Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log Insp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_Feed Topic RSSsp_TopicIcon
Responsibility and Historical Accuracy
August 28, 2009
8:45 am
Avatar
Claire
Admin
Forum Posts: 958
Member Since:
February 16, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Further to my post yesterday on \”The Tudors\”, I was just wondering if directors, producers, screen writers etc. have any responsibiity to make things historically accurate.

I for one just enjoy \”The Tudors\” for what it is – a romp (romp being the operative word) through history but some people have pointed out that they think it is marketed in such a way as a viewer might take it seriously and believe it utterly. So, should programmes and movies about real events and times tell the real story or should writers/directors be free to be inspired and do what they want with the story?

Movies/series (off the top of my head) that have been criticised include the Cate Blanchett Elizabeth films, Titanic, Pearl Harbour, Rome and The Tudors.

What do you think?

Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn

August 29, 2009
12:26 am
Avatar
Sabrina
California
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 205
Member Since:
June 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

If the writers of these shows want people to see them, they usually take some poetic license to make the story more interesting. With the Tudors, they have used some very cannon sources, but there is still alot of embellishing on the gaps. If they are claiming that they are making a documentary, then they need to have the proper sources to back up their claims. If it's fiction, and they are basing the show or movie off of a period in time, then they should at least make it known that it's fiction, so people don't go around believing they are learning the truth when they aren't.

It bothers me when I read things from other groups, thinking that blatently historical ficition novels are true, even though there are notes in the back saying that they filled in the gaps where they couldn't find sources. Things get heated, and it shouldn't get that way. We all want to know the truth, but I would rather read the huge historical books by Ives, Weir, Starkey and all the others instead of just getting a taste from the fiction writers..

Let not my enemies sit as my jury

August 29, 2009
6:52 pm
Avatar
Rochie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 114
Member Since:
June 24, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Having calmed down a little after yesterday's debate on the main site, I still have to say that all theses shows just make my toes curl with embarrassment whenever I see them – I can't help it! It all just looks like modern people and modern preoccupations played out in fancy dress – like Coronation Street or Eastenders in tights. And yes, I do feel we should have a little regard for these people, who were flesh and blood after all and often suffered terribly. The real interest surely is in trying to learn and comprehend the REAL people themselves, what made them the way they were. What made them think the way they did. That is already so incredibly interesting – more than a life-time's study.

Having said that, I do love good drama and fiction. I love Shakespeare, and I love some of our great novelists, past and present. But these allow us to use our imaginations, and – at their best – do get beneath the surface and examine the psychology and spiritual beliefs of the characters themselves. I find this terribly lacking in shows like the Tudors

Maybe I should just lighten up and enjoy them for what they are – entertainment. They certainly can be stunning visually. But once they dialogue begins … whoops! up go the toes again, all curlly and embarrassed.

September 7, 2009
10:59 pm
Avatar
Autumn Star
Ohio
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 24
Member Since:
July 28, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

i understand that most of the movies and shows portraying the Tudor era and other historical themes are for entertainment purposes, but unfortunatley these may be the only bits of info about these historical figures many people may come in contact with and for that i feel directors and movie makers should stick to what actually happened. So many people have misconceptions about Anne, Henry and Elizabeth when I talk to them and it is soooo frustating!! I ask them where they got some of their info and it is always some tv show or movie. If the plots were true to life than so many people could be educated in what actually happened and appriciate the era for what it truly was.

*Autumn*Star*
le plus heurex

September 10, 2009
1:57 am
Avatar
gwenne
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 56
Member Since:
June 23, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

 So many people have misconceptions about Anne, Henry and Elizabeth when I talk to them and it is soooo frustating!! I ask them where they got some of their info and it is always some tv show or movie. If the plots were true to life than so many people could be educated in what actually happened and appriciate the era for what it truly was.

I can totally get this statement.  People form these perceptions about these people that's masked behind good costumes and it always seems that there is something missing from the portrayal of people in history like the Tudors.  I feel that there were much deeper elements woven into these historical figure's personal personality, that isn't addressed in portrayals of them.  Alot of misconsceptions continue to this day, being easily perpetuated by shows and movies even while being disproven by archeology and modern studies. 

Diem et animus scire cupio: I desire knowledge of the soul.

September 10, 2009
7:45 pm
Avatar
Rochie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 114
Member Since:
June 24, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Totally in agreement with you Gwenne.

For me it is a matter of depth. The current clutch of TV shows and movies are two dimensional – in more ways than one.

It's history on a flat earth.

September 11, 2009
3:45 am
Avatar
Emma_pug
Pennsylvania, USA
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 51
Member Since:
June 21, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I'm admittedly a hypocrite on this subject, because while I adore The Tudors (shrug off the inaccuracies) I absolutely despite The Other Boleyn Girl.  With the latter, I think it is worse because it's so popular – both book and movie. I suppose I am overly sensitive because I am 'protective' of Anne, and it infuriates me to think of how she was portrayed, and how Mary Boleyn was painted as so angelic.  I've had countless discussions with friends and relatives who have read or seen TOBG, and they all have the same response – \”Anne Boleyn was a horrible person!\”.  Unfortunately for them, this subjects them to my tirade.

Another example – I'm also a fairly new fan of the BBC's Merlin, which has taken creative licenses with Arthurian Legend.  Again, in this case, I really enjoy it because it is a new interpretation with a modern twist – much like The Tudors.  IMO that is different from near character assassination, like TOBG. 

But who to blame?  The creators of these works for making changes, or the people who read/watch and not fully realize what is FICTION in historical fiction?  I don't know.  IF this could work to make people curious and then go look for true information, that's good.  But too many people assume it is true.  Frustrating!   And makes this site all the more important. 🙂

Noli me tangere

September 11, 2009
10:02 am
Avatar
Claire
Admin
Forum Posts: 958
Member Since:
February 16, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

It is all a very tricky issue. I bought my friend \”The Tudors\” season 1 and 2 and she now hates Anne Boleyn and thinks I should do \”The Catherine Files\”! She also kept ringing me up with questions about whether events really did happen. So, perhaps \”The Tudors\” is a problem.

While I thought that Natalie Dormer was great at showing Anne's feistiness and The Tudors did a far better job at portraying her than TOBG, she was still very scheming. However, The Tudors does not profess to be accurate whereas Philippa Gregory tends to put sources at the back of her books and talks of how she does a year's research for each book. I'm not gaving a go at Gregory but I think people can be led astray by her books as they do not know what is real and what is fiction.

With myths and legendary figures like Robin Hood and Merlin, I can completely forgive productions deviating from the accepted stories because why not? I don't think there's any harm putting a new spin on it and, again, they are not professing to be history programmes.

I can't say that I've been enjoying Season 3 of The Tudors as much as the first two season. The first two had very strong characters and actors and I miss them.

As far as the Elizabeth movies/series go, I've watched a stack of them and have to say that I like Glenda Jackson's portrayal of Elizabeth and the series starring Helen Mirren and the series starring Anne-Marie Duff, they were much more accurate than the Cate Blanchett movies which have I think made people have very warped views of Elizabeth.

It's all still a conundrum!!

Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn

Forum Timezone: Europe/London
Most Users Ever Online: 214
Currently Online:
Guest(s) 1
Top Posters:
Anyanka: 2333
Boleyn: 2285
Sharon: 2114
Bella44: 933
DuchessofBrittany: 846
Mya Elise: 781
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1
Members: 425972
Moderators: 0
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 13
Topics: 1679
Posts: 22775
Newest Members:
DennisFub, Robertrot, coryry11, anthonyzl3, MarioCoino, JustinMUH
Administrators: Claire: 958