Land Girls (2009–2011) User Reviews (34)

Stir Well and Serve Cold

[richievee · 6/10 · 22 April 2012]

This program has very fine actors doing their best with woefully inferior scripts. Every character is a stereotype of others we have seen before. Time and time again they behave stupidly in order to advance the plot and intensify the false sense of drama. Sorry, but it just rings hollow and false. There are precious few honest steps taken through the course of "Land Girls." Instead, the audience is manipulated, often with the use of modern PC sensibilities. I have forced myself to watch all fifteen episodes, and it has not been an easy chore. The scripts of Dominique Moloney, Dale Overton, Paul Matthew Thompson, Jude Tindall, Joy Wilkinson, and even series creator Roland Moore fall flat, dumbed down to the shallowest of viewers.

And then, in the midst of all this mediocrity, there comes a single brilliant episode that shows what might have been. Rob Kinsman has written a terrific script for "The Enemy Within," which is episode 3 of series 3. Here the dialogue crackles with intelligence. Suddenly, we are confronted with real people, not television templates. After watching "The Enemy Within," I thought perhaps "Land Girls" had finally found its stride. But, alas, it was not meant to be. Back to the same old predictability we go, and our patience is tested by stupid characters behaving stupidly. Clearly, this production should have hired Rob Kinsman from the start and stayed with him for the entire run. Then they might have really had something to be proud of. As it is, all too often the result is embarrassingly bad.

Land Girls review

[jackipoulin · 7/10 · 13 August 2017]

Liked the series but they left you hanging without wrapping things up with several stories. One character came back as a different person (the first one was better looking). There isn't going to be a 4th series and again left dangling. Changed the girls too many times. Could have been a lot better, loved the time period, the actors were great, gave insight into a unsung group of women who sacrificed and served during the war. I liked that. Overall enjoyed the series, disappointed that it didn't continue and maybe bring back some stories they left unfinished to wrap them up.

Relax and Enjoy!

[admin-55780 · 8/10 · 5 January 2018]

What a bunch of wingers we have in here! People need to chill out, relax and stop nit picking. This is superbly acted and very entertaining. Thank you to all involved. I've just got Netflix and loved this series - hurry up with Episode 4 please!

Watchable but a bit disappointing

[didi-5 · 11 July 2010]

Riddled with clichés, this daytime drama about the land girls (women conscripted to work on the land during World War II) is in five parts and boasts a competent cast in a sanitised script - a very PC and simplistic view of a country under siege.

We first meet the four new land girls at the start of the first episode - snooty Nancy (Summer Strallen) who wears high heels and expects a soldier to carry her luggage from the station, sisters Annie (Christine Bottomley) and Bea (Jo Woodcock) - one bitter, one naive, and salt of the earth Joyce (Becci Gemmell) whose family were wiped out in the Coventry bombings. We also meet Esther (Susan Cookson), who keeps the girls in order, black-marketeer and farmer Finch (Mark Benton), and the Lord and Lady of the House (Nathaniel Parker and Sophie Ward).

There's also a Home Guard Sergeant, Tucker (Danny Webb) who likes the feeling of being in charge, and in town there's a group of GIs.

From here it is very much ticking the boxes - there's an illicit affair, a soldier going AWOL, suspected collaborators, a marriage based on hate, and a bit of political correctness about black GIs and segregation. It's watchable enough but somehow I was expecting a bit more.

Although it looks great and as if a bit of money has been thrown at it, Land Girls is historically shaky and very much has the air of 'we've seen all this before'. A bit of a missed opportunity.

I loved it but I am a hopeless romantic.

[magicman195705 · 10/10 · 18 April 2019]

I am not sure why some people here gave it such a low rating. People have forgotten that it's television. I found the stories very rememerble and touching. It did end abruptly but shows get canceled all the time and never finish their story lines. I would watch any further stories about the land girls.

Reasonable Series but Beware of Stereotypes

[mazinman-1 · 6/10 · 4 May 2015]

I enjoyed "Land Girls" well enough but got a little tired of the "obnoxious American" stereotype. The character development of specific roles was fleshed out a fair amount, some more than others, but all-in-all pretty well.

The young American corporal that takes advantage of the young WLA girl was a little forced, as were most of the American roles. The imposed American segregation was hit over the viewer's head like battle-axe; and the loud, demanding American ordnance defense contractor wore thin. It seemed it would have been a good opportunity to show how generous the American GIs were famous for being when contributing to local British families or throwing benefits for the numerous orphans moved to the country-side.

The shining stars were definitely the leading ladies of the series. Especially of note was the fine acting prowess of Susan Cookson as Esther Reeves, the senior WLA lady, and her specific moral challenges she encounters. In contrast, Celine Hizli (Connie Carter) performed her role with the finesse of a D-Day invasion. Interesting to watch Mykola Allen (Martin Reeves) mature through the series as his real-life puberty developed in real-time on screen.

I binged watch on Netflix so Land Girls had little more impact than watching it as a weekly TV series. I think it would have moved a little too slowly if I had to drudge along week to week.

The Ahistoric Historians

[rlong7246 · 8/10 · 29 June 2018]

The series is well acted. The complaint here about "cliches" is itself one. Look up the history and look it up from first-person, eye-witness research. The events are based on real-life experiences and the protagonists being women should not frighten away legitimate historians who understand the time period and the sacrifices British women had to endure. The shape of the events are far closer to real history than some of the bleating-heart (not a typo) critics imagine. Yes, it is a soap opera. That was a given, by the way, to anyone who started watching it. But the position of women in Britain during the war and the dynamics that could and did occur are a part of history that also shapes the future for that society. For that focus, alone the series deserves respect. If the negative critics of this series are Americans, they can be forgiven for their ignorance. If the critics are British, they can only be apologists for the behavior of officials who had totally lost their moral bearings.

WARNING: It's a daytime soap opera!

[chrissso · 7/10 · 11 June 2017]

Aficionados of WW2 films take note … this series was not written for you and you will be disappointed! Indeed this series was produced for BBC Daytime broadcast and received several "daytime" TV awards.

That said I watched anyway and was surprisingly disappointed! Why surprisingly? Well I knew it would be soapy. I knew it would be overly dramatic and shallow. What I didn't expect was to find a very well-produced and "somewhat" informative production. In short this series could have been a great WW2 series as opposed to an interesting daytime soap opera and that was disappointing!

The biggest problem is that the series suffers from an extremely inconsistent story line AKA bad writing. One moment it's compelling, dramatic and informative (great to learn about the Women's Land Army or the politics of the day), the next it's totally sophomoric, over-dramatic and unbelievable. More so the non-stop clichés make it a tough row to hoe (get it?)

On the other hand it is a great period piece that seems to capture the Britain's WW2 experience well. Particularly pleasing were the solid actors … decent CGI … and exceptional cinematography, locations, sets and soundtrack (excepting S2 theme song)

In the end I enjoyed the series despite the fact I often found myself rolling my eyes. Most importantly I learned a few things.

7 of 10 stars … cheers!

POST: Shame on the BBC for releasing this without subtitles! In this day and age there is no excuse for this … especially if you plan to sell in Australia and America.

Period satisfaction

[ginasharp · 10/10 · 1 September 2020]

This is a period piece which I thoroughly enjoyed. It has drama, adventure, suspense and an era that I am very interested in. Not sure how true to life it is, but there was "land girls" that took jobs at farms during WW11 and I imagine some of this drama went on! The acting was great in my opinion, I was able to "get lost" in the era. For period lovers, its a must! It is clean and no worries of inappropriate scenes.

Watchable but with flaws

[sarahhg-77460 · 7/10 · 9 November 2019]

I love any BBC period series and lap them up especially when I can watch them in one hit. In my opinion, Home Fires, was a much stronger series with great actors and great dialogue. The characters grew and you could bond with them. I immediately got disappointed first with the American segregation thing. "Not again" I thought, thank goodness it didn't last. Young girl meats Yank, falls pregnant, oh hum! I agree the last episode was good, damn, I wish that had been the first. A few inaccuracies. One with the detached retina. I've had 4 operations in both eyes and the second lot, when it was discovered almost right away, my feet hardly touched the ground as I went to GP, eye specialist and then the surgeon in one day to save my sight. I wasn't hit on the head at anytime, they just happened. The abortion bit, with the doctor from the makeshift hospital coming to save a botched procedure, he would have to report it. How did Joyce, who was a hairdresser before the war, became a land army girl and then a nurse? Did I miss her doing 4 years somewhere? Despite all that, I did enjoy the series and hope if not more to come, can someone write a book like they did with Homes Fires, to finish things off.

Very disappointing.

[jamison0601 · 5/10 · 2 February 2018]

I really wanted to love this series. Its England, its WWII...usually all I need to love a show. The acting is very good, best thing about it. But the writing is just dreadful. The characters are put in ridiculous situations. They are breaking each others hearts, stabbing each in the back, being generally vicious to each other...then in the very next scene they are sitting next to each other in church as if nothing happened. The continuity is non existent. Cliche plots where they hold on to secrets that just make things far worse and its just so unrealistic. It only makes the viewer frustrated, not left in suspense. Many of the characters are just not likeable, and for only 5 episodes a season, its difficult to bond with them, and then the actors dont return for the next season so it was moot anyway. Even Joyce lost me in season 2 by leaving Tucker in the rabbit trap. Ridiculous, no matter what happened between them, the adrenaline would have made her help him...not sit there having a therapist session. And when she was following Martin to the shed...on a horse and cart?? How stealthy was that...and then Martin didnt hear her? Ridiculous. Just two examples of cringe worthy plots and scenes. All that being said...great acting, great scenery, great costumes and set dressing. Definitely a nice 40s wartime feel. This show could've been brilliant, but the writing just ruined it. In a time of Downton, Victoria. Crown, Foyles, Home Fires, etc etc, this show was done a great disservice. It deserved better.

Great drama-filled series

[reperioca · 10/10 · 2 August 2018]

I thoroughly enjoyed this series. Perhaps those looking for historical accuracy will find faults, but if you are looking for a well-developed drama and superior casting and acting, this series is really one of a kind. I didn't know any of the actors prior to watching, but really appreciated all of them even the vilains. Wonderful piece of drama. I've watched the series twice!

Cute period piece

[Calicodreamin · 7/10 · 31 December 2019]

A fun series following the lives of women left behind during the war as they work on a farm.

How many clichés can you fit into one series?

[pensman · 4/10 · 5 July 2013]

This series has some fine actors and those familiar with the BBC will recognize them by face if not by name: Mark Benton, Nathaniel Parker, Danny Webb, and Sophie Ward. Unfortunately they are cast in a series that lacks imagination. Set in WWII, the series follows several land girls, city women who volunteered to work on farms as the men were off in the war, and their clichéd lives. Will the status grubbing one be able to push out the current Lady of the manor and snag her husband; will the incredibly naive one get through her petition to integrate the American troops and deal with her one night leg over and inevitable pregnancy by a roguish American soldier; will the plain married one survive the loss of her handsome flier husband? It is hard to care about any of these characters and contrived hardships. I suggest you spend your time with the vastly superior Call the Midwife.

How hard is it to get medical facts right?

[douglasscarol123 · 4 April 2015]

I've watched Land Girls to the bitter end, and feel several IQ points less intelligent now. Really, as other reviewers have said, the series is rife with historical inaccuracies. But as one BBC spokesman said, period pieces don't have to be accurate. Really?

Most annoying to me, though, were the episodes in which Martin, the young boy, gets hit in the face by a barn door. He gets up and walks home, with a bit of a headache. But later, he mentions that he "can't see" a page of writing, although somehow he has no problem getting about.

Some days, or weeks? later, he goes to the doctor and finds out he has "detached retinas" (although he can still see), which means he'll go blind without an operation.

Apparently no one did a blind bit of research on this: In order to have both retinas detach, you'd have to be hit extremely hard on the back of the head, and would have not been trotting around soon after. Also, if your retinas are detached, you simply would not be able to see, and after waiting for weeks for the "operation" it's unlikely that there would still be any viable tissue left. 20 years after this period piece, retinal surgery was still in its infancy, with low rates of success.

Of course the "operation" was a plot device that had consequences that took the series through several episodes.

But really, is it that difficult for script writers to do a bit of research? I think they must count on people being so ignorant about history and other facts that they don't notice glaring errors. Perhaps they think we all have retinal detachments.

Great show

[Netflixfan1912 · 8/10 · 2 May 2020]

I liked this show. It goes about the history of England during war, that really impressed me. I recommend this show for you, but you have to see for yourself what you think about it. During the show the actors are undergoing different events, like drama and the characters act very good. Good show with quality. Unfortunately this show doesn't exist of many episodes.

Entertaining but could have had some more (spoilers!)

[markmonkhfx · 7/10 · 13 September 2020]

The series was not bad to watch. The characters were entertaining and you couldnt help but feel bad for the lady of the manor. Each season needed an extra chapter or two each and the final frames of the 3rd series left me with more questions, making Dr Channing more mysterious than ever.

Heartwarming, although inaccurate

[Roughmusic · 9/10 · 28 July 2020]

Never knew inaccuracy and war could be so heartwarming. Yes, there are untied ends. Yes, the cast gets recast with no explenation. And yes, the inaccuracies are many. But who cares. It's a brilliantly beautiful show, and touches upon the pretty untold subject of Land Girls. Great acting and even some nice morals to the story. Only sad part is there only were 3 seasons. Loved it.

Love BBC

[sassygirlw · 10/10 · 3 September 2017]

I just watched Land Girls for the first time on Netflex . I absolutely enjoyed it so very much. I watched the whole series in two days. I am so disappointed that it is no longer on the air. Is there any possibility that they will make more? I think BBC makes the most excellent shows. I live in Texas and I don't like anything they put on. I have also watched all of the Father Brown series too. I can't wait for season 6 to come out. It too is well written and I love it. I first started watching Keeping up Appearance. I just loved how funny it was. Thank you so much for making great shows for the whole family.

Dorothy

Good Lord, this is bad.

[elizabethdnorris · 3/10 · 5 January 2019]

I tried, I wanted to live this but the script is just awful. I don't know if the "Yanks" are really American but the accents are horrible. The real Land Girls deserve a lot better than this.

Give it a chance

[chipsdipsanddorks · 8/10 · 26 February 2021]

I finally got around to watching this one night just to see if it was any good. I liked Bomb Girls, so I hopped it would come close. I'm not a fan of British film and I prefer violent movies. It took about 2 episodes before I was caught. I don't know much about WW2 English history, but it seemed accurate enough for me. Of course it did make fun of Americans, but I understand, we did have to save England. Each episode kept me wanting to start the next one and I really enjoyed it. The only downside is the characters, some come and go without explanation and even some suddenly change faces. When I was a kid, I was forced to watch Up Stairs/Down Stairs (1971 BBC) series, so it is similar with the story/drama of the wealthy house and the farm employees.

Cliche ridden hokum

[billcarr31 · 3/10 · 8 January 2020]

If the land army was anything like this it is a miracle we won the war. The writers seem to have got the book of cliches and decided to cram as many of them as they able into the episodes. The self righteous, the pompous, the flirt, the Nazi, the sexy Italian POWs the list is endless

Far better than I would have thought

[knella1 · 23 July 2013]

Well, despite what has been written I thought this was a smashing little series, or three. It is a bit 'soapy' but I don't like soaps yet I like this. It does lean on sentimentality, but in my opinion not too much. More than anything it's a character study, where few characters are either all good or all bad. Mark Benton provides the comic relief and it's something he expertise's in. It does stand as a drama though, the trials and tribulations of a set of decent women in an harrowing time. I've just watched it daily on bbc, and have felt cheer for the characters at a personal time where I need something to believe in. The acting is excellent, the story lines strong. It can be disappointing when characters or actors drop out between series'. But I presume that's a testament in itself. As with all wartime dramas (as opposed to war dramas) it shows the best of British resolve. All I know is, when good things happen to the main characters I feel glad, and when bad things happen I feel sad. And if a drama manages that, it's more than halfway home.

Women helping England fighting the 2nd Word War

[carmo-5 · 8/10 · 5 March 2023]

The motivation for creating the British series entitled Land Girls (2009-2011) was due to the celebration of the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War (1st September 1939 - 2nd September 1945). The episodes were filmed in and around the city of Birmingham. The 15 episodes that make up the series, divided into three seasons, focus on the lives of women who joined an English civil organization, Women's Land Army, whose objective was to supply agricultural labor, since many of the men who worked in agriculture went to serve in the army during World War II. Some of the many stories that unfold during the three seasons ended poorly. The series is very good, has very interesting characters and a wide variety of personal stories. To our satisfaction, it could have gone well beyond its 15 episodes.

Dreadful Stuff

[markfranh · 3/10 · 12 July 2013]

I knew we were in trouble when we borrowed the DVD from the library and saw that it had won awards for best daytime drama with the keyword there being 'daytime'. It's a soap opera. Nothing more and nothing less and should be treated as such by anyone prepared to sit through this material.

Why would an actors as talented as Nathaniel Parker or Sophie Ward want to demean themselves by appearing in this dreadful series? One can only wonder.

The acting is decent but they are all left trying to do their best with an awful script. The characters are stereotypes; the plot twists fully predictable and we've seen it all over and over again many times in the past. No attempt has been made by the writers to come up with anything original. In short, it's rubbish and nonsense.

The soap opera conclusion we had quickly reached was only reinforced by the closing line from one of the lead characters in episode 1 being "what shall we do now?" ... making one presumably keen to find out by watching the next episode tomorrow? Well sorry, I just didn't care by then.

Incidentally, the plot of black American soldiers being barred from British pubs etc at the insistence of the American military so that white American soldiers didn't have to mix with them was covered (I'm tempted to say copied exactly!) in an earlier episode of Foyle's War and which did it far more justice.

My wife and I watched the first episode of series 1 and felt that was far more than enough as the 45 minutes felt more like a tedious hour and a half that could have been better spent doing something else. I'd suggest others save themselves the wasted time and watch something like Foyle's War if you are looking for a quality British wartime drama.

Perhaps the most mysterious of all is why the producers made two further series of this. I'd hate to think the British public so undiscerning in its tastes that they actual enjoyed this production!