A proper ‘Adams’

HAVING just watched the first two parts of “John Adams” on HBO, I must disagree with Mary McNamara’s dyspeptic review of the series [“HBO’s ‘John Adams’ Slogs Through History,” March 14]. McNamara decries the historical realism that she feels has taken precedence over storytelling. In fact, she finds the program not interesting enough and thinks “a strange flatness permeates the entire cast.”

To echo Adams’ line: I beg to differ. I found the first two parts riveting and very emotional. McNamara suggests that the characters are one-dimensional and that the love story between John and Abigail Adams is hampered by a lack of chemistry. I feel that the filmmakers courageously chose to focus on the love rather than the sex, a more substantive approach that is also truer to the period.

Oh dear, historical accuracy again! Whatever can they have been thinking?

Susan Wolfson

Glendale