Deadwood is a landmark in TV dramatisation - technically as well as logistically. It's also a superb multi-level drama and a stunningly accurate-seeming (who knows for sure?) recreation of a Gold Rush town, with layers of thought-provoking parallels to our modern political situation. The trouble with its overall excellence is that one or two faults stick out like chicken bones in a tobacco wad.<br /><br />Plot:(SPOILERS) Over the whole series there's a sense of anticlimax. Among the much-trumpeted gangs of hired guns and the convoluted human tragedies, the main baddie simply - leaves town; Swearengen decides to kill a scapegoat and that's it. We are already aware that he has a heart, so the decision not to kill Trixie is a given. While Deadwood is commendably faithful to the idea of realism in the plot most of the time, dramatically this becomes a letdown, and nor is it made clear enough why just killing Hearst wouldn't work. I anticipated a new take on a three-way gun battle, and when that didn't happen there wasn't much agonising about anything else. And there were far too many loose ends. Drama suffered here for realism's sake.<br /><br />Characters: There are some classic cameos in Deadwood: my favourites are Doc Cochran, Reverend Smith (why no website profile?) and Richardson, and Trixie is amazingly modern and three-dimensional. The character that doesn't work for me is Calamity Jane, in spite of Robin Weigert's faultless realisation of the script. I see where Milch is coming from - she's a lovable drunk, as opposed to, say, Steve the unlovable drunk - but you only have to see one photo of the actual woman to realise that they've been extremely kind in their casting. If you're going to make Calamity Jane's reason for being in it being a pioneering lesbian, she's got to be the bullest of bull dykes. Robin Weigert's just a misunderstood tomboy. Where was the realism here? I also feel that there are eventually too many characters introduced: if you left the Langrishe Theatre Group out completely it would make very little difference to the overall plot, and while Brian Cox is as good as I've ever seen him, that particular brand of scenery-chewing tends to rub off on the other actors - and it did. Powers Boothe turned from a believable rival to Al into a moustache-twirling pantomime villain, less convincing than E.B. Farnum. The two sassy soldiers at the Stirgis election were fantastically menacing; where was the menace (apart from Hearst per se) in Deadwood itself?<br /><br />Performances: The one performance that really lets Deadwood down (from an Olympian height) for me is Timothy Olyphant. He looks great, and ranges from caring husband to psycho killer beautifully. So why is it that I keep thinking he's about to burst out laughing at the wrong moment? Maybe he's just trying to hide his cute teeth, instead of baring and grinding them. He's like Roger Moore as James Bond: just too smooth. I wonder if that's why they kept giving Seth Bullock all those scars. The face-pummelling on the floor almost becomes a running gag.<br /><br />From the start, I really thought Deadwood was going to blow me away. In the end, while it sets the bar for Hi-Def TV to come, I felt it got bogged down in all that realism, and eventually stopped being a better-than-first-rate drama and became a first-rate docu-drama with a bit too much over-acting in places and far, far more cast than was well utilised. But it's a pioneering chunk of TV, best seen and heard in HD.