Support the Café

Search our Site

Grantchester reviews

Production still from Grantchester showing the star

Grantchester reviews

Did you see the opening episode of Grantchester? It was reviewed favorably in a number of newspapers, including the New York Times and Wall Street Journal.

From the Times review:

“Grantchester” will be breezy fun for fans of the form, though the more discerning will be put off by how rudimentary the actual murder mysteries are after being squeezed into 50 minutes (half the norm for this type of show). Others are liable to find it faintly ridiculous, more of a haiku than an actual drama. It benefits from the presence of the veteran Robson Green (“Wire in the Blood,” “Touching Evil”) as Sidney’s sidekick, Inspector Keating.

The Times took a nuanced view, seeming to find the show enjoyable albeit implausible. The Wall Street Journal had less qualified praise.

From the Journal review:

What also moves this show along are the stories about murders—which Sidney finds himself drawn into solving after forming a friendship with a disheveled policeman, ‘Geordie’ Keating (Robson Green). Each of the crimes or moral misdeeds—whether they involve suicide, adultery, bigotry, euthanasia, class snobbery or greed—reveals Sidney to be ahead of his time in most respects, and yet resolute in his faith.

Did you enjoy the first episode? Will you tune in for the second? What was your (spoiler-free, please!) take?


Posted by David Streever


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Lipnicki

Watching the first episode was intriguing enough for me to watch subsequent episodes but I must say I was not overwhelmed with the mystery or the first airing. However, all that changed as the series progressed. I have only watched up through episode 3 and I am hooked. I find the series to have more depth than I expected, the acting excellent and the time period a joy to watch. Let’s hope the series continues. It is a keeper.

John Farrell

I found it incredibly boring — slow moving with curiously unengaged characters. This was pretty much the same reaction I had to the book upon which it’s based. Too bad. The premise is interesting and the vicar is serious eye candy. But this is a non-starter for me. As for forms of address, I prefer “Father,” but will take “Mister” over “Reverend” any day of the week.

Paul Woodrum

I quite liked the first episode: a man with one wife, two mistresses, and bullet in his head. Like Cabot Cove, Grantchester seems to be one of those charming villages with a murder-a-week residency requirement.

As to titles, when I did an exchange with the vicar of an Anglo-Catholic parish near Brighton, I was generally addressed as Father, but also as Vicar, Padre and Mr., and (gasp, gasp) Reverend. Today first names following the title seem to be all the vogue. And John, I suspect the quandary is not so much with “Father” as with it’s counterpart, “Mother” for the ladies.

David Allen

I thoroughly enjoyed the entire 6 episodes series. I watched it via live streaming from a website in Europe. It develops some interesting characters, has intriguing story arcs that leave off and start again a few episodes later. You get glimpses of a burden the priest bears throughout the series and don’t learn the full story until episode 6. I found it interesting that not once in the entire show were any of the clergymen referred to as Father, only by their 1st names by those close to them and Mister So-and-So by everyone else. Push through what may seem a slow start in episode 1 and you will likely enjoy it and all the eye candy, not least the vicar.

Bro David

JC Fisher

My mom told me that Episcopal priests in her youth (California 1920-50s) were always “Mister”. It’s interesting to me that it changed so much, so fast (because by the time I was aware of it in 1960s-70s), they were always “Father” (unless they were first name only). Clearly, Anglo-Catholic practice took off post-WW2!

John Chilton

JC –

You’ll see “Mister” if you read old Journals of PECUSA dioceses. Yes, I remember when the days when it was “Mister” in speaking to an Episcopal minister.

Wow, if we’d stuck with that life would be so much easier — we could use Mr., Mrs, Miss and Ms. We created quite a quandary with “Father.” I wonder if it was on purpose as some sort of tactic to delay inclusion of women in the priesthood.

Mark Archer

It seemed a bit slow getting going but we ended up enjoying it and plan to tune in again. I agree with Daniel in that it’s nice to see a clergy person portrayed as more than a one dimensional character.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café