Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
10:36 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
“May the best man win” according to Bart Simpson is the mating call of the looser. Is this new “War of the Roses” TV series going to show us that Richard III was just having a “bad day” in Bosworth field?
Or maybe that Henry VII was a great King of war?
No, it seems that the battles matter not and all will get sorted down the woman’s tent over a nice cup of tea?
Is there enough sex in the War of the Roses for a long term TV series? Henry VII was just a warmonger and Richard III, well he could not mount his horse!
Are we to see Elisabeth of York as a steamy hot temptress?
Who will be the historian for the series?
Will we get a definitive answer to who killed the Princes in the Tower, or one person’s attitude that will live on for a generation?
Is there enough in the War of the Roses for a TV series? After all, it is barely mentioned in school history books.
Let us have the chance to talk about it now and not a Post Mortem view as with “Tudor’s”….
Come out, come out where ever you are and tell me how wrong I am!
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
2:08 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
Oh your right, LOL what everyone needs! SEX! No,no, no I kind of agree though cause The Tudors was full of sex which was easier cause Henry was known for mistresses and infidelity.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
3:54 pm
June 7, 2010
Offline
Sex could be featured if the series included Elizabeth Woodville and her mother, Jacquetta of Luxembourg (who were considered vixens of their time). I am sure (going by what I know about PG's books), witchraft will be a large part of these stories lines.
Edward IV was a known philaderer and had many mistresses, including the beautiful Jane Shore (later made to do penence in public for their relationship).
Richard III was known to have several illegitimate children. So that could be part of his “sex story line.”
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
6:39 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
There'll be sex aplenty. Edward was a real womaniser and so were his brothers….
oh! and wasn't Cecily Neville supposed to have an affair so Eddy was illegitimate (or so said George and, I think, Richard!)…. And Warwick said the same about Margaret of Anjou….the possibilites are endless
And add in the incest I'm sure every-one was committing around the courts and we have a winner…
It's always bunnies.
10:04 am
February 24, 2010
Offline
Hi Ipaud,
The supposed historian is Phillipa Gregory. I think that answers all of your questions. 
11:46 am
May 16, 2011
Offline
LOL
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
5:32 pm
June 19, 2009
Offline
So we will be none-the-wiser about the actual War of the Roses then?
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
7:26 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Anyanka said:
And add in the incest I'm sure every-one was committing around the courts and we have a winner…
I seem to remember that Richard was thinking of marrying Elizabeth after Anne Neville's death…so incest is covered…
It's always bunnies.
6:46 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
Shocking… really shocking…Stiff upper lip then and soldier on.
Does anyone thing that it will have anything to do with the battles? Or will all that stuff will be going on outside the window interrupting the sex?
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
5:02 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
I'm sure they'll have like a 2 second battle scene then go back to someone doing someone then back and forth. As long as they show a battle even if it's 2 seconds then their job is covered.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
6:07 pm
June 19, 2009
Offline
OMG… Its starting to sound like Blackadder…
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
8:52 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
Well that's TV these days and combined with PG….yeah good luck!
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
7:19 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
How about a title then?
“Henry VII does Bosworth”
What do you all think?
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
10:38 am
May 16, 2011
Offline
There you go, sounds good.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
6:49 pm
January 6, 2012
Offline
For all we know, there will be sex during the battle scenes.
7:53 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
Rebecca said:
For all we know, there will be sex during the battle scenes.
Hahaha, yeah.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
7:25 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
If its all sex, then cast the main players?
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
12:18 pm
June 7, 2010
Offline
Anyanka said:
oh! and wasn’t Cecily Neville supposed to have an affair so Eddy was illegitimate (or so said George and, I think, Richard!)…. And Warwick said the same about Margaret of Anjou….the possibilites are endless
According to some historians, Cecily Neville had an affair with an English archer sometime during the summer of 1441. They claim, given his date of birth, he could not be the son of Richard, Duke of York, since he was away fighting from July to August 1441. Since he was several days away from Cecily's base of Rouen, he could not have fathered the future Edward IV. Further, the argument goes: Edward's baptism was a quiet, small affair, and there is no record of him being born premature.
It seems the really issue of his paternity was during his disputes with his brother, George, and when he married Elizabeth Woodville. I've read several sources that blame Cecily for bringing up the issue of his paternity, but I find it a rather apocryphal statement. I doubt she would out herself as an adulteress.
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
3:01 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
ipaud said
“May the best man win” according to Bart Simpson is the mating call of the looser. Is this new “War of the Roses” TV series going to show us that Richard III was just having a “bad day” in Bosworth field?
Or maybe that Henry VII was a great King of war?
No, it seems that the battles matter not and all will get sorted down the woman’s tent over a nice cup of tea?
Is there enough sex in the War of the Roses for a long term TV series? Henry VII was just a warmonger and Richard III, well he could not mount his horse!
Are we to see Elisabeth of York as a steamy hot temptress?
Who will be the historian for the series?
Will we get a definitive answer to who killed the Princes in the Tower, or one person’s attitude that will live on for a generation?
Is there enough in the War of the Roses for a TV series? After all, it is barely mentioned in school history books.
Let us have the chance to talk about it now and not a Post Mortem view as with “Tudor’s”….
Come out, come out where ever you are and tell me how wrong I am!
I think ipaud you are trying to base an entire television series around 2 kings when in fact the whole War of the Roses issue involved 4 kings.
I certainly think there could be enough material found in the reigns of these 4 Kings. Henry 6th the deeply relgilous king prone to bouts of madness, with a French harpy for a wife, Edward 4th with what some have called a witch for a wife, Richard 3rd who it is rumoured to have poisoned his wife so he could marry his niece, and possibly murdered her brothers in the tower, and Henry 7th, who only won the throne through combat, and married Elizabeth of York to make certain that he was safe on the throne, and again another possible murderer of the Princes in the tower. Then of course there were the legendary love affairs of love affairs of Edward 4th, and the claims from Edward’s brother George that Edward was a bastard thus inferring his mother was a strumpet, and George’s death in the tower from being drowned in a vat of wine.. I rather think there is more than enough don’t you..
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
