Shark Bytes
I think The Tudors is a great show. Yes you all are correct in stating the obvious it isn't 100 percent accurate, but it's not suppose to be it is not a documentary like BBC's "Six Wives of Henry VIII". However you would be surprised by how much stuff is accurate that they portray in the show. Try checking out Alison Weir's "The Six Wives of Henry the VIII". Long live the King!!!!
This is embarrassing to watch, because like all period pieces done today it only just panders to twenty-something club hoppers who think that people back then viewed life in the same way as they do. It reminds me of those movies about the middle ages with rock songs, the knights high-fiving each other and the girls acting like they're giggly mall rats. The Tudors isn't quite that bad. There were some decent moments, like the whole run-up to More's beheading, which was ruined by JRM howling like an idiot, and some of the performances are good. But it is really a product of this era's taste for dumbed down history. I for one am getting tired of having the taste of teenage girls determine everything on TV these days. Tudors? Day one.
Really, How could you like ann B. I maen look at Katherine, she is so good to everyone especilly her husband.The only sceanes I like are the ones with Katherine in them, and Maria Doyle Kennedy does an ah-mazing job of playing the queen. You just have to love her character
One Last comment attached to my previous comments: Why are people insisting Katherine of Aragon is spelled wrong? Hello! Pick up a history book and read it once in a while. Katherine is spelled with a "K". Not all Katherines are Catherine Zeta-Jones, people.
I just finished Tudors Season One on DVD and found it very interesting. I am also reading a biography about Hnery VIII and the show does move in sync with historical details. Yes, they changed a few things like giving Henry only one sister on the show, but that was to lessen confusion between his daughter Mary and his other sister, Mary. Yes, it moves at lightning speed...but if the show ACTUALLY took SIX YEARS to show his divorce, we would have four seasons of watching Henry trying to divorce Katherine.
Onto another point: According to the book, Henry was very good-looking, sports-oriented, and vain in the sense that he KNEW he was handsome. There are pictures to show he wasn't always obese.
One more point: Having a male heir would have been a HUGE reason for needing a new wife. Henry lived in a kingdom where many people felt his place in the court was a sham, and others were entitled to his kingship. Katherine could not bear any more children, and to leave his throne without a male would have probably spelled out disaster for the Tudor Dynasty. Yes, it seems silly nowadays when you look at the out-of-wedlock births and "Who's my Baby's Daddy?" on Maury Povich, but it was obviously a different time and place.
Whoops, one more point: One person commented on Henry "self-gratifying" himself. I don't think this turned it into soft **** but, rather, showed (as according to history also) that while courting Ann for six years, Henry DID NOT stray from her, and he did not have relations with her. OBVIOUSLY the King of England could have had anyone, anytime...i think it was for our benefit to show that he did love Ann at one point, and was willing to do whatever he could to have her.
I think this is an awesome show! Facts are skewed, but for the most part, they seem to at least show a grasp of history and are attempting to make it accurate. I think anyone seeing previews would know that this was a soap opera too.
Onto another point: According to the book, Henry was very good-looking, sports-oriented, and vain in the sense that he KNEW he was handsome. There are pictures to show he wasn't always obese.
One more point: Having a male heir would have been a HUGE reason for needing a new wife. Henry lived in a kingdom where many people felt his place in the court was a sham, and others were entitled to his kingship. Katherine could not bear any more children, and to leave his throne without a male would have probably spelled out disaster for the Tudor Dynasty. Yes, it seems silly nowadays when you look at the out-of-wedlock births and "Who's my Baby's Daddy?" on Maury Povich, but it was obviously a different time and place.
Whoops, one more point: One person commented on Henry "self-gratifying" himself. I don't think this turned it into soft **** but, rather, showed (as according to history also) that while courting Ann for six years, Henry DID NOT stray from her, and he did not have relations with her. OBVIOUSLY the King of England could have had anyone, anytime...i think it was for our benefit to show that he did love Ann at one point, and was willing to do whatever he could to have her.
I think this is an awesome show! Facts are skewed, but for the most part, they seem to at least show a grasp of history and are attempting to make it accurate. I think anyone seeing previews would know that this was a soap opera too.
All of this rationalizing and defense of Henry the VIII's bad behavior is really very interesting. Was it syphilis? Was it diabetes? Was it madness inherited from his dear old dad? How about a far more simple explanation: THE MAN WAS A HIGH POWERED JERK HAVING A MID-LIFE CRISIS AND GETTING HIS ENTIRE KINGDOM, LET ALONE ALL OF EUROPE INVOLVED WITH IT, TAKING SIDES?
Let's see: he dumped wife number one because he became obsessively infatuated with a younger woman, using his need for a son and heir as an excuse. He grandiosely postures to give up everyone and everything close to him to "have" this woman in the eyes of God and his Kingdom. Making a great big huge spectacle of the situation and himself. He sacrifices friends and family relationships. Terrorizes his subjects. And what happens?
After he gets her, he decides she really isn't what he wants after all. And he knows he is now very unpopular with his subjects. He looks like a complete and utter fool. So what does he do? In order to save face, he tells everyone he was "tricked" "bewitched" by this woman, and has her killed mostly as a public relations exercise.
Having an affair, behaving irrationally, putting everything on the line, losing friends and family, coming to one's sensibilities and blaming the woman for it to save face....hey, this is an every day event in my country. No, people typically aren't killed as a result but then nobody has that power, either. Not an exclusive event to those with syphilis or diabetes or inherited madness. It is something called STUPIDITY.
HENRY THE VIII was a STUPID man and an even worse King.
Let's see: he dumped wife number one because he became obsessively infatuated with a younger woman, using his need for a son and heir as an excuse. He grandiosely postures to give up everyone and everything close to him to "have" this woman in the eyes of God and his Kingdom. Making a great big huge spectacle of the situation and himself. He sacrifices friends and family relationships. Terrorizes his subjects. And what happens?
After he gets her, he decides she really isn't what he wants after all. And he knows he is now very unpopular with his subjects. He looks like a complete and utter fool. So what does he do? In order to save face, he tells everyone he was "tricked" "bewitched" by this woman, and has her killed mostly as a public relations exercise.
Having an affair, behaving irrationally, putting everything on the line, losing friends and family, coming to one's sensibilities and blaming the woman for it to save face....hey, this is an every day event in my country. No, people typically aren't killed as a result but then nobody has that power, either. Not an exclusive event to those with syphilis or diabetes or inherited madness. It is something called STUPIDITY.
HENRY THE VIII was a STUPID man and an even worse King.
To: Guest
I have to agree with you on point one you make below. Diabetes does seem like a more likely suspect than Syphilis for Henry's descent into obeseity and borderline madness. . .at least if you beleive historical accounts of the end of his life. Some, however, have suspected syphilis since his personality seemed to change as much as his weight. Syphilis might have been hard to detect on most of his wives since they didn't live long enough to have symptoms show. In the case of Anne of Cleves he may not have even consumated the marriage due to his unhappiness over her looks. Jane Seymour died early in childbirth and both Anne Bolyn and Katherine Howard was beheaded young.
Then you have to look at his offspring.
Mary died early of a cancerous tumer eary, Elizabeth was (supposedly) barren and bald (or so history relates), Anne Bolyn delivered stillborn sons, The child by Jane Seymour was alwasys sickly and died before he was 20.
The most compelling argument that he suffered from diabetes and not syphilis was his 6th and last wive, who never had the disease and had a child by another following Henry's death.
Point 2 you make below isn't worth commenting about
On point 3 below, As far as Henry being athletic and verile in his younger days, that is certainly a possibility, perhaps even a liklihood. The point is, at the time he was with Anne Bolyn he was 45 years old. She was executed in Jan 1536, he died in 1547 at the age of 56. If he looked the way he does in the Tudors at age 45, he certainly went to hell in a handbasket in his last 11 years.
I don't think I've ever seen a portrait of Henry as being thin. They may be out there somewhere. He's always been played as being stout at the very least going back to the days of Charles Laughton (Henry the VIII), Richard Burton (Anne of a Thousand Days), and the PBS series (The 6 wives of Henry
the VIII) .That's what makes the series the Tudors so interesting, even if it does take "artistic license with the historical facts.
Now, I'm through commenting on this subject. You can have the last word
I have to agree with you on point one you make below. Diabetes does seem like a more likely suspect than Syphilis for Henry's descent into obeseity and borderline madness. . .at least if you beleive historical accounts of the end of his life. Some, however, have suspected syphilis since his personality seemed to change as much as his weight. Syphilis might have been hard to detect on most of his wives since they didn't live long enough to have symptoms show. In the case of Anne of Cleves he may not have even consumated the marriage due to his unhappiness over her looks. Jane Seymour died early in childbirth and both Anne Bolyn and Katherine Howard was beheaded young.
Then you have to look at his offspring.
Mary died early of a cancerous tumer eary, Elizabeth was (supposedly) barren and bald (or so history relates), Anne Bolyn delivered stillborn sons, The child by Jane Seymour was alwasys sickly and died before he was 20.
The most compelling argument that he suffered from diabetes and not syphilis was his 6th and last wive, who never had the disease and had a child by another following Henry's death.
Point 2 you make below isn't worth commenting about
On point 3 below, As far as Henry being athletic and verile in his younger days, that is certainly a possibility, perhaps even a liklihood. The point is, at the time he was with Anne Bolyn he was 45 years old. She was executed in Jan 1536, he died in 1547 at the age of 56. If he looked the way he does in the Tudors at age 45, he certainly went to hell in a handbasket in his last 11 years.
I don't think I've ever seen a portrait of Henry as being thin. They may be out there somewhere. He's always been played as being stout at the very least going back to the days of Charles Laughton (Henry the VIII), Richard Burton (Anne of a Thousand Days), and the PBS series (The 6 wives of Henry
the VIII) .That's what makes the series the Tudors so interesting, even if it does take "artistic license with the historical facts.
Now, I'm through commenting on this subject. You can have the last word
If you're going to criticize the show for inaccuracies, please get your own facts straight:
1) It is highly unlikely that Henry died of "the ravages of syphilis". Times being what they were, then most of his wives and all of his children would likely have been infected as well. The descriptions of Henry's illnesses, mood swings, etc are more consistent with advanced Type 1 diabetes, which is fatal if untreated. That his wives had so many miscarriages, stillbirths, and sudden infant death could be attributed to any number of factors including high infection risk, complicated deliveries, and simply, the amount of inbreeding among European royalty.
2) "Katherine" is the Anglicized spelling of Catalina, as another poster pointed out.
3) Up until his early 30's, Henry was lean, fit, and athletic. He began to gain weight when old wounds began to reopen and ulcerate, causing him to curtail his physical activities - again, most probably due to diabetes, which complicates the healing process.
I don't know that the show has jumped the shark. Hyperbolic advertising aside, it never promised to be anything more than a high-end bodice-ripper and it has not failed to deliver!
Collapsing some characters and events is commonplace - even among other movies that have been cited here. It's called artistic license.
1) It is highly unlikely that Henry died of "the ravages of syphilis". Times being what they were, then most of his wives and all of his children would likely have been infected as well. The descriptions of Henry's illnesses, mood swings, etc are more consistent with advanced Type 1 diabetes, which is fatal if untreated. That his wives had so many miscarriages, stillbirths, and sudden infant death could be attributed to any number of factors including high infection risk, complicated deliveries, and simply, the amount of inbreeding among European royalty.
2) "Katherine" is the Anglicized spelling of Catalina, as another poster pointed out.
3) Up until his early 30's, Henry was lean, fit, and athletic. He began to gain weight when old wounds began to reopen and ulcerate, causing him to curtail his physical activities - again, most probably due to diabetes, which complicates the healing process.
I don't know that the show has jumped the shark. Hyperbolic advertising aside, it never promised to be anything more than a high-end bodice-ripper and it has not failed to deliver!
Collapsing some characters and events is commonplace - even among other movies that have been cited here. It's called artistic license.
It certainly is watchable even if they do play it fast and loose with the historical facts. Are there shortcomings, doubtful moments, and even lol's at certain points?
Sure there are, but if you take it for entertainment only, it is a good show. It certainly has an interesting premise. That is, Henry as a lean stud rather than a disintegrating middle aged man suffering from the ravages of syphilis.
To respond to the last poster about Henry having the ability to stop the beheading of Sir Thomas More. Yes, he could have, but there was more at stake for Henry.
He had everything. . .and I mean everything. . .out on the line over his split from the Catholic Church. It may have initially been to divorce katherine, but it had transended that.
To save Sir Thomas More would have severely undermined all credibility in his court (and country). In a later episode, Henry related that he was, nevertheless, tempted to save More, but was pursuaded by Anne and her father's people to permit the execution to go forward. In hindsight, maybe he could have commutted the sentence to 10 years in the tower of London and then, when the heat died down, ushered More out of the country or something. But history is what history was in this case and More was beheaded. Was Henry' anguish real or staged for TV. Who knows?
We haven't got to the point yet where Anne (and her hapless brother) were executed, but too bad her father wasn't in the grouping. He was the one who should have got it in the neck but didn't.
Sure there are, but if you take it for entertainment only, it is a good show. It certainly has an interesting premise. That is, Henry as a lean stud rather than a disintegrating middle aged man suffering from the ravages of syphilis.
To respond to the last poster about Henry having the ability to stop the beheading of Sir Thomas More. Yes, he could have, but there was more at stake for Henry.
He had everything. . .and I mean everything. . .out on the line over his split from the Catholic Church. It may have initially been to divorce katherine, but it had transended that.
To save Sir Thomas More would have severely undermined all credibility in his court (and country). In a later episode, Henry related that he was, nevertheless, tempted to save More, but was pursuaded by Anne and her father's people to permit the execution to go forward. In hindsight, maybe he could have commutted the sentence to 10 years in the tower of London and then, when the heat died down, ushered More out of the country or something. But history is what history was in this case and More was beheaded. Was Henry' anguish real or staged for TV. Who knows?
We haven't got to the point yet where Anne (and her hapless brother) were executed, but too bad her father wasn't in the grouping. He was the one who should have got it in the neck but didn't.
Whatever, I am in agreement with you. Although I see now that I am going to have to rent Season II if what you say is true about Henry screaming/bawling during Thomas More's beheading. I have to see that - LOL. Did he forget he was the BLOODY KING OF ENGLAND!! and he could have put a stop to it?
Watching such truly over the top acting, Jonathan Rhys Meyers roaring his lines like it was Shakespeare on the Autobahn, "IT'S NOT ABOUT YOUR F***ING VIRGINITY!!!" "I AM THE BLOODY KING OF ENGLAND!" "YOU MARRIED WITHOUT MY PERMISSION!!!!" combined with bad writing, and bad directing, you just can't take it seriously.
Watching such truly over the top acting, Jonathan Rhys Meyers roaring his lines like it was Shakespeare on the Autobahn, "IT'S NOT ABOUT YOUR F***ING VIRGINITY!!!" "I AM THE BLOODY KING OF ENGLAND!" "YOU MARRIED WITHOUT MY PERMISSION!!!!" combined with bad writing, and bad directing, you just can't take it seriously.
Day 1 or the beheading of Thomas Moore, take your pick. I watched Season 1 on DVD. The cover caught my eye, it was so ridiculous - they made "Hanky" (Henry VIII) look like a K-Fed reject with the royal collar about his neck, punk buzz cut, three faceless, busty ladies-in-waiting behind him casually lounging on his thrown. I laughed out loud in Blockbuster! "Oh no they didn't!" I don't have Showtime thus I didn't see the commercials and I thought it was some quasi-tongue-in-cheek black dramedy. I quickly realized they were taking themselves seriously but kept watching out of morbid curiosity (due to the ravaging of historical facts and gratuitous sex scenes). Plus homoerotic story arcs that just...evaporate. By the beginning of Season 2, courtesy of friend's TiVo, I began to groan. The cut to Hanky screaming in anguish while Thomas Moore is beheaded was such a farce, it was campy! I giggled hysterically. If you didn't dismiss it from the beginning that was definitely a JTS moment. You could tell Jonathan Rhys Meyers was trying to hold back his laughter as well. Plus Ryhs Meyers is too effiminate and over compensates as a result. Bad series? Definitely. So bad it's good? Jury's still out.
I watched the entire first season of this crass Showtime series via DVD and I have to be honest, it really got tiresome very fast. Beautiful costumes, beautiful scenery, but the historical context got lost very fast. I got sick of "I'm the bloody king" uttered at least three times an episode, and gratuitous sex with some lady in waiting as filler. I think the scene that made me finally hit the stop button was the scene where Henry was self-gratifying while a servant held a bowl in front of him. I thought that was in extremely bad taste and unnecessary. It turned it into soft-core costume ****.
It was great to see Henry portrayed as handsome and athletic as he apparently was as a young man. But the last 15 years of his life (e.g. middle age) were when "all the interesting stuff happened."
On a positive note, I do think Jeremy Northam's portrayal of Thomas More was spot on. But Natalie Dormand made me laugh until I cried with all her huffing, puffing and eye rolling nympho portrayal of Ann Boleyn.
It was great to see Henry portrayed as handsome and athletic as he apparently was as a young man. But the last 15 years of his life (e.g. middle age) were when "all the interesting stuff happened."
On a positive note, I do think Jeremy Northam's portrayal of Thomas More was spot on. But Natalie Dormand made me laugh until I cried with all her huffing, puffing and eye rolling nympho portrayal of Ann Boleyn.
Re: Catherine of Aragon: her name in Spain was "Catalina", so her English name is Catherine. Showtime=Dummies=Jump
Historical inaccuracies in movies and television?! SAY IT AIN'T SO!
Get over it people. I'm a history buff, but I understand that history alone isn't always good TV.
The Tudors is good TV, inaccuracies aside.
Get over it people. I'm a history buff, but I understand that history alone isn't always good TV.
The Tudors is good TV, inaccuracies aside.
Actually, the Tudors is not as bad as you're all making out. Katherine is the original spelling of Katherine of Aragon, and Catherine is the modernised spelling, so that is actually correct.
King Henry was not ALWAYS fat. In his youth he was considered the handsomest man in England and was very athletic. I agree there are considerable discrepancies, but consider the limitations of making a TV show that uses one episode for each year. I was disappointed that Prince Henry, for example, only lived to be four years old instead of 17, but you can see that this is because they would have to employ a new actor every few episodes to depict his growth.
King Henry was not ALWAYS fat. In his youth he was considered the handsomest man in England and was very athletic. I agree there are considerable discrepancies, but consider the limitations of making a TV show that uses one episode for each year. I was disappointed that Prince Henry, for example, only lived to be four years old instead of 17, but you can see that this is because they would have to employ a new actor every few episodes to depict his growth.
Leave a Comment
