OT your opinion on this new trend of Historical and epic tv shows

History (as we know it) has always been commissioned in the same way. Kings or nobles paid for deeds and campaigns to be recorded, the product that they received was much like what we receive in the form of 'The Tudors' - detested by the people who want these series to reflect what actually happened or the actual conditions/language/sociology/culture, but adored by the public that they were written for.

One of my favourite quotes: (from The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance) 'When the fact becomes legend; print the legend' - meaning that fiction is more entertaining than the truth. Soon what we see in these series that you talk about is what people will believe happened. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing i could not say, personally i would say that it is not relevant.

These programmes are meant to entertain, this they do, the best measure of their popularity will be the ratings system that IMDB provides. Personally i would like to watch these programmes, especially as some of them have actors and actresses that i enjoy watching, but i have been put off - especially from 'The Tudors' for the inaccuracies as unfortunately they do (for me) get in the way of a good drama.

Michael Hirst the creator and writter of The Tudors said in his commentaries that he tried his best to get as close to reality as he could.

Every Biopic and Historical film has a little of fiction but the great ones to try to be historically accurate.

And I think a great series of this type is not exception.

I should hope that he did, but then again so did Mel Gibson in Braveheart.

If these were accurate, then they wsould be boring. There is nothing wrong with glamming up the stories for public consumption, charcters and events need to be changed so that people now can identify with them. There is little point in history if it is not consumed by the present society.

Well I'm not saying that those shows can substite books or articles made by historians and journalists who have studied those times

But they show us history in a fun way and like you said they need to change some parts to make it more interesting.

But are not that far from real history.
Maybe some times more than for entretainment they putting their point of view about the characters in those series.


Everyone of us has a point of view about these very famous historical characters and the way we watch those shows we are watching the directors's point of view and interpretation of what happened


For example Anne Bolyen
michael Hisrt made her look like a smart woman who had to fight for her rights in a men's world meanwhile the director of the other Boleyn girl made her look like a horrible bitch who treated everyone like she wanted to so she could become queen.


Her Daughter Elizabeth is the same
Michael Hirst showed us Elizabeth as England's Heroine who brought back peace and stability to England.
Mean while other directors made Elizabeth look like queen with a very high temper and having crazy swing moods like her father Henry and no of them it's lying they are showing their thoughts and vision in those films or series

Don't you think

Rome & Tudors: I like how they have a well researched backgrounds, but I dislike how they are overdone for today's audience. Insanely lot sex and slow-paced violence. They lack superstition and other psychological devices I think are necessary to really depict ancient ways.

"Hello I'm Frank, give her a donut"

I agree about too much sex and Violence in Rome but I think the Tudors was more subtle in those aspects.
The scenes were done and shown but, it was done in a very classy tasteful way.

Well, the women looked good...

"Hello I'm Frank, give her a donut"

I want one about 3rd Century B.C. Alexandria. Sort of like this thread.
http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000134/thread/162655389
After reading the initial post head right down to my post at the bottom.