Comments on: The Tragedy of The Tudors http://www.twirlit.com/2009/08/18/the-tragedy-of-the-tudors/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:04:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: kim http://www.twirlit.com/2009/08/18/the-tragedy-of-the-tudors/#comment-4618 kim Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:53:24 +0000 http://www.twirlit.com/?p=17351#comment-4618 Missed a word above in the 3rd paragraph - comment on Gabrielle Anwar (Margaret's tan)...not Natalie Dormer's. Missed a word above in the 3rd paragraph – comment on Gabrielle Anwar (Margaret’s tan)…not Natalie Dormer’s.

]]> By: kim http://www.twirlit.com/2009/08/18/the-tragedy-of-the-tudors/#comment-4617 kim Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:52:19 +0000 http://www.twirlit.com/?p=17351#comment-4617 Wow! The only piece of this article that I agree with is the historical inaccuracies in the show. That part is tragic, I agree, and you should have ranked it as your FIRST issue with the show, not the last one. But other than that - the actual show is fantastic. JRM has the perfect personality for Henry. Egotistical, self absorbed, and power hungry. The only fault with him is that Henry was overweight and more than slightly repulsive to his later wives, not a hot guy. The fact that you neglected to even mention that is a problem with casting JRM, and instead attacked all the similarities he had with Henry is pretty terrible. Natalie Dormer, who played Anne was also great in her role. Anne was seductive, sultry, and knew how to manipulate the King. Her job was to be exactly how Anne was portrayed - how can you miss that?? And to comment on her tan - that's absolutely absurd and makes your entire review seem petty and baseless. I'm glad you know the skin complexion of all of the royals back in the day, since you seem to know nothing else about the time period. The dramatic acting is pretty dang spot on to how people acted if you actually study anything of the time period. Men were men and felt they needed to act as such. They did grunt and fight. Ladies were ladies and acted the way they were taught. Yeah they did swoon and fan - they weren't like the women of today, if they acted like we did - that would be a terrible show. This show is on Showtime - if you were expecting a real history lesson I'd have to question your check on reality. If you take issue with the history, then yes, I agree. But 90% of your review was based on nitpicking on extremely superficial items. I hope this is your last commentary on a show. I really like this site and love the posts and this by far has been the WORST one I have read. It sounds more like you are ranting to a girlfriend on the phone than writing something for public consumption. Wow! The only piece of this article that I agree with is the historical inaccuracies in the show. That part is tragic, I agree, and you should have ranked it as your FIRST issue with the show, not the last one.

But other than that – the actual show is fantastic. JRM has the perfect personality for Henry. Egotistical, self absorbed, and power hungry. The only fault with him is that Henry was overweight and more than slightly repulsive to his later wives, not a hot guy. The fact that you neglected to even mention that is a problem with casting JRM, and instead attacked all the similarities he had with Henry is pretty terrible.

Natalie Dormer, who played Anne was also great in her role. Anne was seductive, sultry, and knew how to manipulate the King. Her job was to be exactly how Anne was portrayed – how can you miss that?? And to comment on her tan – that’s absolutely absurd and makes your entire review seem petty and baseless. I’m glad you know the skin complexion of all of the royals back in the day, since you seem to know nothing else about the time period.

The dramatic acting is pretty dang spot on to how people acted if you actually study anything of the time period. Men were men and felt they needed to act as such. They did grunt and fight. Ladies were ladies and acted the way they were taught. Yeah they did swoon and fan – they weren’t like the women of today, if they acted like we did – that would be a terrible show.

This show is on Showtime – if you were expecting a real history lesson I’d have to question your check on reality. If you take issue with the history, then yes, I agree. But 90% of your review was based on nitpicking on extremely superficial items. I hope this is your last commentary on a show. I really like this site and love the posts and this by far has been the WORST one I have read. It sounds more like you are ranting to a girlfriend on the phone than writing something for public consumption.

]]> By: Levi http://www.twirlit.com/2009/08/18/the-tragedy-of-the-tudors/#comment-4577 Levi Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:13:31 +0000 http://www.twirlit.com/?p=17351#comment-4577 Dude, You are an idiot. This is a brilliant show with amazing acting and writing. You obviously don't know jack about the show and can only nitpick over stupid details about how you don't like the actor or she is too tan. You are a disgrace to journalism and I am ashamed to have wasted two minutes reading this piece of crap. Dude,

You are an idiot. This is a brilliant show with amazing acting and writing. You obviously don’t know jack about the show and can only nitpick over stupid details about how you don’t like the actor or she is too tan. You are a disgrace to journalism and I am ashamed to have wasted two minutes reading this piece of crap.

]]>