Critical opinion appears to be divided when it comes to The Kennedys, BBC2′s latest glossy American import. It’s either the worst thing ever created and an insult to the US version of the royal family; or it’s the worst thing ever created and an insult to the US version of the royal family. It’s certainly polarised opinion.

I’m going to offer a third view – I’m actually quite enjoying it.

And I’m not typing that with any sense of irony. I’m not enjoying it in a ‘it’s so bad it’s good’-type way, I’m genuinely enjoying it – although God knows it’s got some faults: crowd shots that involve about 25 extras, very few scenes that take place outside, tons of clunky exposition when characters speak and a really irritating habit of jumping back and forth in time.

But, as I say, apart from that I’m quite enjoying it.

The trouble with this type of series, one that involves real historical figures, is that by its very nature it involves people we think we know well even though they have been dead for decades. Greg Kinnear doesn’t look much like JFK, although he has been given the hair. That hair could have a series all of its own. It’s a wonder that hair didn’t carry on in the Oval Office all by itself after the assassination. During the sixties men must have gazed upon their President in awe – not because of what he was doing, but just because of the way he looked.What a head of hair.

Kinnear is a skilled actor. He could quite easily sit back and let the hair carry the series all by itself (it could probably have a decent stab at playing Jackie as well), but he’s nailed the voice and the mannerisms, particularly the way he often leans on the furniture to alleviate the character’s constant back pain.

Barry Pepper makes a very convincing RFK, Katie Holmes is not bad at all – far from it, in fact – as Jackie, and our own Tom Wilkinson is very good as old Joe Kennedy. (Incidentally, did you know that it’s now part of media law that we have to put ‘our own’ before Tom Wilkinson’s name? Seriously. That’s true, that is; swear on me pet cat’s life.) It would be easy to make the old man a caricature of greed and evil, but there’s a real human being underneath ‘our own’ Tom Wilkinson’s (see?) portrayal, just not a very nice one.

But it’s in the secondary characters that the series suffers. This week we were introduced to a Frank Sinatra who looked and sounded nothing at all like Frank Sinatra – he could have been doing Sammy Davis Jr. It’s much the same for the man playing J. Edgar Hoover. It wasn’t until he was introduced that I realised who he was supposed to be.

And then we were introduced to the Mob (who presumably will be blamed for the assassination) and they looked  – after a gap of 50 years – exactly like you expect the mobsters of the 1960s to look: hats, suits, dark glasses. I’m sure they did look like that, otherwise we wouldn’t have that stereotype in our minds, but there was a scene where Sam Giancana was making a telephone call surrounded by henchmen and it was like looking at The Anthill Mob setting a trap for The Hooded Claw.

It’s a cliche that ‘the kids’ these days get most of their knowledge of history from television, but it’s a cliche that happens to be true, and programmes such as The Kennedys have a responsibility to get things right because what they show will eventually become what the majority of people believe.

The Kennedys is interesting because it plays up some salacious details, such as JFK and Jackie being injected with amphetamines to keep up with their schedules, but plays down others. According to some accounts the Kennedy men were almost allergic to keeping their trousers on, but we haven’t had that much rumpy pumpy so far. So is this a fair and balanced portrayal? Er…Yes (probably).

You wouldn’t necessarily want The Kennedys to appear on the school curriculum, but for a Friday night it’s prefectly acceptable fare – as entertainment.

I wonder what’ll happen to JFK in the final episode?