just in case the headsman wants to give her an encore, she has her head tucked underneath her arm

[angevin2]

So this evening J and Beth and I went to see The Other Boleyn Girl, since whenever an overinflated Tudor-era costume drama we go to see it so that we'll have clever things to say when people ask, and also we are all masochists.

More below the cut. The short version: it was really bad, and not the right kind of bad to be hilarious like Elizabeth:

Comments

[garpu]

Bleh. It actually looked like something I'd want to see. :/

[megwolff]

Heh. Sounds like this one even topped Bette Davis playing ERI.

[lareinenoire]

Aw, man. I'd hoped it would at least be bad in a Tudors butchering-history-with-heaving-bosoms kind of way. I find that series an occasional guilty pleasure, when I'm not squashing the desire to hurl rotten fruit at the screenwriter for ruining perfectly good historical events by getting rid of them.

At this rate, I might not see it -- or at least not at the first-run cinema. Maybe if it moves to the $3 cinema when I'm at home, I'll consider. In the interim, I shall hope to find Elizabeth: The Golden Age available for rent, and enjoy myself thoroughly.

[angevin2]

Elizabeth: The Golden Age manages to achieve funny-bad and is thus worth watching. ;)

How did the Woodstock reading go, btw? :D

[lareinenoire]

As I said on IM, it went really, really well. Everyone seemed to enjoy the play very much, and the ending was a resounding success. It led to a really interesting discussion about the political context of the play and how it fits in with other plays in the general period and so forth. Our Woodstock was fantastic -- she had to be brought in at the last minute when the original person caught the flu. The horse was actually a stuffed dog, which was hilarious. My tiara got loads of laughs; it makes me so happy that everyone understood why I went with the girliest crown possible.

And yes, there is a recording, though I probably won't be able to get my hands on it till Friday. I am happy to upload once I have it.

[writerwench]

I've flicked through the book it's apparently based on, and yeah - that sort of 'ignore history except as a convenient hook on which to hang a romantic/sex drama story' does irritate me mightily.
So it's basically a very boring would-be Tudor bodice-ripper.

Pass.

[ann1962]

Thank you for this review. My 12 year old daughter really wants to see it, and this gives me much more information to help make the decision. I just know she will be so disappointed.

[writerwench]

Perhaps she might gain from seeing the film, knowing that it's not well thought-of, and that there are other, much better films about the Tudors. Her disappointment at its superficiality may be the springboard to her wanting to widen her horizons, and see better quality films.

[ann1962]

Yes, that would work with her because she has a surprising amount of knowledge at her age, of that time period. I guess I am worried about her seeing all that "sex sex sex exposition ambiance"!

[calligrafiti]

Yeah, I read the book and kinda hoped the movie would improve on the book's faults, but it doesn't sound like it. Pity. I like costume dramas when done right or done the right kind of bad.

[angevin2]

Yeah. This was the wrong kind of bad in that it was bad, but not funny bad, just boring.

[arcadiaego]

Nice icon. :)