LOL I agree Steve he does definetly look preg… I mean stagnant . I wonder what name they will give their feather filled bundle of joy?
I can seem to make up my mind if this is meant to be an historical drama or an hysterical drama? but judging by what I’ve read and watched so far I’ll soon be needing to threat my needle to sew up my sides from where they have split from laughing so much.

SteveJ said

Blimey! My rubbish notions are being plagiarised!

Note ~ feature includes photos of King Pillow himself:

http://www.radiotimes.com/news…..-his-shirt

Lol I thought exactly the same

I’ve seriously gone off Edward in the series

Yes, and it’s one of the things I like about the series, Bo: the women are given their rightful prominence. Even the “negative” characters (like Margaret of Anjou) have something about them. It just so happens that, generally, the actresses are the pick of the cast too.

Still, even considering their valid, historical reasons & motivations, I’m finding it difficult to accept that TWQ‘s Richard & Anne – decent people throughout the earlier episodes – have now turned into the later Michael Corleone and his sister Connie, or Mr & Mrs Macbeth. Making the actors wear black and linger in corners evesdropping doesn’t quite cut it; ambition can be a terrible & transforming thing but it’s hard to credit the two “nice guys” changing their natures so much. Richard, who formerly looked like a muppet, has now become the Dark Lord *cue bats screeching, lightning flashes etc* while Anne seems to have swapped her intelligence and kindness for Girl Power and tiaras. Shame.

You have to give the Earl of Warwick a modicum of credit, he certainly arranged the marriages of his daughters well enough. Isabella married to the Duke of Clarence and then when he threw a hissy fit of Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville marrying Anne to Edward, Prince of Wales Henry 6th son. By doing that he kind of guarenteed that the Warwick bloodline would continue, either down the Yorkist Line or the Lancastian Line or as I believe he had hoped, via both. I believe he thought that, “it isn’t always a good idea to put all you eggs in one basket”
In some ways he was right to do that as the Warwick line did continue up until Henry 7th had the head of the young and hapless Earl of Warwick who had been housed in the Tower from the time of Edward 4th death more or less. When he tried a somewhat foolish bid for freedom along with Perkin Warbeck in Henry 7th reign.
Margaret the elder sister of the hapless Earl did at least fair a little better, she married Richard Pole, and had issue one of which Reginald Pole took holy orders and preched vehmently against Henry divorce from K.O.A and that Henry should declare himself head of the Church. Lard arse unable through careful skill from Pole was able to avoid Henry’s assasins in Rome, but although his life was spared, his mother took the rage and malice Lard arse had against him. So poor Margaret, was viciously chopped up by Lard arse’s axe man. It was said that Margaret when was told to lay her head of the block she refused saying she had not committed treason and therefore she wouldn’t lay down and submit to the axe, leaving the axeman no other choice but to chase poor Margaret who was not a young woman and hacked her to pieces.

Boleyn said

You have to give the Earl of Warwick a modicum of credit, he certainly arranged the marriages of his daughters well enough….

not really – Warwicks dynasty was extinguished within 3 generations of (and because of..) his ‘brilliant marriages’ and the Nevile and Beauchamp lands were scattered to the winds.

the Dukes of Northumberland and Norfolk (the Percy’s and the FitzAlan’s) (for example) have managed to hold the same titles and lands (roughly) in their families for more than 800 years – it is they who have survived, not Warwick.

Bob the Builder said

Boleyn said

You have to give the Earl of Warwick a modicum of credit, he certainly arranged the marriages of his daughters well enough….

not really – Warwicks dynasty was extinguished within 3 generations of (and because of..) his ‘brilliant marriages’ and the Nevile and Beauchamp lands were scattered to the winds.

the Dukes of Northumberland and Norfolk (the Percy’s and the FitzAlan’s) (for example) have managed to hold the same titles and lands (roughly) in their families for more than 800 years – it is they who have survived, not Warwick.

That is true. But Warwick wouldn’t have know that his bloodline would have been chopped to bits by the Tudors. He would have done what most of the nobility would have done at that time who only had daughters to inherit their lands, get them married off and having children as soon as possible, and hope that one of their children’s children was a son to carry on the family line. Isabella succeeded there, well for a while at least.
The other option of course for Warwick was to ditch his missus and marry again and hope his new wife could give him the son and heir he wanted.
Would he have done that? If he had, would Elizabeth Woodville married him to one of her sisters? Now there’s a thought.

Giving birth to scatter cushions
I guess the series ends with Henry Tudor marrying a cushion…

I agree with Anne Neville still looking like a child. I think a lot of the blame rests in the costuming; she always looks as though her clothes are miles too big for her. In fact the entire costume department has sunk to new lows on this production, even worse than ‘The Tudors’. I was watching a couple of episodes of the first series of ‘Blackadder’ the other night and their costumes are brilliant. If the BBC could pay to have proper costumes for a comedy 30 years ago why can’t they front up the cash for a proper historical costume drama now?

The thing is with costume dramas these days is they tend to focus more on the sexual side of things other than the reality aspect. In short sex sells.
If the producers stick to the traditional or the realistic as they would have dressed side of things people would get bored with watching it.

Better to have woman with their boobs hanging out or preforming sex acts, with anything that moves. Mind you given that Edward was a bit of a ladies man it’s small wonder that the goldfish he had in his fountains stopped swimming whenever he was around . Think about it .

SteveJ said

Yes, and it’s one of the things I like about the series, Bo: the women are given their rightful prominence. Even the “negative” characters (like Margaret of Anjou) have something about them. It just so happens that, generally, the actresses are the pick of the cast too.

Still, even considering their valid, historical reasons & motivations, I’m finding it difficult to accept that TWQ‘s Richard & Anne – decent people throughout the earlier episodes – have now turned into the later Michael Corleone and his sister Connie, or Mr & Mrs Macbeth. Making the actors wear black and linger in corners evesdropping doesn’t quite cut it; ambition can be a terrible & transforming thing but it’s hard to credit the two “nice guys” changing their natures so much. Richard, who formerly looked like a muppet, has now become the Dark Lord *cue bats screeching, lightning flashes etc* while Anne seems to have swapped her intelligence and kindness for Girl Power and tiaras. Shame.

Well I suppose it beats them playing Morticia amd Gomez Addams. E.W could have played Lurch, as she was quite tall for a woman of that period, and of course Jacquetta would have to play Granny. But who would play Thing? possibly Margaret Beaufort I suppose, Uncle Fester Hmmm I guess this would have to be Jasper Tudor. With Henry Tulip as Pugsley and Elizabeth of York as Wednesday. I bet if we were submit this idea to S.W.M.N.B.N she would write a Plantaganent/Tudor version of the Addams family.

Bo