myOtaku.com
Join Today!
My Pages
Home
Portfolio
Guestbook
Quiz Results
Contact Me
AIM
erizabeff
E-mail
Click Here
OtakuBoards
Nevi
Website
Click Here
Vitals
Birthday
1991-05-08
Gender
Female
Location
Turn Left At Greenland
Member Since
2004-01-11
Occupation
Webmistress.
Real Name
Elizabeth
Personal
Achievements
Have over 60 LP records.
Anime Fan Since
Since I was a child, I suppose.
Favorite Anime
Currently? Anime: Death Note -- Manga: Nana
Goals
To get into Oxford University! (I dream big!)
Hobbies
Listening to music, reading, writing, photoshop, anime,
Talents
Photoshop, HTML, knowing the name of any Beatle song by the opening line.
|
|
|
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Buried again...
Today we watched the film "Lady Jane." Now redirect your minds to the lengthy post I made about Edward VI.
This film was so grossly inaccurate that for me, it personally felt like they buried them all again.
They made Gilford Dudley a little drunkerd (which he was) with a "soft heart." A "heart for the people." He wanted to help the poor and hungry. Bull. Gilford cared little for anything besides himself and his mother, who was entirely left out of the film. When things didn't go Gilford's way he's run to his mother to makes things better.
The portrayal of Jane made her out to be a bit obnoxious and clingy to Guilford who in reality she hardly liked.
There was no time that they were left alone in a house together for some grand makey-outey sessions. They were in fact separated after the marriage so that they would NOT consummate the marriage, because if things "didn't work out" it would make divorce easier.
There was no new shilling. No new shilling at all, I don't know why they even put that part in there.
They left out the fact that Gilford and Jane's wedding was a triple wedding with Katherine Grey, Jane's little sister to Lord Herbert, and Catherine Dudley, Gilford's sister to Lord Hastings.
When Edward convinced Jane to marry Gilford he did not go to her home but she came to London to see him.
Jane did not give away all of her clothes to the poor, and she did not do so many "good things" during her nine days, in fact she was sick for nearly 5 or 6 days of her reign. And she protested that they had poisoned her, just as they had poisoned Edward. (Which wasn't confirmed to be true but it was a large court rumor that Edward had been poisoned.)
In the film when they told Jane that they were going to crown Gilford King she had to "protect him," so she denied him the crown and naturally being the "soft hearted" guy he was, he didn't care. In truth he did care, a lot and he pitched a big temper tantrum.
After being sent to the tower Jane never spoke to Gilford again but he sent a note requesting her to meet him and she declined. Why she declined is uncertain.
In the movie Jane never saw Gilford go to tower hill but was told about the experience by the priest. In truth she saw him go and she saw his body being brought back. Also in the movie Gilford was calmly taken to the block but in reality he went down kicking and screaming.
In the movie they acted like Philip of Spain was the only marriage candidate for Mary but there was another man too, who was English. I forget his name.
Now I wasn't entirely displeased with the film. I think the actor who portrayed Jon Dudley did a good job and so did Patrick Stuart and the boy who played Edward. Also I liked the costume design, it looked fairly accurate.
But over all I give this one 1 out of 5 stars. Not worth seeing but not worth murdering the actors, directors and writers.
-Nevi
Comments
(0)
« Home |
|