Tudors and Poles together on TV

Did you see Anne-Marie Duff's portrayal of Elizabeth I on BBC1 tonight?
I saw Wyatt die, Ridley, Latimer and Hooper suffer together and Michael
Feast as Cardinal Pole with Joanne Whalley as Mary.
However I was disappointed to see 40 minutes of Mary's reign without
mentioning the Scarborough affair at all.

I couldn't quite accept the casting of Mary. It looked like they cast
her as a "Spanish" sister with rather dark looks, but if you look at
portraits of Mary she was a red head like her sister. In fact she bore
a striking resemblance to Dennis Waterman!
By the way did you get who Dexter Fletcher was playing, was it the
elder Earl of Essex?

--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<smlark@t...> wrote:
>
> Did you see Anne-Marie Duff's portrayal of Elizabeth I on BBC1
tonight?
> I saw Wyatt die, Ridley, Latimer and Hooper suffer together and
Michael
> Feast as Cardinal Pole with Joanne Whalley as Mary.
> However I was disappointed to see 40 minutes of Mary's reign without
> mentioning the Scarborough affair at all.
>

--- In , "theblackprussian"
<theblackprussian@y...> wrote:
>
> I couldn't quite accept the casting of Mary. It looked like they cast
> her as a "Spanish" sister with rather dark looks, but if you look at
> portraits of Mary she was a red head like her sister. In fact she bore
> a striking resemblance to Dennis Waterman!
> By the way did you get who Dexter Fletcher was playing, was it the
> elder Earl of Essex?

Come to mention it I didnt think Manne Marie Duff was the right actress to play Elizabeth -
maybe it is because Helen Mirren, who portrayed her a few weeks ago - magnificent - is
such a hard act to follow. Also thought the costumes were a bit ropey too - BUT - werent
those burning at the stake scenes realistic - I felt quite queasy!
Eileen
>
> --- In , "Stephen Lark"
> <smlark@t...> wrote:
> >
> > Did you see Anne-Marie Duff's portrayal of Elizabeth I on BBC1
> tonight?
> > I saw Wyatt die, Ridley, Latimer and Hooper suffer together and
> Michael
> > Feast as Cardinal Pole with Joanne Whalley as Mary.
> > However I was disappointed to see 40 minutes of Mary's reign without
> > mentioning the Scarborough affair at all.
> >
>

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@y...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "theblackprussian"
> <theblackprussian@y...> wrote:
> >
> > I couldn't quite accept the casting of Mary. It looked like they
cast
> > her as a "Spanish" sister with rather dark looks, but if you look
at
> > portraits of Mary she was a red head like her sister. In fact
she bore
> > a striking resemblance to Dennis Waterman!
> > By the way did you get who Dexter Fletcher was playing, was it
the
> > elder Earl of Essex?
>
> Come to mention it I didnt think Manne Marie Duff was the right
actress to play Elizabeth -
> maybe it is because Helen Mirren, who portrayed her a few weeks
ago - magnificent - is
> such a hard act to follow. Also thought the costumes were a bit
ropey too - BUT - werent
> those burning at the stake scenes realistic - I felt quite queasy!
> Eileen
> >
> > --- In , "Stephen Lark"
> > <smlark@t...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Did you see Anne-Marie Duff's portrayal of Elizabeth I on BBC1
> > tonight?
> > > I saw Wyatt die, Ridley, Latimer and Hooper suffer together and
> > Michael
> > > Feast as Cardinal Pole with Joanne Whalley as Mary.
> > > However I was disappointed to see 40 minutes of Mary's reign
without
> > > mentioning the Scarborough affair at all.
> > >
> >
>
Episode two now in progress:
Kevin McKidd is playing Norfolk. Comments?
The 1562 smallpox, that nearly put Henry of Huntingdon on the throne,
has just been shown.

--- In , "Stephen Lark" <smlark@t...> wrote:
>
> ->> >
> Episode two now in progress:
> Kevin McKidd is playing Norfolk. Comments?
> The 1562 smallpox, that nearly put Henry of Huntingdon on the throne,
> has just been shown.
>

Enjoying it a bit more after first slight disappointment. Thought Kevin McKidd very good -
being ever so picky here but I thought they dropped a bit of a clanger with the portrait of
Mary Queen of Scots - she would have been younger then - I thought the portrait of her
garbed all in black was when she was older - although of course she was a widow at that
time. Another thing I also thought Amy Robsart was fully dressed when found, not in her
night clothes, as comment was made that although her neck was broken her hood i.e.
headdress, was undisturbed.

Havent read up lately on Leicester and Amy but my first thought re did she fall or was she
pushed - if she was suffering from breast cancer, which she was doomed to die from why
bother to murder her??

Stephen - who henry of huntingdon????
strggling to type this as cat refusin to dislodge herself from her fave position - drapped
around my neck with claws dug in for support - am giving up now and going to bed....
eileen, in pain

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@y...> wrote:
>> Havent read up lately on Leicester and Amy but my first thought re
did she fall or was she
> pushed - if she was suffering from breast cancer, which she was
doomed to die from why
> bother to murder her??


Working from memory -- and we know how dangerous that is for me -- the
death of Amy Robsart was fishy for several reasons. The flight of
stairs down which she supposedly tumbled to her death is very short, I
believe five steps but it could have been nine. Some contemporary
remarked that she'd have to fall down those steps several times to
cause the injuries her body showed. Also adding to the suspiciousness
the circumstances, all the servants had been given the day off to atted
some local fair or event. All of them, despite her direct protest that
she would be without any attendants -- and remember that it required an
attendant or two to dress and undress a woman of her station, clothing
being constructed as it was. Quite possibly, she could not have gone
to the bathroom without a servant to assist with her clothing. The
whole matter of her death, and the subsequent declaration that it was
an accident, smelt like a big cover-up.

Katy