As a history buff (well, I suppose a history major) and particularly a fan of McCollough, I am both excited and relieved to hear that this new miniseries is not a flop. The movie musical 1776 shaped how I look at the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution, and especially the character of John Adams. I don't know if Giamatti can really ever replace the singing William Daniels, but this still sounds promising.

Glad to hear 1776 referenced, though. It shaped my image of the Founding Fathers, too.

I plan on recording this series, as it looks that good.

That said, let me add that I, too, am a big fan of "1776". I first saw it as an in flight movie, flying back from Italy in the summer of 1973. At that time of my life, I loathed musicals, but this started to change that attitude. However, and more importantly, it touched me on a deeply emotional level. The final, freeze-frame scene found me unexpectedly misting up. My college minor was in history, so I knew they were playing a bit fast and loose with the screenplay and that one, final scene, but I didn't care. Every nation needs its patriotic legends/images, be it Leonidas at Thermopylae, Horatio at the bridge, Nelson at Trafalgar and this. Yeah, they all happened, just not as neatly and noble as depicted.

We need the inspiring images to set into our souls, then get the understanding of what happened. That these were real, gritty, sweaty, mortal guys, troubled by much the same insecurities as us only makes us appreciate them all the more when we see that they rose up beyond all that and did the stuff that put them in our national pantheon.

My parents took all three of their children to see "1776" on Broadway. My little sister couldn't have been more than six years old. She sat quietly, completely enraptured; when it was over, she turned to my mother and asked, "Is that it? Why did it stop?"

And I came out swooning over John Adams. I was already something of a history buff at the age of 14, but I'd never paid much attention to the John Adams story - he seemed so boring compared to Jefferson and Franklin and Washington. No more! I was thoroughly hooked on John and Abigail. I still remember their dueling letters set to music, him asking for saltpeter, her asking for pins.

I've been looking forward to this miniseries ever since I heard it was coming, and I think casting Paul Giamatti was inspired. And Laura Linney continues to show why the best actors are those who become transparent in their roles - her plain face, devoid of makeup, looks like the essense of the New England puritans who first settled that cold, rocky coast near Boston.

Three cheers for the Adams family - huzzah! huzzah! huzzah!

His Harvey Pekar our Ratso Rizzo

In fact, unless you're fascinated by the particular debates that took place at the First Congress or you relish the old-fashioned miseries that loomed ever present in this harsh new world, the first two episodes of "John Adams" will range from somewhat taxing to sleep-inducing.

Good grief, child, those debates were the DaVinci Code of their time - a literal life-and-death struggle by the best men of the colonies to figure out how to break away from a Superpower without getting themselves hung for treason and their families raped and murdered by mercenaries.

And today, when a feckless, thoughtless frat boy is sytematically destroying the nation and the Constitution for which Adams and the others sacrificed their comfortable lives, we need more than ever to relive every gritty, "boring" moment.

And realize that had he lived 230 years ago, Smirky would have not only been a Tory, but one of the first cowards to run away to Canada.

It's time to heap abuse and scorn on the man who created the Alien and Sedition Act. The first in a long line of evil dictatorial deeds the dastardly evil American perpetrated!!!!

The first song of "1776" includes this chorus:

CONGRESS:

Sit down, John! Sit down, John!
For God’s sake, John, sit down!

I agree that the major blunder of his administration, the Sedition Act (that expired as he left office), was awful. It was a moment when the Congress and the President worked as a unit, against the Constitution, and the Court was not yet strong enough to invalidate the law. How much of a blunder? Well, here's what the Supreme Court wrote in 1964 (Sullivan v. New York Times)....

Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history. Fines levied in its prosecution were repaid by Act of Congress on the ground that it was unconstitutional....Jefferson, as President, pardoned those who had been convicted and sentenced under the Act and remitted their fines, stating: "I discharged every person under punishment or prosecution under the sedition law because I considered, and now consider, that law to be a nullity, as absolute and as palpable as if Congress had ordered us to fall down and worship a golden image."

Nonetheless, I believe that the world would be a far lesser place, had Mr. Adams not lived.

Liked your post, all true!

Current Pres. would have wanted to be a Benedict Arnold, but he would have been so inept the Brits wouldn't have used him.

America is a dumb dull country made up of dumb dull distracted fools. But if there was TV in 1776 people would be glued to Colonial Idol. (In fact more people voted for American Idol than did vote for President). Back then only about 15% of the populace could even vote, serious debate was reserved for people who had an interest and ability to partake of it. I have no problem American Stupidity. We just have to recognize it.

Benedict Arnold is generally regarded as the ablest American general of the Revolution, who turned traitor only in desperation over continued mistreatment by Washington and his friends. It's well documented, but you can start with Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benedict_Arnold

Bush (or Snarky, love that -- sort of the anti-Charles Schulz) could never aspire to be an Arnold, as he's not capable of Arnold's successes. He's in a little treasonpocket all his own. Maybe Millard Fillmore fits in there with him, but he's caused more damage to the country than Fillmore ever did. Buchanan is a competitor, but he was more malevolent than incompetent. As we know, Bush is both.

And the thing about more people voting for American Idol than president is an oft-debunked urban legend. There are no limits as to who can vote on Idol; residents of other countries, convicts, children. Multiple voting is encouraged. Not quite a valid comparison.

One thing Bush has done for the country: in 2000 there was a sizable bloc of eligible voters (call them, for convenience, Gen X) who held the opinion that voting was a waste of time as it made no difference who was in office and they were busy adding up the profits from their tech stocks. They seem to be sorry now; the generation that followed them certainly is. Judging from the caucuses and primaries, 2008 should be a record turnout.

And, to say a word about Adams, he really is the Republicans' idea of a great president. There were valid reasons why he and Jefferson were enemies to the death. We'll see how the series deals with the election of 1800.