Recent Weres, Vamps, and Ghostly Films!

Contemporary Werewolves, Vampires, and Ghosts, Oh My!

By Kristin Battestella

Despite the abundance of low budget, poor quality scary film fair, not all modern horror pictures are that bad. Here’s a few slightly feminine wolfys, vamps, and paranormal creepies giving some hope to recent horror productions – and one stinker, of course.

Byzantium – Gemma Arterton (Quantum of Solace) and Saiorse Ronan (The Lovely Bones) anchor this 2013 vampire spin from director Neil Jordan (Interview with a Vampire) co-starring Jonny Lee Miller (Hackers), Maria Doyle Kennedy (The Tudors), and Caleb Landry Jones (X-Men: First Class). The cinematography from Sean Bobbitt (Hunger) is intriguing, and a golden, antique patina contrasts the bitter daylight, nightclubs, boarded windows, and harsh concrete. Ironic uses of Etta James standards and melancholy piano music add to the slight sense of abstract– the contemporary still has a feeling of the past in old décor, fedoras, and aged computers. Nostalgic paper, pens, and handwriting or scandalous red lights and saucy lingerie establish the ladies’ personalities better than the in medias res mellow narration, which takes too long for viewers who didn’t know this movie would be about vampires. Fortunately, Arterton is sexy yet deadly and nude yet refined – she’s a killer in every sense of the word but bizarrely maternal, loving, and considerate. Although Ronan’s depressing, woe is me burdens are a bit much, her somber, hypnotic blue eyes are classy and bittersweet. Her flashbacks provide interesting snippets of period piece macabre; the past wasn’t glamorous but dirty, grimy, and violent thanks to Miller. Clearly, the emo Eleanor just wants attention, and those ready to die recognize her for what she is. Aren’t there better ways to go about your hidden existence until disbelieving authorities, prodding schools, and teen angst disrupt it? Each vampire seems trapped in easy, cliché mindsets from centuries ago – nobody can learn anything or mature in 200 years? The fine but disorienting flashback within flashback and non-linear two hours make the audience wonder why writer Moira Buffini (adapter of the 2011 Jane Eyre, where the flashback pacing worked wonderfully) didn’t put the storytelling in order or tighten the slightly long and uneven vampire mythos instead of calling attention to the hip framework. Brief shots of the seemingly aware police in pursuit go unexplained until the finale, and perhaps the plot should have been all period or totally present. Thankfully, the brooding feminine spin, artsy blood and gore, and a unique vampire creation and organization combine alongside the subtle but expected sharp nails, wrist bites, and jokes about fangs or daylight. These ladies dab the blood from their lips, quietly wait for the invitation to enter, get tempted by the sight of blood and injury, take the lives of the ill or elderly – and they watch Hammer movies! This isn’t scary, and the assorted accents and Brit-ness may bother some. However, this isn’t a sparkly teeny bopper love triangle either. The viewer doesn’t always know what happens next in the intense finish, and this tale makes for a surprising, worthy piece of vampire storytelling.

(Ironically, I must say, I have a 2008 novel about a family of vampires that goes back and forth with flashbacks and varies points in time, too, hehe.)

Ginger Snaps – This quality Canadian horror drama will be too teen girl angst for some adult male audiences; it’s not for animal lovers and today, such teen sex, drug uses, school violence, juvenile morbidity, and obsessions with death would land sisters Katharine Isabelle (American Mary) and Emily Perkins (Hiccups) in serious hot water. Director John Fawcett (The Dark) and co-writer Karen Walton’s (Orphan Black) puberty is horror theme, however, was new during the Y2K era and this Red Riding Hood equals Big Bad Wolf combination fits the solid coming of age progression and lycanthrope twists. Unlike recent in your face horror clichés, there’s sexy here without cheap nudity, the handsome blood and gore isn’t too gory, and the non-CGI wolf get ups are well done. The sharp editing isn’t hectic or seizure inducing, and the likeable, witty, sardonic characters are given full room to blossom or wax irony– the go to expert on wolfs bane is the town’s resident pot dealer! The audience doesn’t know how far the scares and suspense will escalate or if this sisterly core can survive the wolfy puberty. Unfortunately, there is a big, slightly unsatisfying problem with the typical house under construction chase finale and all the potentially worthy plot lines and red herrings left hanging in its wake. How much did quirky mom Mimi Rogers (Someone to Watch Over Me) really know? She’s giddy on periods and womanhood and just happens to buy the deadly poison needed at a craft store – seriously? Deleted scenes and extended DVD editions once again rear their head here, but none of that answers one very critical question: Who’s the original dang wolf? Yes, this lovely werewolf build up and fine feminine sisterhood feels imbalanced in the end, however this is a great, morbid teen thriller for budding macabre young ladies. 

Mama – Jessica Chastain (Zero Dark Thirty) and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau (Game of Thrones) lead this 2013 scary fairy tale from producer Guillermo Del Toro (Pan’s Labyrinth), director Andres Muschietti and co writers Barbara Muschietti (from their original Mama short film) and Neil Cross (Luther). Dangerous snowy roads, car action, and police radio immediately establish the isolated cabin and wooded perils for these adorable little girls and their innocent statements. Firelight only scenes, dark surroundings, and creepy noises accent the almost livable but messy designs and wild child state of mind. Eerie observation rooms, case study reports, medical analysis, and research montages anchor the scary amid a reality of courtrooms, technology, and red tape. Some of the brighter colors do seem too pretty or oversaturated; however, pleasing shadows, reflections, and flicking lights keep the spooky subtle. Megan Charpentier (Resident Evil: Retribution) and Isabelle Nelisse (Whitewash) create an excellent mix of sympathy and disturbing – their child artwork, whispers, and games are both cute and eerie along with moth symbolisms and leaf motifs. Although she has stunning eyes and cheekbones, Chastain doesn’t quite fit her character’s short, dark hair and punk style. Her attitude and problem with kids feels fake or without cause, and she’s more worried about her own safety then helping these girls. Her Annabel is more like a stunted teen babysitter, complains this isn’t her job, and what bass we hear from her isn’t that good. Psychiatrist Daniel Kash (Hannibal) is right when he tells her to grow up, but he also foolishly doesn’t share all his case findings. Is this film about a doctor and a woman trying to help in this unique child tale or is it about scaring the obligatory but rocker babe? Realizations come too easy, the rules of the scares change, the motivation or abilities of the entity become purely opportune, convenient file folders and information are stolen without consequences, and research ladies who claim to not know anything sure do drop a load of exposition. The bump in the night scares or jump moments are typical don’t look in the closet, haunted house hijinks, and the extra boom chords and flashes of light are unnecessary, for the audience only ploys when the troubling video sessions with the girls or seeing and hearing their reactions suffice. The CGI also looks iffy and dark, and though fittingly eerie, askew and distorted coma visions and dreamy flashbacks look cartoonish. Most of all, however, I’m disappointed that the rental blu-ray is full of previews and shows the menus and features before blocking them with “This disc is intended for rental purposes and only includes the feature film.” Hmph. There is a nice pace, mood, and atmosphere here, but the lack of answers, plot holes, and thinly drawn characters will be too much for some viewers to ignore. I mean, not only do the psychology and relationship possibilities fall prey to womanly doing right by the spirit sacrifices, but explanations to the authorities are never considered and what happened to the &^$#% dog? Longtime horror viewers won’t be fooled by the surprising moments and twists here, but fortunately, there is enough child likability and ghostly traditional style for a disturbing watch or two.

Do Skip

Metamorphosis – A promising Elizabeth Bathory narration, Hungary 1610 period fine, and a firelight sweet palette rush to start this 2007 vampire tale before jumping into the present day with a superstitious funeral, great cemetery iconography, and screeching owls. On location country sides and castle filming add authenticity while crosses shake in the presence of vampires for a unique spin. Christopher Lambert (Highlander) has a lot of fun here – even when the script fails him with clichés, jokes, and bad quips ad nauseam. Lambert and family vampire curses past and present would have been enough to carry the 90 plus minutes here, but unfortunately, obnoxious BMW driving youth and their bad acting takes over most of the time. Their gallivanting is of course due to the cliché book research excuse, and a lot of plot holes and not a lot of writing ensue with Corey Sevier (North Shore) and Irena A. Hoffman (House of Flesh Mannequins). The younger cast simply seem like they are in a different, wooden, mess of a movie compared to the classy or seriousness from the elder monks or nuns at hand, and I’ve never wanted to fast forward thru such a moodless, laughable, candlelit sex scene so much in my life. The hip dialogue and delivery from the juvenile ensemble is completely unbelievable and jarring rad cool mixed with past speaketh. The entire Bathory descendants plot and purgatory talk is woefully obvious to the viewer, and it’s tough to find sympathy when the kid cast is waxing historical or mocking what we’ve already seen. The setting should have stayed in the past or gotten to the atmospheric trapped in a scary castle mood much, much sooner. Half the cast, all the comic relief, and the lame excuses disguised as twists should have been excised in favor of explanations and clarifications. Bad fang and eyes effects, pathetic faux Fu, hardly any blood, woeful staking effects, crappy car accident action, and painfully apparent post accident twists are simply too stupid to get past unless you can have a good time laughing along with Lambert.

Downton Abbey: Season 1, 2, and The Christmas Special

Downton Abbey Series 1, Series 2, and the Christmas Special

(Because I’ve had That Kind of Marathon!)

By Kristin Battestella

Robert Crawley, Earl of Grantham (Hugh Bonneville) and his American wife Cora (Elizabeth McGovern) are distraught to hear their cousin and heir presumptive to the family title has died in the sinking of the Titanic.  Eldest daughter Mary (Michelle Dockery) was engaged to the late Patrick to ensure the fortune and Downton Abbey estate remained within the family, but now middle class solicitor Matthew Crawley (Dan Stevens)- a third cousin once removed- stands to inherit all.  Matthew comes to Downton with his mother Isobel (Penelope Wilton) -who butts heads with Robert’s mother Violet, the Dowager Countess (Maggie Smith).  Middle daughter Edith (Laura Carmichael) schemes to displace Mary in the social circles while looking for romance of her own, and youngest daughter Sybil (Jessica Brown Findlay) spends more time downstairs with the servants as World War I shortly and irrevocably changes Downton Abbey.  Embroiled in their own personal highs and lows, valet Mr. Bates (Brendan Coyle), butler Carson (Jim Carter), housekeeper Mrs. Hughes (Phyllis Logan), and maid Anna (Joanne Froggatt) must also deal with embittered lady’s maid O’Brien (Siobhan Finneran) and conniving footman Thomas (Rob James-Collier) as the Great War leaves marriages, positions, and social classes in turmoil. After becoming a soldier’s convalescence home during the war, Downton Abbey faces more change and upheavals as 1920 dawns.

Whew! I must admit, I was a little reluctant to catch on with the recent Downton Abbey hype.  After all, those of us who’ve been in the British period piece know all along shouldn’t be surprised that Oscar winning creator Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) has a hit on both sides of the pond.  The good folks and evil characters here are not necessarily synonymous with either high or low stations, and this fine balance amid the personal drama is Downton Abbey’s glue. Yes, snots exist above and below, but the higher ups are quite kind and respectable enough to consider far-flung family as well as those on the wrong side of the class divide.  Somehow I suspect Americans must have thought these aristocrats would be cruel and nasty the likes of HBO juice.  However, the fact that all the servants and nobles are essentially one big family at Downton Abbey makes the budding soap drama easier to accept for viewers who wouldn’t normally tune in for the expected stuffy English tale. Honestly, all this acclaim and success for a show that is essentially about a chick trying to find a husband!  One could boil Downton Abbey down to that simplicity, yes; but the period heavy and personal angst upstairs and down (wink) becomes so much more.  Of course, with such a large cast, it is tough to tell who is who at the start, and a revolving door of guests might even make it difficult to tell who’s actually a regular player!  Fortunately, Fellowes and his writing team smartly focus on those characters instead of relying on saucy elements. Again, I think stateside audiences expected debauchery like The Tudors and are surprisingly pleased by the proper period strata and changing societal storytelling at the forefront of Downton Abbey.  Okay, there is one critical and scandalous indiscretion, but if Downton Abbey did fall into those sex, drugs, and rock and roll trappings, it wouldn’t be any good.  This show goes its own way, and the opposites attract approach is a refreshing treat.

 It’s ironic, however, because there are some unlikable people and scenarios that keep Downton Abbey’s word turning.  At first, I disliked Michelle Dockery’s (Red Riding) Mary- her love life indecision is damn nerve racking! Then again, she and Laura Carmichael’s (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) meddling Edith grow, or at the very least, ebb and flow with the audience’s attachment.  There’s an early sympathy for Edith, but she becomes increasing cruel and mishandled by time we get to the Christmas Special.  Sybil (Jessica Brown Findlay, Albatross) also doesn’t have much to do at the start, and her involvement with chauffer Branson (Allen Leech, Rome) is also somewhat uneven, ranging from endearing to possessive. Fortunately, the veteran players Hugh Bonneville (Iris) and Elizabeth McGovern (Once Upon a Time in America) are great; a loving yet proper couple who understand the formal but know how to be warm to all in their household. Of course, Maggie Smith (you must kidding if you need a Dame Maggie reference!) is playing, well, somewhat of the same character she always plays- but Dowager Violet is a hoot.  Its great fun to see her and Penelope Wilton’s (Doctor Who) upper middle class Isobel go toe to toe. However, I must say I do find Dan Stevens (Vamps) as heir and romantic foil presumptive a bit dry.  The back and forth romancing, crushes, proposals, and possibilities just gets laid on too thick at times and it can be kind of obvious to say the least. Even so, the entail structure and class situations keep the Crawley family intriguing throughout the First Series. The family loves and hates as needed, with the performances well done all around.

But let’s not stop there! The downstairs of Downton Abbey might just outdo their ‘proper’ counterparts.  While we can get tired of aristocratic technicalities now and again as they go round and round, seeing good servants rise above while ne’er do well ones get their do is always quality television. I can’t wait to see Siobhan Finneran’s (Benidorm) O’Brien and Rob James-Collier’s (Coronation Street) Thomas get theirs!  Their plotting, moments of regret and humanity, and continuing scams are love to hate fun.  With them causing trouble, the servants become a dysfunctional family themselves. Jim Carter (Shakespeare in Love) is delightful as the dutiful butler trying to keep Downton Abbey a smooth machine along with Phyllis Logan (Lovejoy) as strict but sensitive housekeeper Mrs. Hughes. It’s a beautiful irony the way these dang fine people have rather tame pasts that they consider a black mark- when in fact all the dirt and blackmail is upstairs.  Though they’re obviously on the relationship merry go round, too, Brendan Coyle (True Dare Kiss) and Joanne Froggatt (Robin Hood) as Bates and Anna are charming. Really, servants are expected to live like monks and nuns with only Downton Abbey in their souls? I think not. Junior maid Gwen (Rose Leslie, Game of Thrones) and cook Mrs. Patmore (Lesley Nicol, The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe) are also somewhat stock or less developed early on, and likewise Sophie McShera’s (Waterloo Road) kitchen maid Daisy and Thomas Howe (United) as happy footman William are typically annoying but shy and sweet. Fortunately, the dreams, contentment, and taking pride in what one does even if you are supposed to be ‘low’ add a lovely charm and wit. Everyone does indeed have a part to play at Downton Abbey, just as World War I comes along for Season 2.

 Sure, the warfare is somewhat subdued and small scale despite Downton Abbey’s enormous budget, but the trench conversations and no man’s land action is still damn well done stuff for television today. Survivor and reality shows my arse- we simply don’t see enough Great War material that often anymore. It’s much more interesting than the heir and love speculation of Series 1, but the uneven presentation this season is a tough balance indeed.  We had to see the highlife drama before the war in order appreciate the changes, and it is indeed great how the high, low, good, and bad has all gone topsy turvy.  Unfortunately, the war years are dang rushed- the entire show could have simply taken place from 1914 to 1918 with more than enough material.  There’s no need to create storylines that don’t ring true for Year 2. I must say, all these soldiers going off to battle and heavy hospital changes do get me choked up, but it is much too hasty!  With the passing of last WWI veteran, an entire generation is now gone. It’s a past that is no longer garnering respect, and it saddens me that this will happen to World War II veterans- perhaps in my lifetime. Already, we look on the latter war with far-gone period piece nostalgia, rather than seeing the heroes of the 20^th century as the living elders with which we grew up.  It’s a shame that The Great War didn’t receive true focus and finite looks for Downton Abbey’s sophomore year.  More effort was spent on the aspects of change itself.  The hats are smaller, the hems are a bit higher, the lines of class are blurring, but it’s still treated as a romantic, radical time.  Fortunately, 100 years later, we do certainly understand the idea of war and the home front emotion it brings- even if we don’t have footmen at dinner anymore either.

Perhaps my sympathy over the War is a sore spot because it was displaced by a few less than stellar new characters. Too many would be at home scandals are just not that interesting- Amy Nuttall (Emmerdale) as new maid Ethel is just a real stick in the mud that I could really care less about, and my gosh Clare Calbraith’s (Heartbeat) maid Jane is just too weird. I mean-spoilers!- one kiss in a few episodes when it took years for everyone else? This isn’t anything we haven’t seen before either, coughjaneeyrecough.  Wasting time on a quick war resolution and affairs while others are ill with the Spanish Flu was indeed a misstep. I’m sure favoritism and higher up favors went on, but the Earl pulls a few strings every episode it seems.  While it is great that they still care about all at Downton regardless of station- it’s quite touching actually- but Matthew’s extended leaves, English tours, and back and forth war travel feels too convenient. Ian Glen (Game of Thrones) as crusty newspaper man Sir Richard Carlisle is intriguing foil for Mary, but the love triangle between them, Matthew, and his kindly but dull fiancée Lavinia (Zoe Boyle, Sons of Anarchy) is also all over the place.  Why go round and round with them when we have under used sassy sister Samantha Bond (GoldenEye) and Maria Doyle Kennedy (The Tudors) as Bates’ scheming and love to hate worthy wife Vera? 

Even with World War I aside, it seems the two-hour finale of tacked on Spanish Flu is just an unnecessary twist. Yep, Downton Abbey zips right through that too, boiling the epidemic down to a Mary and Matthew convenience! Unfortunately, while others are praising the feature length Series 2 Christmas Special follow up, I must say I was a little disappointed.  This special was no more seasonal nor any more of a return to glam heights of the First Season.  The pace again seemed haphazard, with a Servant’s Ball that was just so important yet we never saw it before the war.  And said dance was squashed amid the much more critical Bates on trial drama- along with an odd Aunt Rosamund storyline and more dalliances with the maid.  Weren’t we just here? I love Samantha Bond as Lady Painswick and would much rather have more of her than this rotating maid door.  But tragically, all of this is also sharing screen time with a kidnapped dog plot. Huh? The Christmas Special seemed like an awful lot of filler, a strategically timed delay on the end of the Second Series. Did we really need an extra episode just to get some resolutions finally about ^$%#$&* time! for a few characters? I think even Downton Abbey’s most ardent audiences can agree Series 2 seemed a little by the seat of its pants, and viewers who liked the show when things were fine, dandy, and pretty to look at with not much was going on probably don’t prefer these fast paced war heavies and upheavals. 

Yes, international acclaim and all, yet Downton Abbey is not entirely perfect.  Again, despite the stylized favor, those of us who already watched British period dramas will feel a sense of déjà vu, with generic Titanic references, tame Lady Chatterley put ons, and repeat locations that akin Downton Abbey with feelings of Poirot, Englefield House, and even Hex and X-Men: First Class.  The Series 1, Episode 5 flower show plot is more than just a tribute to Mrs. Miniver; it immediately recalls the classic Greer Garson picture for anyone who’s ever seen it.  Sometimes, it’s as if Fellowes has run out of little events to pin each episode on - and underutilizes the big events- so the critical character storylines get down played for these seemingly random and standard soap opera plots.  Watching all of Downton Abbey together is nice, but viewing everything so closely when the episodes themselves span over 8 years is also unusual for the audience.  To us, all these dramatic life-changing things just happened, so how could they so easily forget? Oh yes, it’s been a few years for them hasn’t it? The uneven skipping- accentuating little plots while missing half of World War I- makes things move too awkwardly- slow on the relationships but fast on the history. It definitely looks like the ball’s been dropped by the writers, and if you don’t have some idea of the history, one can get even more confused.  Series 2’s expanded length further exposes these faults. You can’t have all the war mayhem and glory and shoehorn in the regular society at home, too.  The aforementioned maid meanderings are here one episode, gone the next, and are truly needless in the grand scheme of Downton Abbey.  Though a plus, the editing and pace of what’s good suffers when you have to cut away to the drivel.  Enough is already happening, and these random soap opera entrappings didn’t need to be part of Downton Abbey.

 Thankfully, that style, suave, and Edwardian glamour makes it easy to forget the soap pacing or story issues.  Everyone top to bottom looks dang smashing!  From Lord Gratham’s adorned military get up to Daisy’s little pink frock, Cora’s black netted gowns to Thomas’ footman livery.  The supposedly lower class people are just so proper and well mannered, too.  It’s not that they are British- the dialogue and accents are easy on all ears, classy and old school.  I wish I could speak like this without being looked at as though I have two foreign talking heads!  While I would have preferred more Christmas décor and celebration, I can’t say any more about the costumes than what’s been said by every single person watching Downton Abbey!  Oh, the fashion nostalgia! The period scoring and music are lovely, along with Highclere Castle and the surrounding English towns and countrysides.   The use of early technology changes is divine, too.  You know 21^st century kids simply cannot comprehend what it takes to get used to electricity, telephones, cars, typewriters, or gramophones. Hello, if they wanted to hear music they actually had to sing it or play the instruments themselves!  O…M…G!

 Despite some storytelling kinks and growing pains pacing, Downton Abbey is wonderful television on either side of the pond.  I liked it a lot actually, and am looking forward to more in Series 3! With a short seven episode debut and Year Two also available on PBS, streaming, and video outlets; it’s fairly easy to jump back with the Crawley gang for a marathon or a quick few weeks of yesteryear. I actually sort of forced myself into my marathon because I had all the glorious looking HD episodes hogging up my DVR!  It can get that addictive, oh yes. Period piece fans, anglophile audiences, and young or old viewers of soap drama can and should definitely get down with Downton Abbey.

 

The Tudors Season 4

The Tudors Season 4 Wavers, but Concludes Wonderfully

By Kristin Battestella

“You think you know a story, but you only know how it ends.” It seems like it’s been longer than four years and 38 episodes since Jonathan Rhys Meyers’ opening introduction to The Tudors.  At last, here we are at the final season of Michael Hirst’s sexy and heady but no less dramatic ode to medieval debauchery. Though not as juicy as previous seasons, this departing Season 4 leaves the not so merry England in style.

King Henry VIII (Meyers) marries his fifth wife, the young and carefree Katherine Howard (Tazmin Merchant).  Unfortunately, senior Lady in Waiting Jane Boleyn (Joanne King) uses Katherine’s attraction to chamberlain Thomas Culpepper (Torrance Combs) against her-and the exposé harbors deadly results for all involved.  The Princesses Mary (Sarah Bolger) and Elizabeth (Laoise Murray) return to court and are restored in Henry’s line of succession behind the young Edward (Eoin Murtagh), whose future power is already being manipulated by his uncle Edward Seymour (Max Brown) and his wife Anne (Emma Hamilton). Charles Brandon (Henry Cavill) has marital troubles of his own, and he butts heads with the returning Earl of Surrey, Henry Howard (David O’Hara).  Can wife number six Catherine Parr (Joely Richardson) restore order to Henry’s court before his madness destroys England?

A lot happens in these final ten episodes-and at the same time, not much happens either. With two wives, wars with France and Scotland, and the infamous gluttony of Henry VIII in store, Season 4 should be tighter and better paced than it is.  We spend the first five episodes with Katherine Howard, and again it seems like too much time with nothing happening before we get a ridiculously rushed departure for the young Queen and her lover Culpepper.  Honestly, all we see is his head on a stick!  I dare say he is not in his death episode-how can that be? We spend so much more time on meaningless sex and intrigue to nowhere between the Seymours and uneven guilt with Charles Brandon.  Despite no plans to continue the series into Edward’s and later Mary Tudor’s reign, all this attention to the secondary players at court looks like a backdoor storyline for just such a format change.   Why not continue into something called The Seymours or Seymours versus Greys or such?  The early dallying makes it seem as if The Tudors is already dead and buried, yet budding action in France with three episodes left doesn’t seem like a show that’s concluding any time soon. New characters and events happen so fast, but shouldn’t this be time for some serious H8 brooding?   It’s a pity we must jump forward in time several years to correct these errors for the finale.  Children age up, critical deaths happen off screen, and new religious turmoil and beheadings all happen in the second to last episode.  Surrey’s downfall, Anne Askew, and a disastrous rack are introduced halfway through Episode 9-where was this conflict and drama when we were dawdling with Katherine Howard?

Although some have been displeased with the mostly pretty boy portrayal by Jonathan Rhys Meyers (From Paris with Love, Match Point, Elvis), his vocal changes, aged makeup, and physical transformation into the Henry VIII we’ve long expected is wonderfully despicable, sad and yet touching. Occasionally, his madness, cruelty, and crazy look are even too tough to see in comparison to The Tudors’ prior sexiness.  Again, sometimes it seems the King is almost a supporting player in his own show, but Meyers makes the most of every scene with a surprising range of skill and reflection.  Henry is blinded by Katherine Howard’s youth, yet establishes fine relationships with Anne of Cleeves and Catherine Parr.  There are moments of fatherly charm, and of course, the twisted madness we’ve been waiting for.  The beautiful final episode is all about him, and rightfully so. Though pleasantly surprised by the lengths Meyers has gone in appearance and performance, Henry Cavill’s resolution as Charles Brandon has been a disappointment.  I don’t think it is Cavill’s (Stardust, Immortals) fault, as again, he’s been barely there until the final three episodes, but more should have been given to the only other cast member who’s kept his head off the chopping block for all four seasons.  Cavill’s given the moments to shine in the end, but too much was instead made of the new hottie Torrance Combs (jPod) as Culpepper early on.  Why bother spending two episodes developing such a cruel and obsessive dude when you’re going to axe him two episodes later?  

Tazmin Merchant (Pride and Prejudice) does the best with what is given to her, but it’s not a completely developed character-despite what the uneven portrayal would have us believe.  The young Katherine wavers from being just an innocent girl wanting attention, to a possibly abused and unjustly disliked Queen, to a bitchy and horny gal who knows exactly what she wants.  Which angle are we meant to feel for or relate to-is it Merchant dropping the ball or the writing?  Thankfully, Joely Richardson (Lady Chatterley, Nip/Tuck) adds an element of class to the final episodes of The Tudors.  Catherine Parr is thrust into Henry’s court and does her wifely and royal duties despite some religious scares.  Richardson is a fine bookend in comparison with Maria Doyle Kennedy’s initial Queen Katherine.  Likewise, Sarah Bolger (The Spiderwick Chronicles) has given us a darling and insightful look at Princess Mary.  She struggles with court appearances, royal romances, and religious fervor. Despite the rough reign we know is to come, Bolger keeps Mary endearing, particularly in charming scenes with the wonderful Anthony Brophy (Snow White: A Tale of Terror) as Ambassador Eustace Chapuys.  He should have been a regular cast member all along!

Joanne King (Casualty) is wonderfully juicy as the scorned and conniving Lady Rochford-her plotting is what keeps the first few episodes entertaining.  It’s nice to see a character that began as relative filler has now developed into a full court player. It’s also frustrating then to know we’re not getting the same follow up intrigue with the equally dicey Max Brown (Grange Hill) and Emma Hamilton (Into the Storm).  The juice between them, Andrew McNair (Hollyoaks) as Thomas Seymour, and David O’Hara’s (The District, Harry Potter) Henry Howard is played at the forefront of the earlier episodes then inexplicably dropped for Henry’s war in France.  If this is where the intrigue is at, then the show should continue beyond Henry VIII.  With all this unfinished Seymour business happening, we also only briefly see singer Joss Stone returning as the charming Anne of Cleeves.  Again, was this final season to be about Henry’s errors finally catching up to him or the Seymour politics that follows his reign?  Could two more seasons been done without Jonathan Rhys Meyers? Though Sarah Bolger seems up to the task, newcomer Laoise Murray seems amiss as the young Princess Elizabeth.  If we’re going to have the budding Elizabeth, then by golly have her full force. 

In some ways, I’d rather more historical liberties been taken on The Tudors this season.  Have eight episodes done right with Katherine Howard and the war in France, and then give us another season with Catherine Parr and post Henry succession drama.  Can you imagine what a shock it would have been if Henry’s death and aftermath came over four middle episodes instead of one final hour? Other period dramas and historical fantasies are forthcoming to fill the void, but I’m a bit sad to leave Tudor England.  This season has waned, yes, but it doesn’t seem like The Tudors should be over just yet.  Naturally, the production, interiors, and costumes look great; and by its end, The Tudors turns itself round right. In summation of not just this season but also the entire series, writer Michael Hirst spends a solid sixty-minute Episode 10 returning to the core players.  A lovely, otherworldly and ethereal quality takes over at The Tudors’ end. Foretelling from the not-so-dearly-departed, deathbed visions, and built-in retrospectives bring about a bittersweet, tearful, and very satisfying conclusion.  It’s not infamous like The Sopranos cop out, but rather as the King himself says, “It is well done.”

Though faulty in the uneven storytelling and revolving door at Henry’s court, The Tudors is incomplete without this final season of death and madness.  Fans of the series will eat up this conclusion and begin again with the earlier seasons, DVDs, Showtime streamings and repeats.  Despite the liberties taken and sometimes off-mix of drama and sex in Season 4, The Tudors is still one of the finest productions of medieval England yet filmed.  For better or worse its success has ushered in a new, mature pop wave of historical shows.  Now that The Tudors is complete, historians and fans of the cast can study it to their hearts content, compare with long-standing Tudor material, and delight without the wait.  Lose your head one more time with The Tudors Season 4.

The Tudors Season 2

Seriously Good Tudors Season 2

By Kristin Battestella

Sure The Tudors sold its first season on the sexy actors, sexy costumes, and sex of the times. Season two of the Showtime series still has naughty goodness, but writer Michael Hirst allows historical drama and religious conflict during the reign of Henry VIII to take the forefront.

 

Still fighting with the Catholic church over his divorce from Katherine of Aragon (Maria Doyle Kennedy), King Henry (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) secretly marries Anne Boleyn (Natalie Dormer) and breaks England away from Pope Paul III (Peter O’Toole). Henry’s friend Charles Brandon, the Duke of Suffolk (Henry Cavill) has mellowed his philandering ways and sympathizes with Katherine, unlike Anne’s father Thomas (Nick Dunning), who’s hell bent on royal position. New Secretary Thomas Cromwell (James Frain) also moves up the courtly ladder at the expense of Sir Thomas More (Jeremy Northam).

 

As on form as Jonathan Rhys Meyers (Elvis) was playing the pretty boy King, his turn for darkness and conflict do well here, as does the slow turn around of now Queen Anne. We receive no explanation for the off screen exits of several made to be important folks from season one, but the departing cast this season sets off The Tudors. Maria Doyle Kennedy’s bittersweet Queen Katherine is so sad to watch and yet it gives the downfall of Natalie Dormer’s Anne Boleyn an extra delight. The burnings and persecutions of protestants made me grimace last season, but this time around, Thomas More’s humble devotion to his conscience brought tears to my eyes. As robbed as Sam Neil was of hardware in Season 1, I’m shocked Jeremy Northam is not racking up awards.

 

The supporting and recurring roles add to this rift, with mistresses and bishops caught on both sides of the divide. Some new characters this season are useless, like musician Mark Smeaton (David Alpay) and poet Thomas Wyatt (Jamie Thomas King), but the brief appearances of Bishop Fisher (Bosco Hogan) and The More Family lend a humility to the highly styled court of King Henry. I would have liked more to the quick development of Jane Seymour (Anita Briem, Journey to the Center of The Earth), but the stylized executions that end the series (not a spoiler if you know anything about history) top off the weaker characters.

And of course, we’ve plenty of adultery and mistresses despite the seemingly tamed Henry and Charles. There’s still sex in The Tudors, but now its down to maybe a quick scene an episode, as opposed to the slow full frontals that grabbed audiences initially. Some fans purely watching for the kink may tune out, but serious viewers who were turned off by the soap opera sex should give The Tudors another chance. Sure the show still isn’t playing like a history text book, but Peter O’Toole’s guest appearances from Rome add a new historical authenticity to the series. Yes Wolsey was corrupt, a lot of leaders in the Catholic church were at the time, but most folks caught in the struggle between Henry and the Pope were just good, poor, God fearing people. Strange how I can say a show has a healthy amount of sex whilst discussing social and religious ramifications. The Tudors achieves this rare balance. The lusty are getting their due and England will be forever changed by it. I only hope The Tudors can kept up such charm for Season Three. Look for The Tudors Season 2 on DVD this Christmas.

The Tudors Season 1

The Tudors Wins on Flair, Not History

By Kristin Battestella

The Tudors has made quite a name for itself-from busty billboard ads to Emmy nominations. Showtime’s series starring Jonathan Rhys Meyers as a young Henry the 8^th is not meant to be a history lesson, but trumps on lavish love and locales.

Meyers leads an ensemble cast in King Henry’s court, including the wicked Cardinal Wosley (Sam Neill, Jurassic Park), Henry’s older wife Queen Catherine of Aragon (Maria Doyle Kennedy, The Commitments), and of course Natalie Dormer (Casanova) as the alluring Anne Boleyn. Political players come and go in this first ten episode season. Each episode is meant to be a year in Henry’s reign-plenty of time for mistresses and heads to roll.

Jonathan Rhys Meyers (Elvis, Match Point) received a Best Actor Emmy nomination, but Season 1 rises on Neill’s twisted Cardinal and his polar opposite Jeremy Northam (Amistad) as Thomas Moore. As dynamic as Meyers and Dormer are, it is very easy to feel for Queen Katherine’s predicament. Kennedy portrays the religious Spanish regal to perfection.

As solid as the performances are, The Tudors’ Writer and Director Michael Hirst (Elizabeth) backed himself into a corner with several built in historical discrepancies. Gabrielle Anwar (Burn Notice) guest stars as a Henry’s sister Princess Margaret, but the character is actually a composite of his two historical sisters, making some of her storylines convoluted and unbelievable.

But of course, The Tudors makes no pretense at being historically perfect. The series sells itself on the lavishes and lustful ways of the Middle Ages. There are more accurate portrayals on film. It seems strange to me that some viewers complain about the lack of authenticities in The Tudors. It is just a TV show, and hey, it is possible folks who watch the series may take an interest in the real history. The Tudors definitely appeals to the female romance soap opera demographic-as well as the renaissance fan boy. Stuffy Oxford scholars? No.

Many viewers should tune into the Irish/Canadian production for the lovely on location scenery. The costumes might not be one hundred percent authentic, but the opulent fashions and stunning Irish locales add another layer of color and eye candy. Most medieval shows seem so dark or drab, but not The Tudors. The indoor sets do seem small and leave a little to be desired, as do some of the cgi establishing shots of 16^th century places or ships that don’t currently exist, but these quibbles are not jarring enough to disturb your viewing pleasure.

So alas, I must mention the sexual content-and there’s a lot of it in The Tudors. It’s Showtime, so we shouldn’t really be surprised at the nudity-male and female-nor the rough and cheeky action. Hey, it’s what they did back then, and when you are dealing with a lothario as notorious as Henry the VIII, its nothing to be a shamed of. Jonathan Rhys Meyers is wiry and sexy and impish, sure, but Hirst has struck double gold by baring all of Henry’s pal Charles Brandon. Henry Cavill (Stardust) has become a fan favorite. Sometimes there’s a point to his lover boy scenes, but most often not-that is the nature of The Tudors. It can be a straight period drama when it has to be, but it isn’t’ afraid to have a good time, either.

Definitely not for minors or prudes, The Tudors Season 1 is now available on DVD. Season 2 is forthcoming from Showtime this Spring. As long as the ratings are there, Showtime will continue to invest the bucks into this sexy period soap opera. Performances and kink in a tight, crafty balance-The Tudors needs to be seen to be believed. Check out Showtime’s website for trailers and downloads. Once you are addicted, take the DVD plunge.