-
C
I agree SayIt! Sid never appeared in Austen's original manuscript except on a list of Characters. The Sid in S1 is only a creation of Andrew Davies et al. S1 Sid also looked like a Turkey Vulture hovering over naive Charlotte. Ugh!
41
-
-
G
It is a hoot. Love it all. It is not to be taken seriously. Although I do miss Theo James. Do all men have to have chisled features to be attractive. I am watching for escape. Always love a good Ball. Costumes are great. Loved Bridgerton, also.
74
-
G
DON'T WATCH IT IF YOU DONT LIKE IT!
It's that simple.
Go campaign to another network to get your Sadlotte ending.
You'll be disappointed because TJ will never return, you can never get the same feeling. But go ahead, get an entire new take and let's watch you pick the pieces out of it too!
#SanditonS2 has so far been a true & authentic HOMAGE TO AUSTEN.
72
-
O
All I can say - I am looking forward to S2 and S3 - if you haven’t got anything positive to say, don’t say anything.
72
-
G
Breathe, Matt! IMO: Season 2 focuses on “forging new paths” and the evolution of female empowerment within the constraints of Regency Society. Season 3 was concurrently filmed and scheduled for release in 2023. Sanditon’s setting is now brighter and cheerful with smiles and sass. The introduction of Ms. Hankins, Augusta, and Leonora is genius. ( Whoa, Matt: fiercely precocious Leonora is a “tomboy”… is that even an appropriate term anymore?) S1 characters have matured in Season 2: Ms. Lambe finds her voice with her wealth and her friendship with Arthur who evolves from a hypochondriac caricature to becoming a responsible brother; Lady Babington copes with a miscarriage but finds unexpected kinship with Clara who finds her strength; Ms. Heywood seeks escape from a “forgone conclusion.” Notably, Season 2 Writers confirm both Ms. Heywood and Ms. Lambe continue their respective paths in Season 3 and have Happy Endings.
69
-
G
The next comment posted simply reinforced what I just said. It’s all about Theo.
69
-
O
I would have been happy if Charlotte ended up with Young Stringer but even that was destroyed. Sorry to say, they shouldn't have renewed without two key actors.
9
-
-
C
Hi, Matt: your “underwhelming” review is “pallid” with undertones of “dour!” Your 8th-grade English Lit Class characterization of Colbourne: ”Mr. Rochester” and “Capt von Trapp” is, to quote Leonora: “Far too easy!” IMHO, Cerebral, honest, and an egalitarian, the wealthy widower/landowner of 1000 acres is perceived as a “recluse and miser;” Austen’s Darcy, a wealthy landowner, is perceived as taciturn/antisocial/haughty; however, over time, both learn to respect, admire and love the heroine.
63
-
G
Matt: Colbourne is not Rochester/ von Trapp. Otherwise, parallels of Austen’s own characters: Darcy = Col Brandon; Wickham = Willoughby; Frank Churchill=Henry Crawford; Edmund Bertram= Knightly; Henry Tilney=Edward Ferrars; Capt. Wentworth= George Knightly; Collins=Elton; Sir Walter Elliot=Lady Catherine/Lady Denham…etc.
60
-
P
This is a well-written and thoughtful review. You touched on many of the things that struck me as I saw an early screening. Underwhelming is the way I describe it too-- the bland new suitors are just one evidence of this. In some scenes, I was struck by the bad acting and writing. Really veering off into silly soap opera territory. It's a big letdown from Season 1, which I thoroughly enjoyed, so perhaps as you say the show would've been better left to rest so we could remember it well.
59
-
P
The plot of seasons 1 and 2 has nothing whatsoever to do with Jane Austen. The only thing the fragments of her unfinished novel have to do with the Masterpiece rendition is the names of the characters and the seaside location. Her fragments have essentially no plot, so what you’re seeing in the two seasons is completely unrelated to Jane Austen but written by others. She must be spinning in her grave—there is simply no way she would’ve been comfortable with a naked man rising out of the sea, an incestuous relationship, a couple having sex in the woods, even a pineapple filled with maggots. To present all these atrocities in Jane Austen’s name is to do her a gross disservice and must stand as a profane rendering of her spirit. According to her letters, she never wrote a scene with only men present because she’d never been in such a situation. With such scruples, there’s simply no way this Masterpiece disaster can be illuminating her essence. It is a revolting representation of her genius. She deserves better. In an attempt to make her Regency era world “dirtier, edgier, and more relevant to a modern audience,” you have presented something devoid of Jane Austen herself. We don’t go to her work to find something sexy and dirty!—we go there to discover what Regency England was actually like. Shame on you.
58
-
R
Be careful what you wish for indeed! This certainly isn’t the continuation viewers had hoped for. The “fans saved the show” narrative regarding Sanditon is getting tired, and some of the aforementioned fans feel so invested in the show’s future success that they are personally insulted by critical opinions and refuse to acknowledge any flaws the new seasons may have. And there are many, as the new head writer apparently hadn’t picked up an Austen novel until he was given that job title and the central character from the first season has been written out. It seems like season two might simply be an amalgamation of cliff notes on literally every classic literary work. How sad that Sanditon was resurrected for this. Thanks for the honest review.
54
-
O
The only thing I don't agree with in this review is calling Tom unlucky. That was way too generous. His actions or lack thereof caused Sidney to sacrifice his future with Charlotte.
50
-
O
I’m disappointed in Season 2 Episode 1. Nothing compared to Season 1. Without Theo James as the male lead, there is little hope that it will hold my interest. I’ve been called shallow for my opinion, but it’s the truth. We fell in love with Sidney Parker. Should have just left it as a broken fairy tale.
47
-
O
This is spot on. I don't know who in their right mind would think this series would be good without the character and actor who is, let's face it, the reason for the show's success. We fought so hard to renew this show and we got this joke of soap opera instead. Should have stayed canceled.
45
-
O
I agree wholeheartedly! I’ll leave season 1 as is and stay far far away from season 2 where they try to get a Sidney Parker look alike and fail miserably.
32
-
G
Well-said, be careful what you wish for is so right. I understand people don't want to admit their time was wasted but others don't need to agree!
18
-
-
G
Hi Matt, I agree with your fair and honest assessment. S2 isn't the same with out completion to Charlotte & Sidney's love story. I don't feel you're being harsh as you have always been a supporter of Season 1 and the Sisterhood's HEA campaign.
44
-
P
Very fair & honest review! It simply isn’t good at all!
44
-
O
How were you able to watch the entire series already? You can't know if it's any good at all without having seen it.
67
-
-
C
Thank you for this review. It's been over 2 years of campaigning for a show which no longer resembles what was fought for. A pale imitation of the Sidlotte ending we were encouraged multiple times to fight for. This is one viewer who shall pass.
43
-
O
Oh dear! An honest review from someone who actually liked season one and supported the campaign to save the show. Must be biased I guess 🤷♀️ And I’m pretty sure by “underwhelming” he’s talking about the writing not the actors’s looks. Not everything is a personal attack.
39
-
G
After watching the first episode VIA masterpiece zoom I have to agree with every single word and that's how the majority feel about it whether or not the express it publicly. Show should have stayed cancel
38
-
O
Excuse me, Lady Butterfly, but you are not my voice nor do you speak for me or on behalf of other fans who are looking forward to it.
63
-
P
Glad you are looking forward to it. It still doesn't change the fact that the storyline is at best mediocre.
12
-
-
B
"The majority" 😂 yeah, ok.
60
-
P
Who's the one making the most noise? Who are the ones that left twitter?
5
-
-
G
Odd. No one notified me that a survey was being taken of every fan of Sanditon season 1. That's the only way you could possibly know what the "majority" of them feels.
59
-
G
Read these reviews by people who watched.
-
-
-
R
If I base it on episode 1 alone your review is spot on! You have touched upon the same points many S1 fans have made!
38
-
O
I agree with you and this show should have stayed canceled as it has turned into a cheap copy&paste of season 1. Trying to embody everything from season 1, even down to the new characters
37
-
R
I don't think you are harsh at all, you wrote what you thought and seen. I was one that fought for S2. But unfortunately I wanted a sidlotte ending.,we were promised it, but going by the beginning of S2 we are not getting it. Badly done Justin Young, badly done.
36
-
P
Thank you, Matt, for this honest review. I've been very annoyed with other reviews that totally ignored the feelings of the fans who campaigned for season 2 to see Sidney and Charlotte reunited , see Jane's legacy respected, and feel betrayed by what is presented now. Although I appreciate that the the producers wanted to give the fans something after Theo refused the role of Sidney, they should have marketed it as something different. When you write out the title character -the fragment was originally named 'The brothers' and Sidney's name resonates in the name 'Sanditon'- you're not continuing the story, you are making a spin-off. I appreciate Justin Young's attempt to make the fans happy and his modesty, but he does not know Jane's work as well as Andrew Davies and what makes Jane Austen different from her contempories or the Brontë-sisters. As you correctly point out, this has become a 'Sound of music'/ 'Jane Eyre'/ 'Cinderella'/ 'P&P'-mash up. Even if it's good, it's not Jane Austen or what she intended with the story and they should not try to sell it as such. That is only going to create anger and disappointment. But bad communication has been this show's Achilles' heel all the way. Starting with not informing the the male lead that he was expected to do a second season; not warning for the dystopian ending of season 1, and then telling Sidney would not return while we were celebrating that our campaign had succeeded, pulling the rug from under us again.
34
-
B
Totally agree with all your points!
7
-
-
B
I agree with your honest review. This isn't Austen at all nor is it Austen inspired. It does look like a cartoon and seems to be a complete mockery of Austen. There is no Austen hero Sidney Parker. The role should have been recasted then instead of adding a boring love triangle with non Austen creations.
33
-
A
Watched the first episode in an insider preview and honestly wondered if I had signed up by mistake. The characters were like so many clones of Regency dramas seen before. The story was dull and the dialogue uninspiring. Think I won’t bother continuing so I guess I can thank the preview for saving me time.
29
-
O
I was worried about this. Each new announcement regarding the new seasons has resulted in pangs of disappointment, so it should come as no surprise that season 2 turned out to be so underwhelming. I really wanted to give this show a chance. Thanks for saving me 300 minutes of my life and the cost of a PBS subscription.
28
-
G
Don’t you get PBS for free?
3
-
-
R
Why are you attacking a legit critic and turning it into a tirade against Sidlotte fans and Theo James? Seriously there will be people who won't like the show! Just because it was saved doesn't make it automatically good. You people are obsessed with having no one criticize anything about the show 😂😂
24
-
G
It seems people believe it gives the right to attack a professional reviewer because he didn't love a show they're determined to love regardless! All because they 'saved' it!
20
-
-
G
This is a fair review of what Sanditon now is. This is not Jane Austen, not what I fought for. The hero is gone, the promised HEA cannot be. A love story? It is a tragedy and an unnecessary one.
23
-
O
I'm sorry but the Mr. Rochester wannabe looks more like Mr. Potato Head. Is this the best Britain has to offer as far as handsome actors? Good lord.
21
-
R
Good lord. Why does everyone assume that if we don’t like Season 2, it’s because of Theo James? Yes, he’s attractive and did an amazing job playing Sidney Parker, but that is not the only thing I take issue with. Do I think the character of Sidney Parker was done dirty, yes. I whole heartedly believe that Sidney Parker deserved to be happy too (not having him die a miserable death alone). Aside from that, I really wanted to like season 2, but I didn’t. It felt like a cheesy version of the Sound of Music mixed in with some crazy soap opera plots. I couldn’t understand when or how Rose feel in love Alexander. I just wasn’t on the ride with her at all. The writing was sub par. Andrew Davies is known for writing in the subtle non verbal acting that brings a story to life. This was lacking. The storyline was borrowed. I can be on board with a new love interest if it was done well. This missed the mark from casting, writing, acting and directing.
18
-
O
I’ve watched three episodes now because I care about charlottes character and wonder what happens to her. I’m sadly very disappointed in this season. It’s unbelievable to me that the writers had a clean slate and gave us this. The governess storyline is old and tiresome and seeing Charlotte thar way brings tears to my eyes. Colbourne is not a “Sidney” replacement even though it seems people are begging him to be. He’s not doing it for me and so many others. Lennox is a nice looking man but he’s the one they are making the bad guy apparently. So where are we going with this? Charlotte stuck with a brooding man with issues regarding his late wife? Oh some are so glad Charlotte will be able to heal another man. How about someone come and let Charlotte heal? Writers did you ever think of that scenario? Lennox so far is the only one calling her out and telling her she is better than being a governess and that she deserves more. But according to the ones who know it all, he’s going to be the dishonest creep. Can you really not come up with a more convincing storyline for that poor girl? I can’t even stomach to watch it because (sorry if the actor reads this) but casting did a horrible job. Colbourne will not settle my soul that Charlotte didn’t settle. I’d rather her go off and be happily single after Sidney leaves her some money. 😂 that’s just a pipe dream. But come on writers and casting directors, find an interesting man!
18
-
C
Completely awful, why do they waste our time dragging us into a story only to break our hearts and leave us furious and wishing we had never watched it on the first place. Idiots. We want to see the rest of the story with Charlotte and Sydney, period. If you cannot then don’t bother. And they didn’t even give us a good ending. It wasn’t even well written…. Sydney rushes to say goodbye and she has nothing to say??? She should have chewed him out it tears, reprimanding him for being so careless with her heart and accusing him of doing the very same thing to her that was done to him by Eliza that left him miserable for a decade. Then he should have said you are absolutely right and apologize profusely, in tears, and they should have kissed goodbye. And they could have parted ways… with I do love you, maybe one day our paths will meet again.
If they won’t give us what we hope for, what Jane Austen would have given us, they at least owe us a beautifully written ending to their story. It was like they gave up at the end…. Quit writing. Ran out of money or something and just slapped an awful ride off in the carriage with tears in our faces.
Where was the rich dialogue and fierce arguing that made thier relationship so amazing to watch. Hogwash!!!!!! I am so upset! Can you tell? 🤣😩
18
-
P
It's not exactly what happened between Eliza & Sidney 10 years ago. The only reason Sidney obliged himself to marry Eliza was to keep his brother & his family out of debtor's prison. But yes, the S1 ending was terribly rushed & unAusten.
8
-
-
G
Oh my. You weren’t kidding when you said it gets worse.
16
-
P
I watched the new episode & it didn't hold my interest like S1E1. It was too rushed & a mishmash of other Austen's novels & who thought killing Sidney off from yellow fever all alone & dying a horrible death was a great idea?! His character brought a lot to the show & had ties to the Parkers, Georgiana, Babington & Crowe but many others also didn't return. They should have just recast Sidney.
16
-
G
I was really looking forward to season 2 but so far I’ve been unimpressed by pretty dull and predictable storylines. Maybe it will improve, who knows? From what I’ve seen so far I agree with your review.
15
-
R
The premier show was a dissapointment. Very....boring. They got rid of Sydney the way I thought. Althouth Tom Weston-Jones got is bare chest shot, he's ...stiff. The other potential Sydney rip off is a soft, plump and unattractive widower. And the story shifts from Austen to Charlotte Bronte. Governess to a older man that might have a mad ex wife hidden in the house. Madness will be the theme. Edward also driving Esther mad, etc. So far...a dud. Don't know if I will watch #2.
15
-
C
Disappointed! The acting is lacking as much as the new actors and story line.
14
-
O
Won't watch anymore
14
-
O
I think Sidney should have been recast to continue the story line in the same vein which would have been more consistent with Jane Austen's writing. The viewers would have adapted better than attempting to completely swing away from the original story.
13
-
B
You nailed it. If Austen had written such a wretched tale as is being presented in season 2 -- no one would be reading Austen today. Better to have ended the series after season one.
13
-
R
You want to avoid spoilers then don't read reviews. This is how reviews work!
13
-
C
Episode 5. Oh wow. So good in so many ways and so bad in others. The Esther/Clara/Edward story actually came alive this episode. But Lennox’s true colors came out and Colbourne basically tells Charlotte she’s coming to his place after Lennox already practically mauled her. His story is so eh, and when he tells rhe story he is pitiful. What is attractive about that? I’m all for forgiveness but just own up to it and say something a little better than “I was afraid to tell you” bs. How many times have women heard that excuse? There is just no comparison to last season in any way. Sidney was a real hero with every episode leaving me breathless and wanting to see more and know more about him. He was intriguing and interesting and definitely fun to look at. Colbourne is boring and forgettable. This season is a waste honestly and I don’t know how they can make up for it in season 3 even knowing how it ends this season. It doesn’t leave me wanting more. Sorry sanditon but you shot yourself in the foot with this one.
12
-
G
Watched episode 4 and frankly, this show keeps getting worse. I hate Edward and am sorry he is back. Poor Esther, getting abused by him once again. The senior brother is still an idiot. Only relief is Arthur and the burgeoning romance between Georgina and the artist. I may not have like the ending of Season 1, but at least there was an ending. If I have to wait another year to see what happens to everyone, won’t be back.
12
-
P
The one thing the producers have not understood, and you neither apparently, is that this discussion wasn't about Theo, it was about respecting Jane's legacy. I'm not a fan of Theo, frankly I have no appetite for his work after the stunt he pulled. I'm a fan of Jane. Her heroines do not move on to other suitors. Marrying someone other than their first love is a fate that befalls flirtatious secondary characters, like Marianne Dashwood and Louisa Musgrove... as a 'punishment'. We cannot want that for Charlotte! Jane intended to have Charlotte end up with Sidney. He's the title-character! There was no logic in writing him out. Sidney should have been recast or they should have found another way of reuniting him with Charlotte. If this new production gives you consolation and makes you happy, I am glad for you, but many Janeites are devasted, because it is unlikely we will ever see a reunion of Sidney and Charlotte as Jane would have liked. This new production may not be bad, but they should have presented it as an 'alternative outcome', a spin-off, not as a continuation of her story, then it would be better appreciated. It seems more inspired by other writers than Jane, and they should certainly not try to advertise this as what we asked for. This is 'Charlotte's continued Journey' by Justin Young, not Jane Austen's 'Sanditon', 'The Brothers'.
12
-
B
I agree with EVERYTHING that you said about Season 2. It’s such a let down from the acting to the directing and the editing. The producers should have quit when Andrew Davies quit. Jane would be very disappointed.
11
-
B
He's a professional critic, he's allowed to give an honest opinion!
Have you seen the whole of Season 2?
11
-
G
I love Jane Austin 's Sanditon, it totally broke my heart when Sidney Parker died , or not. I was going too make up my Owen ending.
11
-
G
Only if by “explore” you mean lightly borrow/cherry pick from other Austen novels/adaptations, while heavily ripping off the Victorian canon that wouldn’t even commence for another 2 decades or more….
10
-
G
They absolutely should have quit while they were ahead. It was a mistake to end S1 as they did (I’m not sure what Andrew Davies was on), but there also was a slice of ambiguity there - the central characters still in love, no one actually married off - yet - and, importantly, no one dead. What we were lacking is the narrative payoff, and we’re still lacking that because the central relationship that the series was built around has been dismantled. It doesn’t matter how the story is continued, if it doesn’t the deliver the payoff it’s going to be disappointing viewing. But to add to, as so often is the case when a show flounders, S2 wasn’t even a particularly rigorous effort, as you note. A lot of that probably had to do with budget, which begs the question: what was the point? That’s what I’m still puzzled about; shows continue/renew when the ingredients for success are there, and that includes the writing and acting and, of course, viewing numbers that translate into profit. The whole reason Sanditon wasn’t picked up for a S2 by ITV in late 2019 was disappointing ratings. The economics never made sense to me, but I guess streaming platforms have made production and distribution cost effective and are comparatively free of ratings constraints. That and a gamble that they could ride Bridgerton’s Regency-set coattails. But Jane Austen’s last fragment of a novel deserved better.
10
-
R
I completely agree with your review. I hate that they killed Sidney off. I truly believe for all his faults, he deserved a happy ending too (not to die alone far from away from family). It just seemed cruel. The plot was uninspired and dragged. The characters has zero chemistry and I couldn’t understand how and when Charlotte fell in love with what’s his face. The leading men ( I’m sorry to say) had zero sex appeal. I wish they didn’t do a season 2 without the original cast.
10
-
B
Thanks for your honest review. It's what many previously loyal/passionate fans have feared since the casting announcement. I will make up my own mind, out of curiosity, but any emotional investment I had in this series is gone. I don't regret the time spent discussing the show, making friends, campaigning, it was a blast, but I am beginning to think it would have been a better legacy to Austen and have had greater artistic integrity to leave the unfinished fragment as an unfinished fragment.
10
-
C
I’m hear broken with season 2. They killed Sidney off?! I wish they would have just ended the series rather than have this season 2. I watched it but I was detached and bored.
9
-
R
Isn’t it his job to review?
8
-
P
I would like to see a plot twist where Sidney was incorrectly identified as deceased. Then, he returns (recast obviously) right before Charlotte is to marry someone else, thereby putting the viewers through some tug of war episodes. And, finally the main characters, Sidney and Charlotte, get together as Jane Austen usually ends her stories
7
-
B
That would be great! I would also like a book (at the very least) by Andrew Davies telling the story of how they would have done Sanditon Season 2&3 had Theo James returned.
5
-
-
C
I’ve seen almost the entire season. It will be easily forgotten. Mark my words. Season 1 was amazing. Season 2, not so much. Theo knew what he would be getting himself into.
7
-
P
Indeed. Theo deciding not to come back was regrettable, but it should not have been the end of the character. Sidney was the title character, the core of the story, without him, the plot becomes hollow. Many suggestions have been made by the fans for recasting, or working with body doubles filmed from behind, an injured Sidney whose face had become unrecognisable...But the producers have been very focussed on actor-fandoms, forgetting that they were working with the legacy of a famous author with fans of her own....I'm not a Theo fan, I like Kris Marshall better, but my love for Jane goes much further back and I'm sorry for everyone that worked hard on this new production, but to like and ending that violates the principles of her work feels like I'm betraying her...so I'm just going to withdraw to the world of Sidlotte fanfics and thank the cast and crew of season 1 for inspiring them.
7
-
C
I did like Kris Martin but after seeing his racist comments resurface this past summer from his Death in Paradise interview, I changed my mind.
2
-
C
*Marshall
-
-
P
THEO JAMES must come back to Sanditon or Jane Austin will haunt him for ruining this series. That final look from Season 1 did not say the romance between S&C had run it course.
6
-
G
For pity’s sake, he’s a critic - critiquing the show is literally what he’s paid to do - and at least for now there is still a concept (growing dimmer by the hour I fear) of free speech. Stop with the groupthink Twitter mantras. Embarrassing.
5
-
O
I was annoyed by the season 1 ending, waiting for Charlotte to say something and end with a parting kiss. Wish they could have given us that at the very least! Season 2 doesn’t have the same magic for me
4
-
O
Watched Season 2. Sidney being dead was a bit of a blow to the whole romance thing but hey ho Charlotte really didn't appear bothered. I have got more upset about losing my keys. As for the whole story line it was a bit of a replay from season 1. Guy no1 more articulate manages to gain Charlottes trust and warn her off Guy no2. Only for Charlotte to later find out that Guy no2 was actually the good guy - she doesn't learn from her mistakes. But the twist is the exact same thing happens to her little sis.
As for the rich family even though they were all dealt with in season 1, they return with flimsy excuses to manipulate each other again to try to gain an inheritance from an Aunt that looks like she will outlive everybody out of pure spite.
Episode 6 appears to be neatly tidying up the ends quite quickly only for them to yet again make sure there are no happy endings even when they are the right choice.
Season 1 was great, well very good. But season 2 turned out to be pants and I really made the effort to watch it all because of season 1 it just failed to get any better.
3
-
C
It only got worse.
3
-
R
I agree, certainly, but I would like to propose the following suggestion: it appears more and more plausible -after having watched BBC productions since the ‘70’s that there’s an inverse relation between how much is spent on decor and lavish sets and the quality of the script, the acting and the direction. It has struck, particularly in the past 7 or 8 years that shows like Beecham House - there are many others as well - are hugely impressive as you watch them, but almost instantly forgotten.
3
-
P
I actually watched Beecham House & found it a little boring & barely finished watching the entire season.
3
-
-
R
I agree, it was disappointing. It felt weak and like it fell short of the potential it definitely had! I didn't dislike Colbourne, but there was little chemistry and not nearly enough heart grabbing build up. Even the scenes with Lennox didn't stir any emotions like her relationship with Stringer. After Sidney Parker, you've got to come out guns blazing to even attempt to have an equally good show in the romance department and it just didn't. Fingers crossed for a better season 3!
2
-
G
If we’re talking casual viewers, their creative choices for S2-S3 might not have that much of an impact because there is a stable cadre (1-2M) of viewers who will watch whatever Masterpiece slates on Sunday night, good or bad. The streaming numbers may be more interesting as they have to be viewed over time, but it’s difficult to imagine they will be higher than at the peak interest in this show in late 2019 and early 2020, driven largely by that ambiguously unhappy ending and fan reaction to it. And the latter is where the impact is already very apparent and has been since May 2021 when it was confirmed that there wouldn’t be the narrative payoff fans wanted and expected. Looking at the active fan base across platforms (twitter, ao3, etc.) it’s empirically evident that active fandom interest, participation, and enthusiasm is down 50-80% (depending on the metric) since that peak period in 2019-2020, as is critical interest - only 10 professional reviewers even bothered to write a review for S2 versus 31 for S1. And I note that even PBS didn’t bother to run the show during either February or May sweeps. That’s telling.
1
-
P
Sidney was the worst and easily the most intolerable character of the series. His removal is the best thing that could have happened to the series.
-
P
Sidney was the worst and easily the most intolerable character of the series. His removal is the best thing that could have happened to the series.
-
C
Justin Young specifically stated Rochester and Captain von Trapp as influences! Egalitarian? Can’t say I noticed that. He didn’t pay his daughter or niece any attention until Charlotte showed up. He certainly didn’t treat his employee with any respect – she said so herself. Let’s hope he improves in Season 3.
-
C
Incorrect. Sidney Parker is one of “The Brothers” (Austen’s original title) and is mentioned several times by Tom Parker, and appears towards the end of the fragment. He is clearly intended to be Charlotte’s beau, as nearly all Austen scholars agree.
Watchlist Easy access to only the shows you care about — all in one simple place
Alerts Only important notifications — when a show is returning, when it becomes available to stream, and more.
Special Offers Exclusive products we release related to your favorite shows and streaming services