Can "The Tudors" survive without Anne?

Put differently, is the build up to Anne Boleyn's death the crescendo of the show? Will they succeed, as I believe it's their intention, in following Henry's other wives in later seasons while keeping the show's intensity.


And, can they do it while maintaining any sort of historical credibility?


Opinions?


B

Comments

11 comments

Large 1323446677 14042011110
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Jun 4, 2008 7:34AM EDT

I'm not convinced historical credibility has much to do with it anyhow. There have been glaring differences (not to say the physical appearance of Henry) already.Entertainment -wise it's brilliant. Historically, it's flawed.The rest of the wives were never given so much importance because of the historical effect that Elizabeth had thereafter.It's be interesting to see what could be made of them, though it has to be said, the court life without the conniving Boleyns will be duller!

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

May 11, 2016 2:45PM EDT

Of course this series can survive without Henry VIII's second wife. Only our poor education makes the question plausible.
Each of Henry's courtships and marriages vastly affected the history of his country. Furthermore, every single one of his wives was profoundly interesting in one way or another. Like any subject, the entertainment and intellectual stimulation are proportionally commensurate with the effort one puts into deliberation.
In this series, Jane Seymour has been initially portrayed as a healthy, rather naive young lady who (like all of Henry's wives) is like a bright flower an an arrangement of sturdier weeds -- her male relatives. Her religious beliefs caused Henry a great deal of consternation, because they indirectly implied criticism of his past choices. Her affect on both Mary and Elizabeth actually also had an effect on how each ruled the kingdom she inherited.
Anne of Cleves? Everyone forgets that one because she was fourth, and...attention spans only usually recall the first, the whore and one who had a boy. (I can't say spoiler alert...this is centuries old news). This one was a purely political and religious match, and the one that wasn't expedited by any lust to speak of on Henry's part. She's in some ways profoundly interesting, as she didn't comport herself like any wife Henry ever had, before or after. Why don't we remember her as well? I suspect it's because she was the least victimized. Strange, how we forget the one who might have been counted the winner.
Catherine Howard? Great potential for a season. Nothing could have demonstrated more why Henry's other wives were less likely to have actually committed adultery. They were far more cognizant of two things: the penalty, and the fact (rather than theory) of axes and towers. Stories of child abuse (and this was that) still mesmorize people in a grisly fashion to this day.
Catherine Parr? Most people forget her, as a footnote. Well, most people here who can only remember the names of the first two wives. A stronger woman would be incredibly difficult to find, and the amount of strength she had to muster on her own two feet without Henry is staggering if one bother's to imagine it.
I highly, HIGHLY recommend the series The Six Wives of Henry VIII, a BBC miniseries from 1970 that echoes this one -- with significantly more detail where Catherine's marriage to Henry was concerned. It's a riveting drama, and comparison of how the queens of it and The Tudors have progressed so far makes for interesting thought.
Of course it can progress, and brilliantly. The question -- again -- is whether people have the attention span.

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Jun 4, 2008 1:04PM EDT

I think the series can stay strong across the remaining future wives, but I don't think there can be a two year commitment to any of them like there has been with Anne. Most of the later marriages were short and I think could fit well into a long (15 eps) two or shorter three (10 eps) year expectation. anything longer than that would get tiresome and I think people may loose interest.
I think Catherine Parr is the most interesting of the latter three wives as she actually acted as the sovereign in the King's absence later in his life. I think that would be amazing to explore, seeing how touchy he is when any woman tries to exhert influence in state affairs.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Catherine Parr also had a profound effect on Elizabeth and was an excellent role model for her during the years when Henry wasn't close to home. I think Elizabeth learned alot from Catherine's experiences which she called upon in her own reign.

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Jun 4, 2008 1:07PM EDT

I think they can do it.....Anne was great but in truth i was waiting for her downfall because i didnt like wat she did to Katherine. Now i'm waiting for Cromwell's downfall and just for that, i'll keep watching. I'm also waiting for his fifth wife, Catherine Howard. I read about her and how she cheated on him, it'll be great to see a woman FINALLY cheat on Henry for a change even if it cost her later on.
Getting back to the point, the show will survive but as for sticking to historical facts, it might waiver just a bit because in the first two seasons they cut out material that they could have used later. For example Henry Fitzroy (Henry's son by Elizabeth Blount) dies around 17 from sickness not by the plague at 3 years and others.

Large 1323446677 14042011110
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Jun 5, 2008 4:43AM EDT

I'm with Jackie on this one. Catherine Parr knew exactly how to get by and keep her influence and her head. Clever and an interesting woman.BUT does she lend herself much to drama? Ultimately that's what we're watching. Cath Howard (was she the one that was about 17 and took a lover (silly girl)) was pretty short lived. Henry was just trying anyone that looked like they might give him a son by this stage - and he was right really. Without him having a male surviving child, and Elizabeth not marrying, his line really did die out on the throne. It's arguable he probably had little illegitimate Henry's running around.

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Jun 5, 2008 11:30PM EDT

I was recently reading an interview with Micheal Hirst (creator) which said that Jane Seymour was at LEAST staying in season 3 till near the end of the season... I have a feeling that they may use the season finale as either a mournful tone - if Jane dies before the end of the season - or as a celebratory episode, and centered around the birth of Edward. Also, Micheal Hirst alluded to the fact that we may be seeing more of Henry VII, which would be INCREDIBLE, as he was the Tudor who essentially started the 'dynasty', and it would be great to see a re-enactment of the War of the Roses.
I'm also curious as to whether the show might deal with the martyrdom of Anne, as well as start to signify her importance in the Reformation of England.
Oh! And who can forget little Mary and Elizabeth. I think we'll see a lot of character development with the two, which will probably show why each ruled the way they did.
As for the wives, I am REALLY excited to see Catherine. The show has already introduced Jane Parker (George Boleyn's wife) and she had a HUGE influence on Catherine's behaviour in court - she was the one who arranged many of Catherine's *ahem* adulterous meetings.
I dunno - what does everyone else think?
SO much to think about!?!

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Jun 5, 2008 11:31PM EDT

ALSO - the execution of Cromwell... any thoughts?

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Jun 9, 2008 5:12PM EDT

I think there's a difference between historical significance and educational value. While Catherine Howard didn't directly and personally choose to affect the course of English history, her situation is profoundly educational. Many could consider her to be little more than a "silly girl", but that's a debateable statement. These days, people leave perfectly attractive and kind spouses because they're no longer interested. She was virtually sold to a corpulent, dangerous man and didn't lose her desire for companionship in the process.
A fault of youth, that she didn't exercise more effective discretion? If so, isn't the idea that Anne Boleyn, a more mature and wise woman with more awareness of the consequences, would commit adultery even more ludicrous? Absolutely.
I think our take on Catherine Howard says more about us than anything else. These days, we would expect that behavior from any of the countries that we demonize, or we'd call it human trafficking. Instead, we call the girl silly and forget the names of the men who sold her and made a profit.
As for Jane Seymour, I've been a little uncomfortable by the perky way that they portray her. She was an incredibly serious woman, and much more troubled by his first wife's treatment at his hands.
Can the Tudors survive without Anne? That depends on the cast, crew, directors and writers. However, we wouldn't remember Henry VIII (or England) anywhere near remotely the way we do if he hadn't married four more times.

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Sep 27, 2008 10:12AM EDT

What gets to me, is the fact that poor Anne is made a scapegoat, and Henry acts like he innocent in all of this, it was his own vanity, that got him with Anne, as for Thomas Boleyn, he is just the most pragmatic man ever, he sold his children to climb up the social ladder. Those women especially Jane Parker, better beware, anyone could lose their heads in that court. Brereton wanted to behead her and he ended being beheaded as well. No one is safe, keep that in mind Jane Seymour.

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Sep 27, 2008 1:16PM EDT

Jane Seymour dies of septidemia or something like that a week after childbirth. she is the rare wife who doesn't loose her head.

Default avatar cat
×

What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Feb 19, 2010 9:08AM EST

Jane Seymour dies of septidemia or something like that a week after childbirth. she is the rare wife who doesn't loose her head.-----Just two wives out of the six lose their head!

Want to comment on this? First, you must log in to your SideReel account!