2016 RTE Drama: Rebellion - no spoilers please (mod warning in post #1)

Shurimgreat

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I think if the writing is strong enough it won't matter if it's another language or country or era or whatever.
Generation War is the perfect example of this. Three of the 5 main characters are involved in the war on the German side and another one is banging a Nazi commander to further her singing career (and other reasons). And yet most people would have found themselves ridiculously invested in the fate of all 5 main characters. 1864 is another example. I had no idea of the history behind that one and yet was very emotionally invested.

While I don't think everything about Rebellion's writing was a disaster I will admit that Arthur aside I wasn't that emotionally invested in what happened to anyone. It was more I wonder what happens to them rather than OH GOD! PLEASE DON'T LET X, Y OR Z DIE!

Fair enough about Generation War and I liked it myself. Its just I hear this ridiculous criticism about Rebellion that the Rising leaders are cardboard cutouts, not given enough screentime, blah blah blah. They don't really get that Rebellion is not about the Rising leaders.

Its possible that Rebellion had too many characters, fictional and real, but as I said its impossible to please some people. Give a lot of airtime to people like Pearse, and its criticised for not focusing more on the fictional characters, their back story and so on. And then vice versa.

maudgonner

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Again, not exactly a great comparison. Strumpet City focused almost entirely on fictional characters, had 7 episodes and didn't have to bother with dealing with characters like Pearse, Connolly, Devalera and so on in any detail.

The writer of Rebellion had a difficult issue, how to balance the leaders of the Rising with fictional characters and he was never going to please everyone.

Something like Downfall might be a better comparison - a film I know, but a mixture of characters - it balanced a plotline about Hitler with other plotlines of other characters. The BBC series War and Peace, on now, might also be a good comparison.

So sorry my example didn't meet with your approval I could argue that in terms of setting, scope, budget and context it's a much closer match than Downfall or War and Peace.

Strumpet City (the series and novel) chose not to deal with Larkin etc in depth, but rather to focus on fictional characters. And those characters were compelling, rounded and memorable. The writer of Rebellion was presumably free to make that choice as well, indeed it may well have been a wiser idea to stay away from the leaders altogether. But my point is that the characterisation, across the board, was poor. No matter what the limitations of time or budget, that's a failure of the writing (and to an extent the directing and acting). A drama that fails to make you care about the characters is a poor drama, regardless of whether those characters are real or fictional.

P. Breathnach

maudgonner wrote: »

...
Strumpet City (the series and novel) chose not to deal with Larkin etc in depth

Neither was there a choice to ignore them. They were there as context. You could argue that a similar choice was made in Rebellion. I will grant you that the rebel leaders were not so far in the background.

but rather to focus on fictional characters.

Agreed that this is how Strumpet City was focused - and I think there was a similar intention for Rebellion. But the context in which they were portrayed was an essential part of the story. It was the reason for creating the story.

And those characters were compelling, rounded and memorable. The writer of Rebellion was presumably free to make that choice as well, indeed it may well have been a wiser idea to stay away from the leaders altogether. But my point is that the characterisation, across the board, was poor. No matter what the limitations of time or budget, that's a failure of the writing (and to an extent the directing and acting). A drama that fails to make you care about the characters is a poor drama, regardless of whether those characters are real or fictional.

And that, I think, is the problem with Rebellion: exactly as you say - the writing and, to an extent, the directing and acting.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

maudgonner wrote: »

So sorry my example didn't meet with your approval I could argue that in terms of setting, scope, budget and context it's a much closer match than Downfall or War and Peace.

Strumpet City (the series and novel) chose not to deal with Larkin etc in depth, but rather to focus on fictional characters. And those characters were compelling, rounded and memorable. The writer of Rebellion was presumably free to make that choice as well, indeed it may well have been a wiser idea to stay away from the leaders altogether. But my point is that the characterisation, across the board, was poor. No matter what the limitations of time or budget, that's a failure of the writing (and to an extent the directing and acting). A drama that fails to make you care about the characters is a poor drama, regardless of whether those characters are real or fictional.

I said this before but I think where Rebellion falls down is that it's ambition was greater than it's execution.
Sidelining the leaders was a good idea, in my opinion, but then they should have just stuck with the 5 main characters (the ones on the promotional material) and got them right. Instead they seem to have been trying to include as many different viewpoints as possible and then a few extra for good measure.
It was important to show what life was like in the slums so we could understand why Arthur chose first to join up and then to go back after the Rising. We didn't need to see Minnie and all her plot lines. Likewise we needed to see how someone from the well off Anglo Irish upper class like Liz could find themselves drawn to the rebellion but we didn't need to see how her brother didn't give a flying F about any of it and was happy to just get drunk and spend his money.
Making it clear that the whole island was affected by the goings on was important but having a character from each province and giving them all their own storylines was maybe not necessary. Or could have been better incorporated.
Some of these things on their own would have been fine, for example if the focus was solely on Liz's family then the contrast between her brother's attitude and her's could have been interesting. Thrown into the middle of everything else going on it seemed irrelevant and like a waste of screen time that could have been spent on someone else.

Anyway, I don't think RTÉ should be criticised for attempting something like this. It wasn't the success it could have been but I'm glad they're trying something different and I'd hate to see them throw in the towel now and revert to type with their bog standard dramas.

maudgonner

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I said this before but I think where Rebellion falls down is that it's ambition was greater than it's execution.
Sidelining the leaders was a good idea, in my opinion, but then they should have just stuck with the 5 main characters (the ones on the promotional material) and got them right.

<snip>

Anyway, I don't think RTÉ should be criticised for attempting something like this. It wasn't the success it could have been but I'm glad they're trying something different and I'd hate to see them throw in the towel now and revert to type with their bog standard dramas.

I agree. With the addition that they should have avoided the cliches that plagued the series and given it an injection of the dark humour that Dublin is great at.

Actually, do you know what would have benefitted Rebellion most? A really, really good script editor.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

maudgonner wrote: »

I agree. With the addition that they should have avoided the cliches that plagued the series and given it an injection of the dark humour that Dublin is great at.

Actually, do you know what would have benefitted Rebellion most? A really, really good script editor.

That's why I think a second series would be good to see. Few tweeks here and there and it could be a much better show.

Strazdas

Double post

Strazdas

maudgonner wrote: »

Ah I dunno Strazdas, there's definitely an element of that. But there's also the fact that I felt more in the execution scenes of Seachtar than I did at any point during Rebellion. (I'm no history buff or glorifier of the leaders of the Rising btw, and Seachtar definitely had its own faults).

Rebellion failed at producing characters I cared about, situations that had me on the edge of my seat. It's a sad indictment when a documentary series is more successful at sparking emotion than a drama is.

Yes, Rebellion was hampered by having to portray the key military events of a one week Rising and also having to introduce us to it's characters and develop them. They were clearly caught between two stools. I've a funny feeling a second series (which I believe is to be set in 1918) would / will be much stronger on characterisation and getting to know what makes each of them tick. I'm sure too that the writers have been taking the criticism of the negative aspects of the show on board.

Seachtar was absolutely and given the fact that it was made on a low budget, really excellent at times.

iguana

This was a disappointing series over all. It looked fine, there were some anachronisms but even Mad Men had those from time to time so that's to be expected. There was some seriously unforgivable laziness with the scene continuity and I didn't feel the occasional forays into the docudrama style of direction worked well at all. The acting was mostly ok. The actor playing Peig was brutal and some of Gleeson's choices/direction were badly pulled off (most notably the constipation like grief) but other than that it was fine.

But the writing was very poor, it was like someone took an interesting first draft and made the show from it. Characters like Ingrid and George needed to be culled completely while Minnie and Harry needed to be minor supporting characters not characters with their own totally pointless storylines. Edward dropping dead added nothing to the story just sucked up more time. We didn't even see Elizabeth learning about his death and her feelings about it! May's story needed a re-write, sticking her out in Dalkey for days on end with her lover's wife and pregnancy reveal sucked the life out of the series. And the motivation of characters like Frances and Elizabeth needed to be explained better. It would have been nice to see some of Elizabeth's radicalisation, presumably at medical school with Kathleen Lynn. And what we learned about Frances in the last episode made even less sense than what I'd initially assumed about her. How does the fact that she and her mother were victims of theocratic interference make her want to support the ultra-religious Pearse? I can kind of see what they were trying to do but it was executed in a way that made no sense.

I was also left confused about Stephen. Was he a member of parliament? When did we learn that? I was shocked to hear that during his 'trial' for attempting suicide. That could have been a really interesting plot point throughout. Was he active in pursuing Home Rule? He always seemed in favour of it but totally passive in assuming it would happen. If he was a parliament member actively aiding Redmond then his fiance turning radical and literally at war against him would have been much more interesting. Also the suicide attempt. We saw him at the end of ep 4 contemplating killing himself, then the next we know George is telling him to keep it quiet. Did he actually try kill himself? Did he pull the trigger but move his hand at the last minute and shoot the ceiling? Did he try but the trigger mechanism was conveniently stuck? Did he just think about it, then decide against it but go report himself anyway in the hope of a discharge. I don't know but I do know that Minnie got paid to shag Harry after the credits rolled. Great story-telling priorities!!!

On top of that the history shown was real primary school stuff. Lots of surface knowledge but nothing in depth. I gained no understanding of why what happened happened and I feel that's because the writer didn't bother to do much more than very cursory research. I wouldn't have minded that so much if the story had been compelling but it wasn't. I think I'll give the series 3/10.

Strazdas

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Again, not exactly a great comparison. Strumpet City focused almost entirely on fictional characters, had 7 episodes and didn't have to bother with dealing with characters like Pearse, Connolly, Devalera and so on in any detail.

The writer of Rebellion had a difficult issue, how to balance the leaders of the Rising with fictional characters and he was never going to please everyone.

Something like Downfall might be a better comparison - a film I know, but a mixture of characters - it balanced a plotline about Hitler with other plotlines of other characters. The BBC series War and Peace, on now, might also be a good comparison.

Strumpet City was pretty much a regular soapish style melodrama (though a very good quality one) which focussed on the relationships between the main characters and romantic relationships. It was actually very light and frothy and could be shown at 2.30pm in the afternoon if necessary, something that certainly couldn't be done with Rebellion.

jmcc

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I think if the writing is strong enough it won't matter if it's another language or country or era or whatever.
Generation War is the perfect example of this. Three of the 5 main characters are involved in the war on the German side and another one is banging a Nazi commander to further her singing career (and other reasons). And yet most people would have found themselves ridiculously invested in the fate of all 5 main characters. 1864 is another example. I had no idea of the history behind that one and yet was very emotionally invested.

There's another aspect to good writing that you didn't mention: The unexpected. A good writer is always a few steps ahead of the audience. The Generation War characters were well done and the thing was that the older brother was the one who, based on the earlier episodes, was the one expected to die. But he survived. There's no real equivalent WTF moment/resolution in Rebellion.

Regards...jmcc

iguana

jmcc wrote: »

There's another aspect to good writing that you didn't mention: The unexpected. A good writer is always a few steps ahead of the audience. The Generation War characters were well done and the thing was that the old brother was the one who, based on the earlier episodes, was the one expected to die. But he survived. There's no real equivalent WTF moment/resolution in Rebellion.

Regards...jmcc

Oh you're wrong. Jimmy and Arthur, two brothers, ended up face to face on opposing sides! Peter got shot and died! Jimmy and Elizabeth kissed and might be in love! All shocking never seen before stuff.;)

Strazdas

jmcc wrote: »

There's another aspect to good writing that you didn't mention: The unexpected. A good writer is always a few steps ahead of the audience. The Generation War characters were well done and the thing was that the old brother was the one who, based on the earlier episodes, was the one expected to die. But he survived. There's no real equivalent WTF moment/resolution in Rebellion.

Regards...jmcc

Generation War was a fantastic series but I'm guessing it was made on a much higher budget than Rebellion, going out as it did on ZDF, one of the biggest TV channels in Europe.

Interestingly, even that programme attracted a fair amount of criticism. The Poles were absolutely furious that it depicted the Polish Home Army and even Polish people in general as anti-semitic in a drama that was supposed to be about the evils of Nazism and their atrocities.

Even in Germany, there was a lot of criticism with some saying if anything it severely downplayed how racist and pro-Nazi that generation of young Germans was. (I wouldn't agree personally....I thought it was a brave attempt to try and face up to the hideous acts carried by the Nazis and to explain how that generation got sucked into the madness).

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

jmcc wrote: »

There's another aspect to good writing that you didn't mention: The unexpected. A good writer is always a few steps ahead of the audience. The Generation War characters were well done and the thing was that the old brother was the one who, based on the earlier episodes, was the one expected to die. But he survived. There's no real equivalent WTF moment/resolution in Rebellion.

Regards...jmcc

Well yes, you could argue some of it was rather predictable but you get that in a lot of writing these days. My mum watches Mr. Selfridge and after about 5 minutes in every episode I can tell her what's going to happen. A lot of BBC dramas lately have tried to copy the "Nordic Noir" style of drama and have all failed miserably. They focus on creating the same kind of atmospheric production and neglect the characters and story and they end up being cliché ridden and predictable. Happy Valley is probably the only drama on any of the the British stations of late that I'd say was almost completely unpredictable and really well written. (Written by a woman too, for what it's worth )

It's easy to point to things like Generation War and say that's how it should be done but someone at the BBC has sat down and picked the very best of German TV to air. If you went to Germany and watched every single thing the stations there produce you'd probably have a lot of crap to wade through to get to the good. Also important to note that Generation War was a bit controversial in itself because it's not a part of their history that the German's would speak that openly about, generally speaking. Likewise 1864 was excellent TV but the Danish people were not happy with it because of how much it cost to make and there were some historic inaccuracies.

Anyway, this just backs up my earlier point that RTÉ shouldn't be slaughtered for this production. They tried something new and different, it wasn't perfect but if they just go back to making lowest common denominator paint by numbers TV it would be a shame. Learn from the mistakes here, mainly tighten up the writing a bit, maybe don't give one person entire control of it either. A second series would be freed up considerably by not having one central event having to be the focus, cull a few people from around the edges, have characters talk to one another a bit more, simple things like that could make all the difference.

Basically I don't think Rebellion is as bad as some want to make it out to be. It's not the worst thing RTÉ have ever done and it's not even the worst thing on TV at the moment. It could be improved and I'd like to see it get the opportunity to do so with a second series.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Strazdas wrote: »

Generation War was a fantastic series but I'm guessing it was made on a much higher budget than Rebellion, going out as it did on ZDF, one of the biggest TV channels in Europe.

I can't find an exact figure online but it seems to have cost somewhere between €10-14 million to make. And it was 3 episodes at a full 90 minutes each, so about 4.5 hours of TV which would be maybe around €3 million per episode.

There was a series called Camelot a few years ago filmed here for a US network. It was pretty rubbish, cancelled fairly quick, but apparently it cost $7 million per episode to shoot!

This is why I don't get the complaints about the budget for Rebellion. If you have no idea about the cost of producing a TV show maybe it seems a big number but look into it a bit and you'll see it's not really that big an amount, comparatively speaking.

maudgonner

Strazdas wrote: »

Generation War was a fantastic series but I'm guessing it was made on a much higher budget than Rebellion, going out as it did on ZDF, one of the biggest TV channels in Europe.

Did a bit of internet digging, out of interest. (Figures come from reputable sites, but it is the internet, so who knows who accurate they are )

10 million euro budget for Generation War, that's for 3x90 min eps. So a good bit more than Rebellion (€6m), but not multiples of the budget.
1864 looks to have been substantially more, around €23 million for 8x1hrs.
Band of Brothers was obviously in a different league - US$125 for 10x1hrs.
Downfall - €13.5million
War and Peace - £10m
Charlie came in around €3.7m for 3x90mins, making Rebellion look like a bit of a bargain.
Strumpet City - IR£1m, but given that it was produced in 1980 that doesn't really mean a lot. Interestingly though, The Year of the French was made around the same time for double the budget and was nowhere near as successful.

ETA Elmo beat me to it

Shurimgreat

If Rebellion is a once off series, I can understand why people might feel short-changed. Not knowing much of the characters' history or back-stories, motivations and so on. If there is a sequel or a prequel, much of what happened would make more sense.

The problem is possibly with the time frame chosen, ie 1 week. Maybe flashbacks or something might have helped.

Overall the series was limited in time, budget and scope, confined to Dublin city centre for 1 week, or slightly more. There was some build-up in the first two episodes.

Something like Lost, the US series covered characterisation and back stories a lot better but then it ran for something like 6 series.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

maudgonner wrote: »

Did a bit of internet digging, out of interest. (Figures come from reputable sites, but it is the internet, so who knows who accurate they are )

10 million euro budget for Generation War, that's for 3x90 min eps. So a good bit more than Rebellion (€6m), but not multiples of the budget.
1864 looks to have been substantially more, around €23 million for 8x1hrs.
Band of Brothers was obviously in a different league - US$125 for 10x1hrs.
Downfall - €13.5million
War and Peace - £10m
Charlie came in around €3.7m for 3x90mins, making Rebellion look like a bit of a bargain.
Strumpet City - IR£1m, but given that it was produced in 1980 that doesn't really mean a lot. Interestingly though, The Year of the French was made around the same time for double the budget and was nowhere near as successful.

ETA Elmo beat me to it

1864 was incredible though, visually. They had numerous huge battle scenes and when they got to the biggest of the battles nearly an entire episode was given over to just the battle, and the way they did it was incredible, like nothing I've seen before. Apparently a section of the Danish public thought the money would have been better spent making more "nordic noir" style shows. Which I guess is the "if it ain't broke..." attitude.

Strazdas

This article in the Herald 'claims' Rebellion is unlikely to return :

http://www.herald.ie/entertainment/rte-set-to-put-rebellion-down-as-viewers-turn-off-34415393.html

I would take this with a large pinch of salt though. Episode 5 was only 20k down on Episode 4 and both RTE's managing director and head of Drama said only last week they would love to see a second series. I'm not sure either where the press have gotten the idea that a drama that is averaging nearly half a million viewers a week (and a lot more on catch up views) is a flop.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Shurimgreat wrote: »

If Rebellion is a once off series, I can understand why people might feel short-changed. Not knowing much of the characters' history or back-stories, motivations and so on. If there is a sequel or a prequel, much of what happened would make more sense.

The problem is possibly with the time frame chosen, ie 1 week. Maybe flashbacks or something might have helped.

Overall the series was limited in time, budget and scope, confined to Dublin city centre for 1 week, or slightly more. There was some build-up in the first two episodes.

Something like Lost, the US series covered characterisation and back stories a lot better but then it ran for something like 6 series.

I was thinking the same thing, although I was never a fan of Lost. If they wanted to start the show in the middle of the action then they should have literally started it in the middle of it and then used flashback to show us how the characters ended up where they were. Either jump back and forth, a little risky and hard to get the right balance, or, bookend each episode with a bit of Rising action and the main part of the episodes been focused on one characters story. Five episodes, five main characters, it could have worked well.

I think, again, what it boils down to is 1) being overambitious in what they wanted to do, 2)being somewhat bound by very specific historic events at the centre of it and 3)trying to tick a few too many boxes. They had a story to tell but then had to include the leaders in some capacity, specific battles and flash points, nods to viewers who are well up on their history but still keeping it accessible enough for viewers who aren't.

Someone mentioned it earlier but a really good/harsh/historically impartial script editor could have made a huge difference. Someone not afraid to say this guy is irrelevant or this particular battle bogs the whole thing down etc. etc.

fin12

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I think if the writing is strong enough it won't matter if it's another language or country or era or whatever.
Generation War is the perfect example of this. Three of the 5 main characters are involved in the war on the German side and another one is banging a Nazi commander to further her singing career (and other reasons). And yet most people would have found themselves ridiculously invested in the fate of all 5 main characters. 1864 is another example. I had no idea of the history behind that one and yet was very emotionally invested.

While I don't think everything about Rebellion's writing was a disaster I will admit that Arthur aside I wasn't that emotionally invested in what happened to anyone. It was more I wonder what happens to them rather than OH GOD! PLEASE DON'T LET X, Y OR Z DIE!

Ya I thought Generation war was brilliant, its on netflix.

jmcc

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Well yes, you could argue some of it was rather predictable but you get that in a lot of writing these days.

Rebellion was very much on the level of "What I did during my Summer holidays."

Written by a woman too, for what it's worth

So? Good writing is good writing.

It's easy to point to things like Generation War

I was using it as an example of how a well written programme can challenge expectations. But it also works as a more general example. A good series can hook viewers in the first half hour or so. It can do it through characterisation where the audience identifies with or sympathises with the characters, or through an idea or concept. Rebellion did none of this.

They tried something new and different, it wasn't perfect but if they just go back to making lowest common denominator paint by numbers TV it would be a shame.

But they didn't. It was TV by cliche.

Basically I don't think Rebellion is as bad as some want to make it out to be. It's not the worst thing RTÉ have ever done and it's not even the worst thing on TV at the moment. It could be improved and I'd like to see it get the opportunity to do so with a second series.

The taxpayer should not have to pay.

Regards...jmcc

maudgonner

Strazdas wrote: »

This article in the Herald 'claims' Rebellion is unlikely to return :

http://www.herald.ie/entertainment/rte-set-to-put-rebellion-down-as-viewers-turn-off-34415393.html

I would take this with a large pinch of salt though. Episode 5 was only 20k down on Episode 4 and both RTE's managing director and head of Drama said only last week they would love to see a second series. I'm not sure either where the press have gotten the idea that a drama that is averaging nearly half a million viewers a week (and a lot more on catch up views) is a flop.

The US viewership and critical reception will have a huge effect on this too, if Sundance kicked in 50% of the budget (as I think someone mentioned earlier in this thread). I can't imagine that any decisions will be made about a second season until it airs in the States. It could well be the case that a second season goes ahead with a reduced budget. That might be do-able without large set-pieces of the Rising to film. It might even make for a better, more focused, character driven drama

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

jmcc wrote: »

I was using it as an example of how a well written programme can challenge expectations. But it also works as a more general example. A good series can hook viewers in the first half hour or so. It can do it through characterisation where the audience identifies with or sympathises with the characters, or through an idea or concept. Rebellion did none of this.

You're taking little bits of sentences there and replying to something completely different to what I said. I've used Generation War numerous times as an example of a similar concept, one that was much better done. Why do you feel the need to cut out the rest of the paragraph I wrote after that one line? You're deliberately choosing to ignore the actual point I was making just so you can agree with a point I myself, and others, have already made numerous times. I'd almost suggest you were using your old pal the straw man argument there.

jmcc

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Why do you feel the need to cut out the rest of the paragraph I wrote after that one line?

I generally leave out the stuff that I may agree with or have no opinion on in either case. I tend to react in a STEM manner rather than an Media Studies/Sociology manner.

Regards...jmcc

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

jmcc wrote: »

I generally leave out the stuff that I may agree with or have no opinion on in either case. I tend to react in a STEM manner rather than an Media Studies/Sociology manner.

Regards...jmcc

You react to things that aren't there.

josephryan1989

If there is to be a follow up series during the War of Independence they would have to introduce new characters since the majority of the fighting occurred in the countryside especially Co. Cork and Co. Tipperary.

For obvious reasons the central characters would have to be male as women were in an entirely secondary role during that conflict.

There were no female flying column commanders and fighters so the lesbian cross dresser Frances is going to have to be ditched.

jmcc

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

You react to things that aren't there.

Like Rebellion fans?

Regards...jmcc

Strazdas

maudgonner wrote: »

The US viewership and critical reception will have a huge effect on this too, if Sundance kicked in 50% of the budget (as I think someone mentioned earlier in this thread). I can't imagine that any decisions will be made about a second season until it airs in the States. It could well be the case that a second season goes ahead with a reduced budget. That might be do-able without large set-pieces of the Rising to film. It might even make for a better, more focused, character driven drama

Yes, the series starts in the US in late April and it will be interesting to see how it's received and if Sundance want a second series.

I don't know where the Irish press have gotten the idea Rebellion is a huge flop though. It started out with a very high rating and then dropped a certain percentage with each episode but that often seems to happen : I believe the exact same thing has happened with Deutschland 83 in Germany.

TCDStudent1

josephryan1989 wrote: »

If there is to be a follow up series during the War of Independence they would have to introduce new characters since the majority of the fighting occurred in the countryside especially Co. Cork and Co. Tipperary.

For obvious reasons the central characters would have to be male as women were in an entirely secondary role during that conflict.

There were no female flying column commanders and fighters so the lesbian cross dresser Frances is going to have to be ditched.

Or they could just follow the war of independence in Dublin.

They could also make the series with the same characters by not having the war as the central focus. Focus on the characters and how the war impacted on their lives. There's no need to have the main focus on the war.