How historically accurate is the Showtime show "The Tudors"

[KrauserKrauser]

The fiance and I have recently starting to watch The Tudors and have been enjoying it for the most part.

I am definitely not well read on the the subject of 16th century England and with my only other reference being "the Other Boleyn Girl" I was wondering how well Tudors adhears to actual historical events, etc.

[open_sketchbook]

I've only watched the first two season, but for the most part it's surprisingly accurate in some cases (general timeline, most major figures, etc) but it is definately embellished and a lot of stuff is simplified so the plot doesn't drift (Wolsey commiting sucide to end his arc is a good example). They also combined a few historical figures together in some cases, most notably with the King's sister Margaret (who was a combination of Margaret and Mary) It's adapted to be more dramatic, keep the number of characters under control, make things intuitive without spending hours on everyone's backstory, and generally make it filmable.

[Setzer]

Well, according to season 4, Henry is still thin enough to be on top without crushing his partner during sex, so, it's kinda breaking with history there.

[Twigler]

It's taking some liberties with history, the biggest ones of course are related to the lack of aging in the main cast. Henry was 42 by the time he married Anne Boleyn for example and at that point he'd already piled on a few extra pounds and was not exactly good looking as such. Other changes would be historical events are moved around, or merged. His sister's story is incorrect, there were two sisters and neither were ever married to a king of Portugal. Etc. etc.

To get a full list, you could check the Tudor's wiki.

YMMV as to how accurate it actually was. For a costume soap I don't think they did too badly.
And the one thing they did get right is the damn long time it took for him to divorce Catherine. My gods did that show drag on forever.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

They also left out the sack of Rome in 1527, which left the Pope trapped in the Castel Sant'Angelo while an Imperial army ransacked Rome in lieu of pay. It was one of the major reasons why he was unable to grant Henry a divorce.

[Lonestar]

I think Kate Beaton mocked the series pretty good over here

[Setzer]

They also left out the sack of Rome in 1527, which left the Pope trapped in the Castel Sant'Angelo while an Imperial army ransacked Rome in lieu of pay. It was one of the major reasons why he was unable to grant Henry a divorce.

No, they mention that. A messenger informs Henry that Rome was sacked by Charles V. In another episode, Henry's emissaries to the Pope tell Wolsey that getting him to agree to a divorce would be difficult with an Imperial army shacked up in Rome.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

They also left out the sack of Rome in 1527, which left the Pope trapped in the Castel Sant'Angelo while an Imperial army ransacked Rome in lieu of pay. It was one of the major reasons why he was unable to grant Henry a divorce.

No, they mention that. A messenger informs Henry that Rome was sacked by Charles V. In another episode, Henry's emissaries to the Pope tell Wolsey that getting him to agree to a divorce would be difficult with an Imperial army shacked up in Rome.

I must've missed that part. Curses.

[Kanastrous]

My wife and I refer to it as Hampton Court 90210.

[Frank Hipper]

Well, they certainly didn't have the first clue as to what an early 16th century warship should generally look like, much less the Mary Rose herself.

[LadyTevar]

Among the ladies of the SCA, I've heard nothing but praise for the costumers. And more than a few "I MUST MAKE THAT!!"

[Vympel]

I enjoy it immensely. It looks fantastic on Blu-Ray. But yeah, current (and final) season (I've only seen the first episode so far) is the only one where Henry seems to be aging, and they've only done that by making his hair grey. Other than that he still looks thirty. They try and make Brandon look old in much the same way, and by adding shitloads of hair so he looks like the wolfman. It doesn't really work.

The leg wound is in, though, that's important.

As for the "Sexy Tudors" comic, whilst funny, really - who's going to watch a historical drama where most of the actors are bumfuck ugly?

We don't like watching ugly people on television. Sorry.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

As for the "Sexy Tudors" comic, whilst funny, really - who's going to watch a historical drama where most of the actors are bumfuck ugly?

British people?

EDIT: I, Claudius, for example, had mostly realistic-looking people. And fat old Augustus was suitably fat and old.

[ray245]

As for the "Sexy Tudors" comic, whilst funny, really - who's going to watch a historical drama where most of the actors are bumfuck ugly?

British people?

EDIT: I, Claudius, for example, had mostly realistic-looking people. And fat old Augustus was suitably fat and old.

Wait, Augustus was fat?

[Thanas]

^What, you never noticed all his portraits stop aging once he had hit the low twenties?

[ray245]

^What, you never noticed all his portraits stop aging once he had hit the low twenties?

I did. I just keep forgetting what happened to Augustus as he reached his old age. The image of Augustus as a young man simply got stuck in my head.

[Setzer]

It's a downright shame. If they had explored the strong and virile young Henry becoming an swollen and sickly man, I would have forgiven the show for quite a lot. They seem so determined to break the stereotype of the fat tyrant that they forget that image of Henry formed for a reason.

[Vympel]

British people?

EDIT: I, Claudius, for example, had mostly realistic-looking people. And fat old Augustus was suitably fat and old.

Yeah, but that's a classic from a by-gone era. I've seen it multiple times, its awesome, but frankly its just not bankable in this day and age.

That said, everyone would agree that most of the young characters are of course, quite attractive (with a few exceptions, for good reason).

Actually, if they remade I, Claudius - it'd be freaking awesome. There was a show that could definitely use a bigger budget.

[Solauren]

Dispite my enjoyment of the show, my real disappointment with it is;

by elminating the people they did, they took out alot of important historical figures via 'no parents'. By doing that, they can't continue the show on with Henry's daughters reigns.

Which is a shame, you could get 10+ good, non-repetative seasons out of Henry and his kids reigns.

[Kanastrous]

Actually, if they remade I, Claudius - it'd be freaking awesome. There was a show that could definitely use a bigger budget.

HBO's Rome was a good big-budget Roman show. It wasn't covering the same sort of territory as I, Claudius (which was Great Stuff) but then again it wasn't trying to.

[Thanas]

Actually, if they remade I, Claudius - it'd be freaking awesome. There was a show that could definitely use a bigger budget.

HBO's Rome was a good big-budget Roman show. It wasn't covering the same sort of territory as I, Claudius (which was Great Stuff) but then again it wasn't trying to.

The second season of Rome should have gotten stricter editing, IMO. There was no need to show extended orgy scenes - one would have been enough. Instead, I would have preferred more plot or dialogue. It is not as if they had to be lacking in both considering the era.

[Kanastrous]

I don't mean to suggest that it's without its flaws. That said...I guess audiences react well, to orgy scenes...

...I would have very much liked to see the series continue into Augustus' reign, but my understanding is that the project was a budget-breaker and they had to let it end where it did.

[Vympel]

The second season of Rome should have gotten stricter editing, IMO. There was no need to show extended orgy scenes - one would have been enough. Instead, I would have preferred more plot or dialogue. It is not as if they had to be lacking in both considering the era.

I love Rome, but I just didn't understand - at all - the whole subplot with the Jewish guy and his brother in Season 2. It really was totally pointless and had nothing to do with anything. Who the hell wrote that? When rewatching the show I just skip over those scenes. Waste of time.

[Elfdart]

Dispite my enjoyment of the show, my real disappointment with it is;

by elminating the people they did, they took out alot of important historical figures via 'no parents'. By doing that, they can't continue the show on with Henry's daughters reigns.

Which is a shame, you could get 10+ good, non-repetative seasons out of Henry and his kids reigns.

Just rent Elizabeth R, which puts all these other shows to shame. The only drawback is that the interiors are shot on videotape rather than film.



The series picks up rather well where The Tudors leaves off, with Thomas Seymour's bungled attempt to kidnap Edward VI.

[Kanastrous]

Glenda Jackson is awesome. She made Mary Queen of Scots a lot more watchable (well, Patrick McGoohan, Timothy Dalton and Ian Holm didn't hurt, either).