Sign in or 
Location: EPISODE Guide for the Tudors
Discussion: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Category:
Discussion Forum /
The TV Series
Share this
royalfalcon |
The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 22 2012, 7:39 AM EST
I have sent out a general message to members informing everybody of the Tudor Series Study. This will be the thread for us all to discuss any aspect of the programme that we wish. It has been suggested that we aim for one episode a week. So we will start off with the first episode and try to get any discussion on that finished by Sunday 29th January. If comments from the first week spill over onto the second it will be okay but if we can try to keep to one episode a week that would be helpful. Also I should point out that if you can only comment occasionally on an episode that is fine.
2
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
Keyword tags:
Series discussion
|
|
royalfalcon |
1. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 23 2012, 2:12 PM EST
Well I will start the ball rolling LOL I hope I will not be the lone poster on here.When I saw the first episode way back in October 2007 in the U.K. I was a little confused with the way the programme started with the death of the King's uncle. As the episode progressed I spotted a few other things that did not seem to have any basis in history. I made a decision at that early stage to enjoy this programme as entertainment and not keep checking for historical errors. Even in episode one I can honestly say that the fact that the star did not bear any resemblance to Henry VIII did not bother me at all. I felt that here was somebody with the charisma to play this famous king.. I know that the fact Jonathan did not look like Henry was a problem for a lot of viewers. After all King Henry VIII must be one of the most easily recognized people in history. There cannot be very many who are not familiar with Hans Holbien's famous portrait! Many other cast members did not bear much resemblance to the character they were playing. either but very few are as easily recognizable as the King. I will watch episode one again this week and add more comments about the actual first episode. I just wanted to get something started on here. 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
Neta07 |
2. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 23 2012, 11:08 PM EST
Well I came by the Tudors by pure chance, first I thought it was not the first episode because it started so abruptly. Going into the show the only information I knew about Henry VIII was his hand in the reformation from my own religious studies as a school girl (which I study just a week before). I must say the thing the kept me was the costumes at first and Henry's relationship with Mary all in that first episode.
Do you find this valuable?
|
princess212 |
3. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 27 2012, 4:46 PM EST
I agree with Jonathan having charisma, though I wonder why the english ambassador was stabbed like that and on whose authority did they act? And already the first episode and Henry is his usual despicable self. Grabbing Katherine's with his unecessary and ridiculous you are my wife speech and why is the King of England jousting when it is a dangerous sport and according to him, he has no "heir"?
Do you find this valuable?
|
MsSquirrly |
4. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 27 2012, 5:36 PM EST
"When I originally watched the first episode of the first season way back in 2007, I had preconceived ideas of Henry like most people and hated JRM in the part. But I stuck with it because the production values of the show and actors like Sam Neill as Wolsey and Jeremy Northam as More. But the more I watched him, the more I came to realize that JRM was just another interpretation. No one is going to be exactly like Henry and this was about him as a young man. He won me over by his wonderful performance. I have to say I am more partial to seasons 1 and 2 which was mostly the young Henry so I feel he fitted the part very well during those years. I will watch the first episode either tonight or tomorrow and I hope we have a few members taking part in the discussion. :) Do you find this valuable? |
|
mrsmakschmerkovskiy |
5. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 27 2012, 6:26 PM EST
When I first saw the show way back in 2007 I had 3 thoughts. 1- this show will be a great period drama. 2- I might need an adult game(drinking game) for the historical innaccuracies and 3- I wonder if they will have the show last through the last Tudor.Okay thought 1 was close to the truth. and it might be a good thing I didn't do number 2 cause there were a lot inaccuriaces. As for the 3rd thought, well that was answered after season 4. Though the first episode got me thinking, "was the court back then really that promiscous?" Yet it was a great premiere that showed the youth of the King and how things might have been. As for the innaccuracies I noted at least 20. From the fact that bessie blunt wasn't married when she was with King Henry VIII, to some of the instruments being from a future time. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
freya9 |
6. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 28 2012, 6:20 AM EST
Some of the changes made you could see why they did it such as Henry only having one sister to streamline the plot. (After all a lot of dramas about Henry don't mention his sisters at all). But some like Bessie being married or Margaret being Mary just didn't seem to have any reason or advantage to the plot. I think in a way it was a good thing that so many of the actors cast didn't resemble their historical conterparts. There have been so many dramas about the Tudor court that you sometimes have a very set idea about the people and what happened. For instance Cromwell in real life looked more like the late Les Dawson than James Frain but having a younger more attractive actor play him meant he seemed less like the cliched villian/heavy of most dramas.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
princess212 |
7. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 28 2012, 9:12 AM EST
I have to ask, did they have shaved heads during Tudor period? I know people went bald, etc, but Henry's lack of hair did not look 16th century nor Charles Brandon and I was just wondering?
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
MsSquirrly |
8. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 28 2012, 9:20 AM EST
"I have to ask, did they have shaved heads during Tudor period? I know people went bald, etc, but Henry's lack of hair did not look 16th century nor Charles Brandon and I was just wondering?"There was actually a variety of hairstyles during the 16th century....some men did have short hair. Check out this page : http://www.thetudorswiki.com/page/Men%27s+hairstyles+in+Tudor+Times 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
royalfalcon |
9. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 28 2012, 1:10 PM EST
| Post edited: Jan 28 2012, 1:11 PM EST
I must admit that I much preferred Henry and Charles Brandon's hair better in Season 2
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
freya9 |
10. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 28 2012, 1:12 PM EST
I read that when Henry's hair started to thin many members of the court started cuting their own hair short so he wouldn't feel so self concious.
Do you find this valuable?
|
Lady_Amber |
11. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Jan 28 2012, 2:50 PM EST
I only started to watch the show 2 years ago but I've always taken interest to the Tudor dynasty. I instantly loved JRM as the king, I was stunned that he didn't have the red hair but I don't think that even mattered he brought a freshness to the show. I remember ringing my boyfriend after watching the first episode, I was babbling away excitedly because I was hooked! Do you find this valuable? |
|
princess212 |
12. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 1 2012, 11:24 PM EST
I believe this week is supposed to be about episode two "Simply Henry" so I will start this one: What is up with Henry riding down by himself to meet with Francis? I believe it was Compton who said that it could be a trap where they intended to kill him? Need some caution instead of pride or whatever it was that was going through his head. Duke of Buckingham's execution was well deserved but quite different from the rest, while he is not the only one to cry, he refuses to stick his hands out and Compton? has to pull them out. I suppose the contrasting scenes of Henry's son being born and his death had to be life and death though I see the two scenes as two entirely different plots with nothing to do with one another. Poor Katherine having to go to her husband's banquet for his son with another woman. I also just had to comment on the intro if no one minds, "you think you know a story but you only know how it ends, to get to the heart of the story you have to go back to the beginning." Nice quote but we didn't start at the beginning Henry, I would have loved to start at the beginning of his reign or even his life because then we would "know the story".
2
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
royalfalcon |
13. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 2 2012, 4:03 AM EST
| Post edited: Feb 2 2012, 4:53 AM EST
Nice points princess212. I meant to mention last week that it always intrigues me why we get the quote "to get to the heart of a story you have to go back to the beginning" and then we start at about 10 to 11 years into Henry's reign.I think Henry going down to meet Francis was just a macho thing. The King wanting to show himself as brave and fearless. Regarding the Duke of Buckingham's execution. I have read somewhere that as there were so many executions that Michael Hirst wanted to ring the changes with them. With Bukingham I think that he was portrayed as all bluster. In other words he wanted to come over as all powerful but when it came to it he was a bit of a coward - all talk. I don't know that the real Duke of Bukingham died this way. I suspect he went to his death bravely as most seem to have done.. With regard to Katherine attending the celebration of Henry Fizroy's birth. I don't know whether she was made to attend or whether she just decided to go. I thought Henry looked rather irritated that she was there and seemed much happier when she left. Do you find this valuable? |
HeverRose |
14. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 2 2012, 11:12 AM EST
I always thought that line a bit over dramatic. You are right, Carol about where they start. ,And then, where EXACTLY is the beginniing? With Henry the "beginning" is not even the start of his reign, but maybe when Arthur died. That event started Henry on the course that would be his life. But maybe the person who wrote that line had the notion that the "story" is the one in the popular imagination of a tyrant who killed two of his wives. Then, the minute Henry decides his marriage is cursed by God would mark the "beginning" of the main events of his reign, especially his marriages. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
royalfalcon |
15. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 2 2012, 1:12 PM EST
Yes, Sasha you could be right about the story. Maybe this particular story was meant to be the start of Henry's marital problems. As opposed to the start of his reign. etc.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
freya9 |
16. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 2 2012, 2:22 PM EST
The tagline suggested that the show was going right back to the beggining and then starts off more or less excatly where every other drama about Henry does. It would have been nice to have at least one scene from Henry's childhood even if it was only a dream or flashback.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
princess212 |
17. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 2 2012, 3:59 PM EST
| Post edited: Feb 2 2012, 4:01 PM EST
What everyone is saying makes sense though I still would have liked to see the beginning of his reign at the least. And another thing to add: What did yall think of Henry throwing that massive temper tantrum where he was destroying stuff. Was he mad because of what happened with Francis or that Charles was elected Holy Roman Emperor? Either way not the proper way to act for a King of England. Lol at the guards popping in though and quickly popping back out.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
royalfalcon |
18. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 2 2012, 4:16 PM EST
| Post edited: Feb 2 2012, 4:17 PM EST
I thought that the massive temper tantrum was in part at least because he lost that wrestling match with Francis. Inititally he was so angry that he was refusing to sign the Treaty until Thomas More made him see how it would look if he refused.. I think in real life Henry and Francis seem to have had a love hate relationship. " One of the Ambassadors is reputed to have said " They hate each other cordially"
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
princess212 |
19. RE: The Thread For Discussion on the Tudors Series
Feb 2 2012, 4:26 PM EST
Yeah, the same could be said with the Emperor as well but those are later episodes. And the gifts part as well Henry just has a pie and Francis has an extravagant necklace. I would have felt bad if that was me, and I had received a gift like that and had only a pie in return.
Do you find this valuable?
|
