If a viewer has to ask about dates it shows the production team haven't done their job. It shouldn't be left up to the viewer to check on Wiki.
I think it means that it's an intelligent production that isn't spoon-feeding viewers with information that they could - if sufficiently interested - get elsewhere. I don't like history, have only the divorced / beheaded / died etc memories of Henry's wives and had quite forgotten there was any Cromwell other than Oliver. But a quick read of Wiki and a couple of other sources has given me the information I need to enable me to thoroughly enjoy this production.
I think it means that it's an intelligent production that isn't spoon-feeding viewers with information that they could - if sufficiently interested - get elsewhere. I don't like history, have only the divorced / beheaded / died etc memories of Henry's wives and had quite forgotten there was any Cromwell other than Oliver. But a quick read of Wiki and a couple of other sources has given me the information I need to enable me to thoroughly enjoy this production.
I think it means that it's an intelligent production that isn't spoon-feeding viewers with information that they could - if sufficiently interested - get elsewhere. I don't like history, have only the divorced / beheaded / died etc memories of Henry's wives and had quite forgotten there was any Cromwell other than Oliver. But a quick read of Wiki and a couple of other sources has given me the information I need to enable me to thoroughly enjoy this production.
It's BBC2, it doesn't have to pander to the LCD.
Oh please. Get off your high horse and stop acting so high and mighty. Just because a scene looked like it happened in the immediate aftermath of another doesn't mean a person is stupid not to realise events actually happened 10 years later. "Lowest common denominator" ? 'rollseyes'
Well I loved the books and I'm loving this - it's about time television catered to those of us who don't need explosions going off every five minutes and a soundtrack telling us we should feel ;-) Mark Rylance has been fantastic - you can see the cogs whirring even as his expression remains passive. I feel sorry for the other actors going toe to toe with him- they can't win
I have always felt sorry for Mary Boleyn being cast off by her family after her second marriage to William Stafford. Still, at least she kept her head.
Maybe she was secretly relieved at no longer having to be at Court?
So what we saw happen didn't really happen in real life
You'd need to ask AB and Cromwell that, as they were the only two there.
Or on second thoughts, just Cromwell - because he was only dreaming about doing it, wasn't he?
When you think about it, the majority of the drama - apart from the broad historical strokes - perhaps didn't happen in real life. eg. the blootered King Henry being propped up by Cromwell on his way to bed, Cromwell thinking back to his father giving him a kicking when he was a child, etc.
I think it means that it's an intelligent production that isn't spoon-feeding viewers with information that they could - if sufficiently interested - get elsewhere. I don't like history, have only the divorced / beheaded / died etc memories of Henry's wives and had quite forgotten there was any Cromwell other than Oliver. But a quick read of Wiki and a couple of other sources has given me the information I need to enable me to thoroughly enjoy this production.
It's BBC2, it doesn't have to pander to the LCD.
That's very unfair. A Man For All Seasons hardly pandered to the lowest common denominator. But it managed to convey historical subtleties without the audience having to consult history books on leaving the theatre or cinema.
With regards to the timeline, I was under the impression that the events of last nights episode were set in the same year. It's been 10 years since the first episode and 10 years between Anne dancing with Henry Percy and Anne becoming Queen. But you guys are talking about time jumps between scenes so I'm a bit confused.
With regards to the timeline, I was under the impression that the events of last nights episode were set in the same year. It's been 10 years since the first episode and 10 years between Anne dancing with Henry Percy and Anne becoming Queen. But you guys are talking about time jumps between scenes so I'm a bit confused.
They were. I don't think it's you who's confused! ;-)
I think it means that it's an intelligent production that isn't spoon-feeding viewers with information that they could - if sufficiently interested - get elsewhere. I don't like history, have only the divorced / beheaded / died etc memories of Henry's wives and had quite forgotten there was any Cromwell other than Oliver. But a quick read of Wiki and a couple of other sources has given me the information I need to enable me to thoroughly enjoy this production.
It's BBC2, it doesn't have to pander to the LCD.
I would think that (as usual) whatever they did would be opposed by someone.
With regards to the timeline, I was under the impression that the events of last nights episode were set in the same year. It's been 10 years since the first episode and 10 years between Anne dancing with Henry Percy and Anne becoming Queen. But you guys are talking about time jumps between scenes so I'm a bit confused.
I was under the impression that it was the same year but then I was informed by a poster on here that Henry courted Anne 10 years after Percy dumped her (in the scene where Anne place her hand on Cromwells and he took her to meet Henry).
Who was the man who threatened Cromwell at the wedding, told him to keep out of his family's business? I didn't know if he was a Boleyn or a Seymour or neither. This is happening to me quite a lot.
I wouldn't worry - I've read the book and I couldn't remember which character it was so thank God for the comment by someone below the line at the Guardian recap blog. He/she said it was William Brereton who had lands near Chester that Cromwell had some kind of interest in.
He was also one of the aristocrats who took part in that masque in ep 2 mocking the cardinal; one of those who Cromwell has mentally 'marked' for doing so.
I was under the impression that it was the same year but then I was informed by a poster on here that Henry courted Anne 10 years after Percy dumped her (in the scene where Anne place her hand on Cromwells and he took her to meet Henry).
I'm with you, so last night was all in one year, which is why there were no dates flashed up. The relationship between Anne and Percy was over before the first episode. I think it was shown in a flashback. Percy just popped up last night to see if he could get something out of his previous relationship.
I'm with you, so last night was all in one year, which is why there were no dates flashed up. The relationship between Anne and Percy was over before the first episode. I think it was shown in a flashback. Percy just popped up last night to see if he could get something out of his previous relationship.
That wasn't very clear as it looked like one minute they were telling her to drop her ties with Percy, Cromwell threatened Percy to stay away from her and the next she was holding hands with Cromwell and meeting up with Henry and she was pregnant.
Compared with the books, Bernard Hill's portrayal is fairly restrained! She writes him in a state of almost permanent apoplexy, shaking with rage.
Don't remember the bosom fondling fantasy or kissing Mary Boleyn in the books - with only 6 episodes in which to cover two mighty books, it is a bit surprising that they feel the need to add extra stuff....
Not really understanding or enjoying this. For me, any fictional dramatisation of real historical events are built on shaky ground, how can you mix the two.
It's a good job one William Shakespeare didn't share your views or some of the greatest works of literature would not exist!
Comments
He was fantasising.
It's BBC2, it doesn't have to pander to the LCD.
That was Anne Boleyn wasn't it?
Adding a few dates isn't exactly spoon-feeding.
So what we saw happen didn't really happen in real life
So what is the historical basis of this scene or was HM just fantasising?
Oh please. Get off your high horse and stop acting so high and mighty. Just because a scene looked like it happened in the immediate aftermath of another doesn't mean a person is stupid not to realise events actually happened 10 years later. "Lowest common denominator" ? 'rollseyes'
Anne Boleyn, and it was him fantasising. Presumably this is more of Hilary Mantel's re-writing of history which she slates others for doing
Did he really have an affair with his sister-in-law after his wife died, or is that also made up?
Maybe she was secretly relieved at no longer having to be at Court?
None whatsoever.
Perhaps I ought to read the book to find out more about Wolf Hall.
Interesting sites about it:
http://history.wiltshire.gov.uk/community/getfaq.php?id=519
http://www.burbage-wiltshire.co.uk/historic/wolfhall.html
http://www.marlboroughnewsonline.co.uk/features/history/2749-wolf-hall-one-of-the-marlborough-area-s-missing-tourist-attractions
You'd need to ask AB and Cromwell that, as they were the only two there.
Or on second thoughts, just Cromwell - because he was only dreaming about doing it, wasn't he?
When you think about it, the majority of the drama - apart from the broad historical strokes - perhaps didn't happen in real life. eg. the blootered King Henry being propped up by Cromwell on his way to bed, Cromwell thinking back to his father giving him a kicking when he was a child, etc.
That's very unfair. A Man For All Seasons hardly pandered to the lowest common denominator. But it managed to convey historical subtleties without the audience having to consult history books on leaving the theatre or cinema.
It was called good writing.
They were. I don't think it's you who's confused! ;-)
I would think that (as usual) whatever they did would be opposed by someone.
I was under the impression that it was the same year but then I was informed by a poster on here that Henry courted Anne 10 years after Percy dumped her (in the scene where Anne place her hand on Cromwells and he took her to meet Henry).
I wouldn't worry - I've read the book and I couldn't remember which character it was so thank God for the comment by someone below the line at the Guardian recap blog. He/she said it was William Brereton who had lands near Chester that Cromwell had some kind of interest in.
He was also one of the aristocrats who took part in that masque in ep 2 mocking the cardinal; one of those who Cromwell has mentally 'marked' for doing so.
Bernard hill does great work as norfolk
"By the thrice be-sh****n shroud of Lazarus!".
I'm with you, so last night was all in one year, which is why there were no dates flashed up. The relationship between Anne and Percy was over before the first episode. I think it was shown in a flashback. Percy just popped up last night to see if he could get something out of his previous relationship.
That wasn't very clear as it looked like one minute they were telling her to drop her ties with Percy, Cromwell threatened Percy to stay away from her and the next she was holding hands with Cromwell and meeting up with Henry and she was pregnant.
There are some issues with the storytelling I think and the way the show is paced, but the performances and the setting come together really well.
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-02-04/wolf-hall-meet-the-major-players
Compared with the books, Bernard Hill's portrayal is fairly restrained! She writes him in a state of almost permanent apoplexy, shaking with rage.
Don't remember the bosom fondling fantasy or kissing Mary Boleyn in the books - with only 6 episodes in which to cover two mighty books, it is a bit surprising that they feel the need to add extra stuff....
It's a good job one William Shakespeare didn't share your views or some of the greatest works of literature would not exist!