Of all the inaccuracies... | Page 4 | The Tudors Show | Forum

Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_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

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Of all the inaccuracies...
May 23, 2014
2:36 am
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Henry did have a portrait of Richard, where the shoulder has been famously altered, probably just after it was painted. It is the earliest portrait of Richard that has survived as far as I am aware. I believe it was part of a set.

May 23, 2014
9:56 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I suppose the reason to why there was a picture of Richard (apart from being part of the set) is to remind people that anything is possible.
H7 overcame impossible odds and gained a throne. H5 destroyed the French army at Agincourt in little over 2 hours. etc.
Although I would have thought that a picture of H5 would have been displayed, the reason being is because H8 (real life) viewed H5 as some sort of a hero, and I believe that one of the things he really wanted to do, was to do as his hero had done and take France for his own.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

May 25, 2014
2:17 am
Avatar
Anyanka
La Belle Province
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2345
Member Since:
November 18, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

All I thought was some poor set designer just pulled up some Tudor-era portaits to fill out some space in the back-grounfd.

It's always bunnies.

May 26, 2014
6:23 pm
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Well flukes are good too Laugh Did the portrait have a red or blue background Lady Kay, do you remember?

May 26, 2014
6:38 pm
Avatar
Lady Kay
Kentucky
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6
Member Since:
January 31, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Olga said

Well flukes are good too Laugh Did the portrait have a red or blue background Lady Kay, do you remember?

It was red. It was the well known portrait of Richard III, with him fiddling with his ring.

"By daily proof you will find me to be both loving and kind."

May 26, 2014
6:42 pm
Avatar
Lady Kay
Kentucky
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6
Member Since:
January 31, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Anyanka said

All I thought was some poor set designer just pulled up some Tudor-era portaits to fill out some space in the back-grounfd.

That’s what I thought!

"By daily proof you will find me to be both loving and kind."

May 26, 2014
6:44 pm
Avatar
Lady Kay
Kentucky
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6
Member Since:
January 31, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said

I suppose the reason to why there was a picture of Richard (apart from being part of the set) is to remind people that anything is possible.
H7 overcame impossible odds and gained a throne. H5 destroyed the French army at Agincourt in little over 2 hours. etc.
Although I would have thought that a picture of H5 would have been displayed, the reason being is because H8 (real life) viewed H5 as some sort of a hero, and I believe that one of the things he really wanted to do, was to do as his hero had done and take France for his own.

I would have thought Henry V as well since that was who H8 admired so much. Maybe it was there to remind him of how he got to power. :)

"By daily proof you will find me to be both loving and kind."

May 27, 2014
1:25 am
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Well they got the right one at least. You never now they may have actually researched that part…and for television purposes Richard III has a society all to himself, they may have figured he was more prominent in pop-culture Laugh

June 30, 2014
2:13 pm
Avatar
mary the quene
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2
Member Since:
March 24, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

In the words of some character I can’t remember from a movie, “I’ve never seen so much, so wrong, so fast.”

The Tudors was worth watching only for Natalie Dormer’s amazing ‘flirting with her eyes’ skill.
I had apoplexy during the episodes I watched. Soooooo much was inaccurate.
Most annoying of all was the Irish chick they had playing Catherine of Aragon. Long-suffering marty much?

The actual truth was so much more entertaining than what was combined in that hot mess of Tudor-style nakedness, baddies twirling their mustaches while the virgin was tied to the railroad tracks (yeah, I know but you get my point) bedspring-polka programming. Yell

July 1, 2014
5:58 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

To be honest the portrayal of K.H was the one that really irritated me more than anything. I wanted to jump through the screen and cuff her one.
I am sure Tazmin Outhwaite? is a good actress, but she certainly wasn’t the right person to choose to portray K.H. I know she was meant to portray K.H as young and perhaps a little naive, as well as being sexy etc, but the petulant behaviour and strutting about got right up my bugle.
I am sure the real K.H was nothing like that, Emily Blunt played a good K.H. Flirty but at least showed some decorum and Queenly virtues in her portrayal. In the original series of the 1970’s K.H part was played by Angela Pleasence and actually her portrayal was rather good, it showed her to be kind and gentle, and able to manage the cantankious old git that H8 had become. The only thing about The Tudors portrayal is when K.H was on the scaffold, when she looked up to the sky and said “Life is very beautiful” and then lay her head on the block. I guess it was then she showed just how young she really was, I’m guessing she was about 19 when she went to her death in real life.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

January 11, 2015
10:48 am
Avatar
Hannele
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 129
Member Since:
August 17, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said

To be honest the portrayal of K.H was the one that really irritated me more than anything. I wanted to jump through the screen and cuff her one.
I am sure Tazmin Outhwaite? is a good actress, but she certainly wasn’t the right person to choose to portray K.H. I know she was meant to portray K.H as young and perhaps a little naive, as well as being sexy etc, but the petulant behaviour and strutting about got right up my bugle.
I am sure the real K.H was nothing like that, Emily Blunt played a good K.H. Flirty but at least showed some decorum and Queenly virtues in her portrayal. In the original series of the 1970’s K.H part was played by Angela Pleasence and actually her portrayal was rather good, it showed her to be kind and gentle, and able to manage the cantankious old git that H8 had become. The only thing about The Tudors portrayal is when K.H was on the scaffold, when she looked up to the sky and said “Life is very beautiful” and then lay her head on the block. I guess it was then she showed just how young she really was, I’m guessing she was about 19 when she went to her death in real life.

Yes, one could help but wonder when watching The Tudors show how in earth Henry could choose as his queen Katherine Howard and later praise her as virtuous when she already in the beginning that showed that she knew everything about how to seduce a man (putting a ring her vagina etc) and would have thus been better suited as a mistress – at least according to the thinking of the age. (Anne Boleyn of course knew sexual tricks also, but not in the beginning when Henry courted her and she behaved modestly and used only her eyes but only when they had a committed relationship.)

However, the actress of Katherine Howard was not responsible about the image of KH but the scriptwriter. After all, he wrote the scenes.

In The Tudors show, there was clearly pattern to create opposites between Henry’s wives (Katherine of Aragon vs. Anne Boleyn, AB versus Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleaves vs. Katherine Howard, KH versus Katherine Parr). Of course, those opposites were mainly based on their traditional images. But in the case of Katherine Howard, The Tudors chose (at least partially to please the actor) to present Henry at that time not as old, fat and probably impotent but as almost youthful and slim and lean and only having a problem with a leg ulcer. After being a little time impotent (for psychologically rather than physiologically reasons) with AoC, he was cured by KH after with he was as sexually eager and potent as ever until the leg ulcer again began to trouble him.

In the show, if this had not happened and Henry would have continued to share Katherine’s bed and satisfy her sexually (their later sex was presented as not good to KH), she would have been no need of Culpepper. Henry’s moral double standard was also presented: he finally slept with Anne of Cleves and thus broke his marriage vows while waiting KH to keep hers!

One odd think in the casting of the Tudors was that nothing in Anne of Cleaves’s appearance could not explain why Henry thought her ugly. But then, all Henry’s wives in the show were beautiful although in reality f.e. Jane Seymour was rather plain. And of course not any of the men was fat, unlike in the reality.

January 11, 2015
1:04 pm
Avatar
Hannele
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 129
Member Since:
August 17, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

One must always remember that in a novels, movies or TV series, the most important thing is a good story with good characters. I have read stories that are historically inaccurate but just because lack any original vision and in fact quite boring. On the other hand, I can forgive historical inaccuracies if because of them, something essential of the characters is relieved.

As for The Tudors, the plot in the first season that Anne’s father and her uncle Norfolk plans Anne to catch king’s fancy and to become his mistress in order to get rid of Cardinal Wolsey who prevents their progression, works well when watching in the show. But when one begins to think the plot, it is nonsense. How an earth could Henry listen to a mistress’s opinions about Wolsey? After Henry agrees to marry Anne, Wolsey seems first to be the best to help to get a divorce, so why would Anne drop hints against him from the beginning – why not wait until she was Queen? Only after Wolsey has failed, Anne’s actions against Wolsey are understandable (there was no Percy affair in the show, after all).

BTV. in the show Wolsey seems to try his best to get a divorce and Henry’s try to go to the Pope behind his back is shown as foolish. However, Starkey says that Henry missed the best time to act when he believed Wolsey to whom it was more important to retain his own power over Henry than to get a divorce.

March 6, 2015
10:56 am
Avatar
davetee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 7
Member Since:
March 6, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I’ve just re-watched The Tudors and thoroughly enjoyed it, despite all the inaccuracies. Such a shame they had to try and change historical facts just to try and make it more dramatic. I’m sure I heard Catherine Howard utter the phrase “you’re weird”. Was weird even a word in those times?

Would have been nice to carry it on through the reigns of Mary and Elizabeth.

March 6, 2015
3:20 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Most of us of the same thought here, Davetee. It would have been good if Showtime had continued the series.
Mary’s speech to Chapuys, when he was to return to Spain was said with such determination, that it would have been good to see how her reign would have been portrayed.
Word Origin and History for weird before 900; (noun) Middle English (northern form of wird), Old English wyrd; akin to worth2; (adj.) Middle English, orig. attributive noun in phrase werde sisters the Fates (popularized as appellation of the witches in Macbeth)

Old English wyrd (n.) “fate, destiny,” literally “that which comes,” from Proto-Germanic *wurthis (cf. Old Saxon wurd, Old High German wurt “fate,” Old Norse urðr “fate, one of the three Norns”), from PIE *wert- “to turn, wind,” (cf. German werden, Old English weorðan “to become”), from root *wer- (3) “to turn, bend” (see versus ). For sense development from “turning” to “becoming,” cf. phrase turn into “become.”

The modern sense of weird developed from Middle English use of weird sisters for the three fates or Norns (in Germanic mythology), the goddesses who controlled human destiny. They were portrayed as odd or frightening in appearance, as in “Macbeth,” which led to the adjectival meaning “odd-looking, uncanny,” first recorded 1815.
I hope this helps a little.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

March 19, 2015
9:06 pm
Avatar
Sharon
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2
Member Since:
March 19, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hi everyone
I have just joined so I’m a little behind….I loved the Tudors series for pure entertainment…(no one in my family would watch it with me though as I kept yelling at all the inaccuracies lol) I too hated Wolsey’s suicide..but I think that for some reason Anne having blue eyes bugged me ALOT !! Katherine Parr’s second husband telling her to go to hell on his deathbed also really really annoyed me, and Elizabeth appearing unconcerned in her final scene as her father says goodbye for the last time… all these things, though small, drove me crazy. And to have amalgamated the 2 Tudor sisters ( BTW 2 of the most interesting women of their time ) and have Margaret murder the king of Portugal…Mental !!!!

March 20, 2015
9:45 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The only thing that got seriously up my bugle with the series, is how Katherine Howard was portrayed. I can understand why the producers, decided to portray her that way. It was to draw attention, to her youth, but it just made me want to leap through the screen and give her a damn good hiding.
However aside from that I love the series. You aren’t on your own with spouse not wanting to watch anything historical with you, my dinosaur hates history and really moans when I point out any inaccuracies in a particular programme.
That’s why our Boleyn home is so important to us, as it’s where like minds can get together, and chatter about history until the cows come home, and then go back out again.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

March 20, 2015
8:06 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2115
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I must be the lucky one. My husband watched the whole series with me. And he put up with all my yelling about inaccuracies. There were a several things which bugged me, but I enjoyed it, and hated to see it end.

April 4, 2015
6:45 pm
Avatar
Alexandria
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 38
Member Since:
March 26, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sharon said

Hi everyone
I have just joined so I’m a little behind….I loved the Tudors series for pure entertainment…(no one in my family would watch it with me though as I kept yelling at all the inaccuracies lol) I too hated Wolsey’s suicide..but I think that for some reason Anne having blue eyes bugged me ALOT !! Katherine Parr’s second husband telling her to go to hell on his deathbed also really really annoyed me, and Elizabeth appearing unconcerned in her final scene as her father says goodbye for the last time… all these things, though small, drove me crazy. And to have amalgamated the 2 Tudor sisters ( BTW 2 of the most interesting women of their time ) and have Margaret murder the king of Portugal…Mental !!!!

Although I also enjoyed The Tudors despite myself, I think that business with the two sisters being amalgamated and moved to Portugal was the most irritating thing. They seem to think that the audience were dim enough not to be able to deal with two sisters, or with several characters called Mary. It also tied their hands if they wanted to continue the series after Henry’s death, as they would have had to explain Mary Queen of Scots’ claim to the English throne! To say nothing of the origin and status of Lord Darnley and of Arbella Stuart. Also re KP, I cannot recall if they dealt with her husband’s involvement in the Pilgrimage of Grace properly, or if they portrayed him as older than he actually was, it is some time since I watched it.

April 5, 2015
10:01 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

K.P’s 2nd husband (Pilgramage of Grace hissy fit) was about 40 when he married K.P. Not exactly elderly by today’s standards, but 15/16th century standards, he was living on borrowed time. I believe that William Parr (Brother) may well have done a bit of blagging work to Henry to spare the life of his brother in law in real life. This is purely a guess mind you, but it does seem feasable to me.
As for the continuation of the series, The Tudors, I believe they (writers) would have possibly made out, that (Henry’s uncle who was murdered in Orbino in the very first episode) would have had a daughter or 2 and a couple of grandkids to boot as well, and that Darnley and Mary QoS were decended through this blood line.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 7, 2015
8:48 pm
Avatar
Hannele
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 129
Member Since:
August 17, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said (Henry’s uncle who was murdered in Orbino in the very first episode) would have had a daughter or 2 and a couple of grandkids to boot as well, and that Darnley and Mary QoS were decended through this blood line.

Except Henry had only one paternal uncle, Jasper Tudor, who had no claim on the throne (his brother married Margaret Beaufort who bore the future Henry VII after his death) and who had no legitimate children. Henry’s maternal uncles were of course the Princes in Tower.

No permission to create posts
Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 70

Currently Online:
20 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Anyanka: 2345

Boleyn: 2285

Sharon: 2115

Bella44: 934

DuchessofBrittany: 847

Mya Elise: 782

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 0

Members: 426038

Moderators: 0

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 13

Topics: 1679

Posts: 23600

Newest Members:

ashleyro2, franklingo18, HorinadR, estherqw4, enriquebo2, Delaquand

Administrators: Claire: 998