It is quite sickly sometimes, at least this third series has gone that way but I have stuck with it ( in vain hope that Sir Timothy would return) and enjoyed a lot of it.
There have been accusations of Lark Rise being too clean. All that soft focus lighting makes one suspicious that reality is being glossed over.
However, I'd like to defend the real-life people on whom this was originally based. From memory, Flora Thompson in her books emphasises that the hamlet dwellers, as poor as they were, did take pride in taking care of themselves and their homes and keeping everything spick and span.
The thing that bugs me is some poor continuity. An example last night was when Dorcas talking to Thomas and Laura about why Mr Blakestone held a grudge against her because she had promised to sell him the post office and reneged on the deal.
She talked as though Thomas and Laura didn't know about it and it had happened ages in the past. In fact it was a major strand of the final episode of series 1 and Thomas had played an active part in sabotaging it all by holding back the signed contract from the post. Perhaps the writers aren't LRtC obsessives like me, but surely they should immerse themselves in past series for professional reasons.
I was also a bit dubious about the railway coming (did they nick that idea from Cranford?). I would have thought, although I haven't checked this out, that most of the British railway system had been built well before the 1890s when I believe this series is set. For me, attention to detail, including historical accuracy and plausibility, do matter. (This is the BBC, not ITV!) I don't think attention to detail has a huge cost implication.
Anyway, I admit I am sulking because of Sir Timothy's no-show. The Timothy and Dorcas story has been the strongest and most real thing in all the series so far, and I thought the "tying up the loose enRAB" episode with Adelaide in this series was unsatisfactory.
Bye bye until 2011 (if I get over my sulks and decide to watch that is)
