johnrbomar This series became such a left tilting soap box as to become distracting. No wonder it contained only three episodes.It seemed written to please and reinforce the ideas of liberals and extreme feminists, angry at the world. It became more propaganda than an effective portrayal of James Herriot's novels.The settings were pretty good as are most UK productions but, as has been said, the characters were two dimensional and seemed to be props for subtle socialist claptrap. As I watched it I was aware of someone trying to be politically manipulating.

windanafive I have to give it only 8 out of 10 because it looks like we're going to be left hanging. If it weren't for that, I'd probably give it a 9 or even 10.One thing Herriot himself did occasionally in his books was to include events of the time and people's attitudes and how they affected his life and others. Particularly reflective of this is his book that covered the time period when he was called up and his first child was born. Although frequently the events in that book were used as a springboard to another anecdote in his life as a vet, not all of them were, such as the time he sneaked off to Darrowby without permission. Another situation that springs to mind is the gloomy attitude of one farmer towards James' health and how after each visit that farm, James would examine himself in a mirror, muttering to himself that he felt fine.In this series, events and attitudes of various people in his life are included and how those events and people influence and shape him, not just as a vet but also as a person.It would be very interesting to know just how close the portrayals of the characters were to each real person. I can easily see they could be quite close or a blend of a few characters (to limit the number of characters and avoid making it confusing) and it's interesting to consider those characters. I would have to disagree with any view that the characters were fairly two-dimensional. My first reaction to one character was to dislike him and consider him a shallow, fairly selfish person but as the series progressed, he did unexpected things on behalf of others, showing him to be a more complex character than he initially appeared.Let's hope they do eventually give us more of the story.

martijn-56 A score of 6 is all The Young Herriot gets? This was surely not that bad at all! I own and have seen all the classic 1970's James Herriot episodes, and comparing them to this series like the first reviewer seems to me like comparing two different eras; it is not the point. But each may have their opinion so I will give my view. I love the old episodes of course, and no new series can top them, but all I can say is I love the Young Herriot, too. I found this new series a good idea as a 'prequel' to the series from the 1970's, and I hope there will be more to come. I can't believe it seems that the BBC so far decided to ax the series, just when things started to take off. I wish we could find out more about what is in store for young Herriot, his student friends, his landlady and life in general at the campus. So far it has been nothing but sheer fun; not only the classic trial and error animal curing stuff we are used to from Christopher Timothy in the 70's but this time the rather shy but determined and stubborn young James is surrounded by the lovely couple and his student friends Whirly Tyson and Rob McAloon. Whirley, played by Amy Manson, is a sort of Amelia Earhart archetype of the independent but still feminine woman, fighting for respect in what was and probably still is a male dominated world. This gives not only many an interesting sideplot on historical issues then relevant, but it also causes her a lot of trouble. Not in the least because of her attitude against a professor who is anti-women.Her partner is the character Rob McAloon, played by Ben Lloyd Huges. He is just great and yet another of many wonderful young actors that keep on showing what British charm is all about. I really hope the BBC will see a lot more of these two since honestly I love them more than the role of James Herriot itself. The previous reviewer thought of them as flat and irrelevant, distracting from Herriot. But I think they are needed since the Young Herriot alone would, when true to his character, have been too serious and timid. Both Whirly and Rob are a sort of Tommy and Tuppence partner in crime couple we knew from Agatha Christie. They make this series just both classy and FUN! Acting and costumes etc were fine, of course, that is what BBC does best, and in all, I found it REALLY entertaining. I do not see why the first reviewer (although I found the review funny) complained about stereotypes. After all, the original James Herriot was also light entertainment full of stereotypes. Indeed this series is no different. For instance there is the similarity with the landlady now and the old lady who owned the dog Tricky Woo in the 70s. Or remember how Sigfried and Tristan were just poles (one responsible, the other just forever drinking and playing, just as Rob and Whirly now). I saw once an interview where Robert Hardy as an actor even got tired sometimes of always having to play the person who lost his temper. So character development has never been a strong point nor an issue in the Herriot series. It nevertheless did not stop the fun, that lied in simply the entertainment value and the atmosphere of the country life in the old days. That is done really well once again. It just makes me wish to become a vet in the pre war days in rural England! In the end, it is about Herriot and the Young Herriot is also here a person who wants to be a vet in heart and soul so I am sure if there will be more seasons, we will get to know and like him just as we did with Christopher Timothy. Just as then, it will take time, so only 3 episodes is too early to judge. I think the Young Herriot has a lot going for it, for instance it does a better job in showing us some issues of the times where the original did not. True, it must be said, The Young Herriot is light entertainment but if your aim is not hoping to find gold nuggets like the all-time knock-out series Brideshead Revisited or so, but just to relax on a Sunday it still shows again that the BBC is the best when it comes to drama. So once again, BBC, please continue this series!

sephalon "Young James Herriot" covers the early adventures of our favorite rural veterinarian. Portrayed over a three episode miniseries, there was plenty of time for them to tell the story. And while certain aspects were genuinely wonderful, the bad outweighed the good.The show shoots itself in the foot by wandering away from the character we came to see. It attempts to bring in period issues (women's equality, fascism, persecution of Jews at the time) but ends up indulging itself in pointless history lessons and boring irrelevant side-plots.Rather than portray an intelligent, thoughtful feminist, they have a shrill, infantile and arrogant harpy to represent the entire women's struggle. And her enemy was an equally straw-man stereotype chauvinist with no redeeming virtues at all. And of course, the local contingent of conservatives aren't just conservatives, they're genuine fascists. Finally, there's the landlady who has a ridiculous amount of screen time despite being utterly irrelevant to all plots.The characters (other than James) we so shockingly two-dimensional as to distract from the otherwise good medical plot lines.Let's end on some positive points: The plots related to diagnosing and treating animals were wonderful. Also, production quality and period setting were above reproach. They give a good feeling for being in the 1930s Glasgow. Of course, period dramas are the UK's specialty.Conclusion: If you can overlook dismal characters, civics lessons, vague liberal soap-boxing and irrelevant plots, the nuggets of gold in the muck may make the show worthwhile to you.