Tudor History Lovers discussion

Tudor Themed Movies/Shows > Anne of A Thousand Days

Comments Showing 1-50 of 59 (59 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments I just got this movie last night and haven't watched it yet. Wondering if anyone saw it and what they thought of it?

message 2: by Tisha (new)

Tisha I saw it. It was pretty good and I definitely enjoyed it more than The Other Boleyn Girl. The actress that plays Anne Boleyn is stellar. :)

message 3: by MAP (new)

MAP | 60 comments Look for an almost not-able-to-see cameo by Elizabeth Taylor!

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1903 comments Worth seeing, I think.

message 5: by Bettie (new)

Bettie Love it Jennifer - one of those films I watch every winter.

message 6: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Excellent! I'm even more excited to watch it now. Thanks :)

message 7: by Wen (new)

Wen (thespoilingone) | 140 comments Oh I have never seen this one. I will have to look for it. Sounds worth watching!!

message 8: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Did not like it one bit. The actress that played AB delievered well and Richard Burton was fantastic as always. The ridiculous amount of historical inacuracies is what ruined the movie for me, I just could not look past that.

message 9: by Thalia (new)

Thalia | 99 comments Inaccurate or not, it's my favourite Henry movie. Being made in that era when films were so grand and theatrical.

message 10: by Stella (new)

Stella | 6 comments This is one of my favourite films from when I was a small girl. All the cast were great. Great costumes, great script even if slightly innacurate at times. This was one of the films that made me want to learn more about the time period and all the players involved.

message 11: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (last edited Aug 19, 2009 11:23AM) (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Colleen wrote: "Did not like it one bit. The actress that played AB delievered well and Richard Burton was fantastic as always. The ridiculous amount of historical inacuracies is what ruined the movie for me, I ju..."

Are you sure that not liking AB doesn't play a small part in why you didn't like the movie? heehee

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1903 comments A Man for All Seasons is as inaccurate as hell about Thomas More - but it's still a great movie.

message 13: by Bettie (new)

Bettie Susanna wrote: "A Man for All Seasons is as inaccurate as hell about Thomas More - but it's still a great movie."

Have to agree with you here Susanna - cracktastic!

message 14: by Deirdre (new)

Deirdre (cynffig) | 17 comments Did you know that when Bolt's original play was staged in the West End, the cast all spoke in an approximation of the dialect spoken in London in the 16th century? It sounded a bit like an East Anglian accent somewhere between Norfolk and Essex.

I didn't actually see the original production (also starring Paul Scofield) but, on TV in either a Royal Command performance or some other gala event, they staged just one scene from the play. I saw it and then forgot it but when I came to see the film I fretted that something was wrong and I couldn't put my finger on it. It was a few days later that I realised suddenly it was the accents and I remembered the bit I'd seen on TV.

message 15: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Jennifer wrote: "Are you sure that not liking AB doesn't play a small part in why you didn't like the movie? heehee"

I knew you would say that. Yes, I actually watched with as much neutrality as I could muster. In fact, though the actress did very well, I don't think the script writers did AB justice.

Okay now you got me started... for AB coming to court being bethrothed to HP and Henry simply noticing her dancing with HP at a random court function? Come on. Mary being with her mother when she died? That drove me mad because I think it was important to note they were seperated in every way for years. AB refusing to get involved at all with Henry because he was already married? Give me a break. Henry being miserable and torn when her (AB) beheading was about to commence? Puhlease, he was already crazy about JS and married her, what 8 days later? Psh, grieving husband indeed. I did like how AB executed Wolsey's fall from grace though.

Historical inaccuracies are one thing if it is tweaked slightly but completely making things up is ridiculous.

message 16: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Susanna wrote: "A Man for All Seasons is as inaccurate as hell about Thomas More - but it's still a great movie."

I thought that was just a play, now I am going to have to netflix that movie; thanks Susanna.

message 17: by Connie (new)

Connie (boleynfan) | 41 comments I love "Anne of the Thousand Days". Genvieve Bujold was the "Anne" all others pale in comparison too.

It is actually incredibly accurate, especially compared to most films. And although not accurate at all, how I wish the scene where Henry visits Anne in the Tower and she tells him off and loves him still all at once at the end had really happened!!

And didn't Anne pretty much refuse to get "involved" with Henry because he was already married??

message 18: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments All the reading I have done points to the impossibility of AB and HP being secretyly married or perhaps even bethrothed, wasn't HP already bethrothed to another woman when AB set her sights on him?

An earlier debate in another thread that got very heated was the question of AB's virginity when she came to Henry (not counting obviously the rape she suffered as a youth). In AOATD there is a conversation AB and HP have about their virginity; HP saying as gently as he can that he is an English man so of course he is not a virgin. AB stating she had one before and one in France then (I found this very interesting) she starts to comment on being molested as a child before they are interupted. AB supporters and AOATD lovers which is it then? The version of AB being pious and keeping her chastity until she got involved with Henry or the version of AB giving herself to TW, HP, and a random young man or two at the French court?

Tudor lovers freak out when I mention my dislike of AB but more than that I would rather hear something as close to historically accurate as possible; giving none of us were alive at the time the Tudor's reign.

I have always been under the impression AB at first wanted nothing to do with Henry because of his past involvement with her sister which went on for years and resulted in two pregnancies. AB would have taken her sister's experience in mind; not wanting to be in a long line of used and cast aside mistresses. She was also still in love with HP and heartbroken over losing him because of her "inferior" lineage. Henry being married seemed not to bother AB when Henry publically gave chase to her.

message 19: by Connie (new)

Connie (boleynfan) | 41 comments Please elaborate on the molestation of Anne. I am unfamiliar with this.

message 20: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Surely Connie:
Apparently when AB was 7yrs old one of her fathers "friends", an official, raped her at Hever castle. Alison Weir mentions this in passing which was first written by a Jesuit priest, Nicolas Sanders, in the 16th century. Alison Weir later dismisses the rumor as false pointing out that Sanders was responsible for "some of the wilder inaccuracies that gained currency about Anne Boleyn". However, the so-called rumor is very specific to the age of AB, the place in which the molestation took, and the identity of the man who commited the crime and as we all know rumors are nearly always based on facts and are often vauge.

message 21: by Connie (new)

Connie (boleynfan) | 41 comments Thanks for the info. With as little as is known about her early life, it is surprising to hear that this info, of all things, came forward. But it appears from what you say, Weir mentions it then dismisses it, so Weir doesn't believe it to have occurred either.

Personally, cannot subscribe to the notion that "we all know rumors are nearly always based on facts" theory. I believe Anne Boleyn, accused of witchcraft and incest based on rumor, would have disagreed as well

message 22: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Plenty argue that the art of seduction is "witchcraft" (not wiccan religion but the lamen term). AB was certainly guilty of that. As for incest, I argue she was willing to do anything to keep her position so who knows who desperate she got. Technically, according to the way things were considered at the time, she did commint incest by getting involved with and having a child with Henry. He already had two children with MB, her full blood sister.

Despite Weir dismissing the story she herself brought up, I see the molestation (of AB) as a good possibility given the specifics of the story.

message 23: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments I don't know if AB committed incest or not... it's possible and I agree with Colleen that she was desperate and more than likely would have done anything to keep her position. That being said, Henry also would have done anything to get rid of her including the total fabrication of rumours surrounding her. I also don't hink that rumors are always based on fact although I know where you're coming in saying that. In this case though I think that if Henry wanted a story to be started about AB then it would have been started. He would have given the men of his council free reign to say whatever they wanted about her. The people already hated her so the rumors would have spread like wildfire. She didn't have a whole lot of defenders, did she?

message 24: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments No, she didn't.

By rumors based on fact, the fact could be anything:

"I see the Queen entertaining Mark Smeaton often in private"

"She spends far too much time with her brother whom she is unusually close too"

Facts stated by many; built upon by many as well.

message 25: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (last edited Sep 04, 2009 06:30AM) (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Yes, I see your point and now you've got me thinking. What about the witchcraft rumors though? What facts do you think those were based on? I have a couple of guesses ...

1. 6 fingers on 1 hand (I've read that to be thought of as the sign of the devil)

2. Mole on her neck that she kept covered (same reason as above)

3. Trying whatever she could (herbal potions, etc) to get pregnant

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1903 comments Also, a witchcraft accusation was a terrific way for Henry to not blame himself in any way for the marriage going south. "She was a witch! It's not my fault! It's why we only had a girl!"

message 27: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Susanna wrote: "Also, a witchcraft accusation was a terrific way for Henry to not blame himself in any way for the marriage going south. "She was a witch! It's not my fault! It's why we only had a girl!""

Yes! Good old Henry.

By the way, I watched AOATD tonight and I LOVED it but I actually took notes while watching (which I don't have right now but will post later). Colleen, I really tried to be unbiased watching it but it didn't work. I'm still a big AB fan :)

message 28: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments During that time anything could be witch craft, it seems like the oldest accusation in the book against a woman who dared going against the grain, especially if she was smart. I know the 6 fingers thing had to be a story but it has been said she had somewhat of a "double nail" on one finger. Tiny fact blown out of proportions. AB was supposedly covered in moles but I doubt Henry would have been anything less than horrified if that were the case. Honestly, any "deformity" was a sign of the devil which is ridiculous.

I don't know that Henry would have cited witchcraft being the reason the only living child from their union was a girl. He was a big believer that a living boy child was God's stamp of approval. They also thought that it was the woman who chose the gender of the child, why would AB "choose" her only heir to be a "useless" girl?

I think his bigger beef aside from no sons, and AB's sharp tongue getting very tiring, was the adultry charge. Do as I say not as I do. He really was a mega-hypocrite!

message 29: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments I look forward to your notes Jennifer and I had no doubt you would like the film but are you sure you watched unbiased? ;p

message 30: by Connie (new)

Connie (boleynfan) | 41 comments It's really quite simple. As Eustace Chapuys wrote of her final miscarriage of a son, "She has miscarried of her savior". If Anne had delivered a son, there would have been no talk of witchcraft, adultery or incest, EVER.

message 31: by Aly (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments Connie wrote: "It's really quite simple. As Eustace Chapuys wrote of her final miscarriage of a son, "She has miscarried of her savior". If Anne had delivered a son, there would have been no talk of witchcraft, a..."

I disagree with you. AB was very disliked by people. I think they still would have talked and tried to discredit her. Would it have been as potent? I don't think so. But the fact is, she turned her back on a lot of people who could help her. Even the man who had helped set her up on the throne, Cromwell, turned against her. He was the one who had "interrogated" Mark Smeaton and got him to say that he had relations with her. She had very few friends. And a lot of deadly enemies. There would have still been talk.

message 32: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Yes Aly. I think the talks of witchcraft and adultry would still have existed, in fact they might have gotten worse. Son or no son there were hoards of people who's toes she had stepped on. Hell at that moment in time who really wanted to be her friend?

message 33: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (last edited Mar 15, 2010 09:52AM) (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Okay, I lost my notes Colleen so I can't post a very articulate review right now. I remember one thing that did bug me about this movie though and that was Anne's hair. While it was very pretty, many times her hair was just loose and flowing. That wouldn't have been the case at that time, right?

message 34: by Aly (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments Jennifer- women who were virgins could wear their hair loose until they were of marriageable age. Women at court had to have their covered and pulled up. The only exception was the queen on her wedding day or coronation day. She was supposed to be the symbol of chastity, so a cream dress and flowing hair would have made her look the part. Of course, AB wasn't the chaste person she had portrayed at her coronation; she was pregnant with Elizabeth.
Colleen- Its true, who did want to be her friend? She was circling the drain and had been pretty awful to mostly everyone around her. Whether or not she was innocent in the infidelities that she was accused of, she was still guilty of being a horrible human being.

message 35: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Thanks Aly, that confused me a bit.
I just can't help feeling sorry for Anne. I know she was awful or I guess as sure as we can be but can you imagine what she must have felt in the Tower, knowing that she had no one, simply waiting to die?

To rise so high and then fall so fast.... and so low.

message 36: by Connie (new)

Connie (boleynfan) | 41 comments If Anne was the mother of the male heir to the throne, she would have given Henry the thing he wanted most. Cromwell only turned on her when it became expedient to do so. There would be every reason for Henry and thereby all of his counselors to support her. Whether or not Anne was well liked, to do anything else would have cast a shadow on the male heir.

message 37: by Suzanne (new)

Suzanne (chatternyc) | 178 comments I did like this film, despite the inaccuracies (which is more than I could say for TOBG...) When it first came out, I was living in London (not allowed to see it -- too young.) But I remember the gripe about inaccuracy at the time revolved solely around Bujold's French accent, which was probably inaccurate.

I'm skeptical about the six fingers stuff. Firstly, Anne's body was exhumed in St Peter ad Vincula in the late 19th or early 20th centuries, and no anomalies were found. Secondly, Henry himself was notoriously superstitious. It's highly unlikely that he would have been able to cope with a sign that at the time was an obvious sign that the individual was involved in witchcraft.

I'm no fan of Anne Boleyn, but I tend to think her reckless and sometimes malicious rather than bad or evil. I can't imagine her committing incest; I can, however, see her being so close to her brother (relatively unusual when children were separated at a young age and farmed out to others to raise) being eagerly seized on by her enemies. Personally, I'd suspect that Anne would have done anything to avoid acquiring the reputation of being 'easy', including not sleeping with Percy, even had they been betrothed. Everything points to her being a strategic thinker, at least up until the point where she felt sure of the king and believed she could afford to be or needed to be more demanding.

message 38: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (last edited Oct 17, 2009 08:13PM) (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments I never really thought about Henry's superstitiousness when thinking about the 6th finger rumour but of course, I have to agree with you. And they definitely would have notice when the exhumed the body.

I also agree that she didn't commit incest or I don't even think committed adultry. She was smart even to get what she wanted and, IMO, smart enough to know what would put her gains at risk. Henry wanted a way out and he did what he could to get it. That being said, I think she could have committed adultry. I guess I'm on the fence. She wouldn't have risked losing the King but she also knew the only way to keep him was to give him a son. If she couldn't get one by him, she might have done whatever she had to do to get one.

I'm going to create a new poll... do you think AB committed adultry? Let's see what we all think.

message 39: by Suzanne (new)

Suzanne (chatternyc) | 178 comments If i were sitting on a jury and the standard was 'beyond a reasonable doubt', I'd have to acquit her. It was possible, but is it consistent or logical? And some of the evidence was so obviously perjury or extracted under torture. I think Smeaton claimed to have slept with her only a week or two after Elizabeth was born...

message 40: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Yes, in this case I think most people, love her or hate her, would find it hard to commit her 'beyond a reasonable doubt"

message 41: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments I hate AB but I really do not think henry would have been "bewitched" enough to carry on with AB if she had a sixth finger or was covered with moles. I have always read Henry was a hypochondriac and very superstitious, the man would have noticed those physical signs of dark witchcraft.

I think towards the end AB was being pushed out of her white castle, by her husband no less, she would have done anything to keep her comfortable status in life. Besides, she was furious Henry went back to his phillandering ways after they were married with a child. Why not get back at him? If a son comes of it who's to say it wasn't his, there was no paternity testing labs.

message 42: by Tisha (new)

Tisha I agree with you Jennifer, I don't think AB committed either incest or adultery. She was too clever. Did she probably flirt...sure...but doubt she wouldn't actually committed the act. Besides, the odds of finding the privacy makes it even more unlikey.

message 43: by Katherine (new)

Katherine Totten (katherine42) I watched a version of "Richard III" last night. This adaptation was set in the 1930's and I highly recommend it.

It was made in 1995 and Ian McKellen played Richard III, Annette Benning: Elizabeth Woodville, plus many familiar actors.

If it wasn't for this group and the reading of "The White Queen", I never would have been able to follow the movie so well. Thanks, guys.

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1903 comments I saw that version of Richard III a few years ago, and enjoyed it. You could tell Ian McKellen was having a fabulous time, too.

message 45: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments I didn't know Ian McKellen was in Richard III, now I want to go watch it too!

message 46: by Aly (last edited Oct 18, 2009 10:17PM) (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments About AB, I don't think she committed incest. And I don't think she had a sixth finger or anything. Henry would have definitely thrown her out the door. The adultery is something that I'm on the fence about. Part of me wants to believe she wasn't that way, but the more rational side of me says "she had nothing to lose at this point." Getting a son was all that mattered. Could I convict her beyond a reasonable doubt? nope.

message 47: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Okay look, I hate AB as you all know, but if she was brought to trial and I had a look at solid beyond a doubt evidence I really would say not guilty if it was crystal clear she was.

However, from all I have ever read and heard about AB she was ruthless and as Aly just said she was at the point of having nothing to lose... and that my friends is a very treacherous place to be.
It's like that saying: "The man that has nothing to lose is the most dangerous man in the world".

message 48: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Agreed. As I said before do I think she did it? No. Do I think she could have? Yes. So really, I have no idea.

Slightly off main topic, I found a strange AB book yesterday. The French Executioner by CC Humphreys.

In an age when human relics exercised great power over the minds of men, Jean Rombaud, Anne Boleyn's executioner, gains the most prized relic of all--Anne's six-fingered hand. With it comes a vow to the dead queen that he spends terrible effort trying to fulfill. A high-energy, highly theatrical tale, C.C. Humphrey's The French Executioner spans 16th-century Europe from England to Italy, Germany, and France. Jean, with the staunch heart of an old-fashioned superhero and a dangerous square-edged sword, receives loyal assistance from a cast of heroic characters: Haakon, an axe-wielding Norseman; the Fugger, a reformed midden-keeper; Januc, a Croatian mercenary; and, most importantly, Beck, a mysterious, dangerous Jew. Evil comes in the thoroughly treacherous form of the Archbishop of Siena, who has need of the famous hand for his nefarious experiments in alchemy. Scenes of Siena's Palio horse race are a highlight. This swashbuckling adventure tale has all the dubious coincidence typical of the genre as well as numerous fight scenes described in astonishing detail--what else would you expect from an author described as "a schoolboy fencing champion and fight choreographer"?

Of course I had to buy it because on tagline on the cover was "Anne Boleyn's Killer... and her last hope" but weird, huh?

message 49: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments WOW, that book sounds amazing! Adding it to the TBR mountain...

message 50: by Robin (new)

Robin | 100 comments Colleen wrote: "I didn't know Ian McKellen was in Richard III, now I want to go watch it too!"

I saw it listed and set my DVR to record it. Now I have to find the time to actually sit down and watch it.

I really, really wish someone would do a movie about R3 set in the appropriate time period!!!

« previous 1
back to top