Jump to content
blackwing

The White Princess

Recommended Posts

Good news for fans of "The White Queen".... production has finally begun on "The White Princess", the long rumoured sequel and the adaptation of several of the next books in the series.  It appears that they have almost entirely dumped the cast from TWQ and started over.  As far as I am concerned, this means that we unfortunately lose the beautiful actress who played Elizabeth of York in the first series, as well as the scintillating Rebecca Ferguson as Elizabeth Woodville.  But fortunately, we get to lose the troll that was Margaret Beaufort (I still have images of her gape mouth acting) and the block of wood that played Henry Tudor.  The only one that seems to be returning is Caroline Goodall as Cecily, Duchess of York (Edward IV's mother).

Notables in the new cast are Michelle Fairley (Game of Thrones' Catelyn Stark) as Margaret Beaufort, Joanne Whalley as Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy (sister of Edward IV, Richard III and George, Duke of Clarence), Suki Waterhouse as Cecily of York (Elizabeth's younger sister), and Vincent Regan as Jasper Tudor.  A newcomer, Jodie Cromer, has been cast as Elizabeth of York.  Somebody named Jacob Collins-Levy is Henry VII.

The series is supposed to air sometime in 2017.

Here is an article with some casting details.

Edited by blackwing
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

If it's anything like the book whose title it shares it will be absolutely ghastly.  Simultaneously dull and lurid (bit of an achievement), the characters of HVII and EoY are pretty much unrecognisable from anything that can be inferred from reputable historical sources.  Awful.  Then again, it's written by Gregory who depicted RIII screwing his niece on the eve of Bosworth, er, Forest, in the August snow (I don't suppose we should blame la Gregory for the absurdity of the setting on the telly, but we can certainly blame her for getting these two between the sheets) and who is the standard bearer of the "anyone but Richard" faction when it comes to the deaths of EIV's sons.  I can forgive a good deal in historical fiction if it's beautifully written (I'm looking at you, Hilary Mantel) but The White Princess is certainly not that.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

@MrsE Thank you! I've disliked Gregory since The Other Boleyn Sister - not just because she took liberties with one of my favourite historical women, but because she obnoxiously and stubbornly claimed her version was the truth!

That said, I'm a sucker for historical shows, so I watched The White Queen (and intensively disliked Elizabeth Woodville and her family of grifters) and I'll probably watch The White Princess too (and end up rooting for the 'wrong' party yet again).

Edited by feverfew
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I came across the trailer on demand and being an incredible fan of the White Queen I was excited to see that it was coming out.   I'm on the fence with how this will turn out because it didn't capture the production style of the WQ.  This one seems like they have "Hollywood-ized" this production and its a little too stylized for me but I will be watching.  Also another nitpick was the way they depicted the story from the POV that Elizabeth was an enemy of Henry's and was plotting his downfall. I understand things are ramped up for television but this portrayal of Elizabeth gave me pause.  

Interestingly enough I recently read a more historically accurate book on Elizabeth of York and the relationship she really had with her mother in law Margaret Beaufort by Alison Weir entitled Elizabeth of York A Tudor Queen and Her World.  This was based on letters, financial records etc.   In the book Weir builds the case that Elizabeth and Margaret got along fine and that Elizabeth and Henry had a loving marriage.  She also paints Elizabeth as a complacent woman content in her relationship and standing.  Not the "spitfire" empowered woman of the Gregory novels and by the looks of it, the White Princess.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

So far I'm enjoying The White Princess more than The White Queen, though I've only seen the first episode of TWP.

Henry Tudor looks like Theon Greyjoy.  Ha! Ha! (I greatly dislike the Tudors).

Catelyn Stark is Lady Margaret Beaufort, the "King's" Mother, which make sense since they're both barking mad when it comes to their kids.

Essie Davis is awesome!  I take back everything bad -- which is to say everything -- I ever said, wrote or thought about Elizabeth Woodville.  Lady Crane Forever!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I enjoyed it.  I rewatched the White Queen this weekend, so it was a little disconcerting to have a completely different cast.  Margaret Beaufort was the most startling.  She went from wearing completely plain dresses to jewels and a headdress!  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Apparently the costume designer for this mistook "random fairy tale princess" for "early Tudor court" and rather than try to fix it just ran with it.  Margaret Beaufort is the only character who even looks close.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I watched the final episode of The White Queen before watching The White Princess so I could jog my memory of where we left off 3 years ago. Princess picking up almost immediately after Queen made it rather obvious that most of the recasts are considerably older. Especially Margaret Beaufort. But I love Michelle Fairley so I will overlook the aging up of her character. For such a pious woman, Margaret wasted no time in dressing herself in rich fabrics and throwing her weight around. I can't wait for Lizzie to knock her down a few pegs.

Lizzie and Henry...where do I even begin?? Seriously, rape?! Ugh. And then he doesn't touch her on their wedding night? Is that supposed to make him chivalrous or sympathetic or romantic?? Way to ruin Henry VII before we even get to know him, Phillipa Gregory. Besides the rape, the other thing that annoyed the hell out of me was the whole 'Lizzie must prove she's fertile before Henry marries her'. It seemed like it was well known throughout the court that Henry and Lizzie were having premarital sex and therefore people will know that Arthur was conceived out of wedlock. Seriously, how is that not going to come back and bite them later on? Isn't that the same situation that haunted Lizzie's parents?

I love Essie Davis as Elizabeth Woodville; it's amazing how much she looks like a slightly older Rebecca Ferguson. I liked seeing Caroline Goodall again and poor doomed Maragaret Plantagenet. I like the recast Henry; easier on the eyes than the one in Queen. Someone said he looks like Theon Greyjoy but to me he looks like a young Michael Fassbender; he even sounds like him.

All in all, this wasn't as campy as I feared it would be now that the BBC is not involved, so I'm sticking with it and I hope others do too so I can have someone to discuss it with.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, bunnyblue said:

Lizzie and Henry...where do I even begin?? Seriously, rape?! Ugh. And then he doesn't touch her on their wedding night? Is that supposed to make him chivalrous or sympathetic or romantic?? 

Well, I am not going to call it rape because Lizzie explicitly agreed and he stopped. But in spirit, it was rape and very disturbing.  I see what they were doing there.... Henry was convinced that he had no choice but to marry her and his only option out was that she couldn't conceive. I do think the show meant for us to think that Henry wasn't too thrilled about having sex with Lizzie at all.  But none the less I almost cannot deal with Henry right now.  They tried to rehab Henry by saying he was overwhelmed but when it seriously looked like he was going to take out a little kid -- teddy -- I wasn't happy.  I understand that it is a fact that the real Henry insisted that the real Lizzy prove she could have a child before he married her. 

Thoughts:

  • Are we to assume that Lizzie was regularly having sex with Henry after the "rape" for some time until she got pregnant. If it was just right after the "rape" how could it possibly be known that it was Henry's child and not Richards? I assumed that was what Lizzy was doing when Margret told her to "do her duty". 
  • I don't think everyone knew what was happening. Just Jasper and Henry's  mom.  
  • I got a little confused as to who was who with a new cast.
  • One thing I didn't like about the White Queen was that it presented things as so "romantic" for Elizabeth Woodville. But this was probably the reality of the times. And it is a good reminder... you can be a princess and treated like that. 
  • What is up with Cecely? I know she was angry with her sister at the end of the white queen but man...  Henry should have deflowered her and then blew her off. 
  • It was not smart to haunt Margaret Beaufort's dreams. 
  • Overall I liked Lizzy's strength. I do think Henry's impressed too and maybe a bit afraid of her. 
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

So far I enjoyed it! I really hope the series spends time letting the York women have private conversations, even Margaret Plantagenet

Spoiler

who is going to end up being executed by Henry VIII in her senior years for being too close to the throne.

Lizzie is in a very precarious place. Her Mom of course wants Richard on the throne (if he's alive) but now that Lizzie is pregnant and married to Henry, any claim by her brother (or person pretending to be her brother) puts her and her children at risk. 

The costuming wasn't historically accurate but quite beautiful. They did a good job with casting, I can see how Lizzie and Elizabeth Woodville could be related. I loved when Elizabeth told Lizzie "I had the good sense to fall in love with the king of England." Comparing it to the White Queen I wonder if anyone's performance will live up to Janet McTeer as Jaquetta. 

Do you think we will get more than one season if it does well?

P.S. Ceciley was being a brat. I wish they would flush her out more, as well as Margaret Plantegent. The young actress is doing a good job conveying her fear and taking care of her brother. It's obvious the court knows he's mentally disabled but he's high functioning enough to be a puppet. We all know what awaits him. 

Edited by SilverStormm · Reason: Spoiler tag added.
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

Seriously, how is that not going to come back and bite them later on? Isn't that the same situation that haunted Lizzie's parents?

Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville had an entirely different issue that wasn't specifically explained in the White Queen, although it was touched on a couple of times. From all accounts Edward was an inveterate womanizer, and on at least one occasion BEFORE he married Elizabeth, it was widely recognized that he married someone else. Rather he "precontracted" marriage with someone else. During that time a precontract was legally binding. Whether he did or didn't ACTUALLY precontract is somewhat irrelevant. Richard III used that as his excuse to de-legitimatize the children of Edward and Elizabeth through an act of the King. There was never any doubt as to WHO fathered the children, just whether or not they had a legal right to the throne.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

. Lizzie is in a very precarious place. Her Mom of course wants Richard on the throne (if he's alive) but now that Lizzie is pregnant and married to Henry, any claim by her brother (or person pretending to be her brother) puts her and her children at risk. 

It definitely felt like they were racing to push the "rebellious wife going to be plotting against her husband [at least until they fall in love]" angle and hoping we wouldn't notice the disconnect between loving mother Elizabeth consoling her daughter on the pregnancy/marriage and telling her  how much she will love her own child in one breath while in the next breath talking hopefully of restoring her brother to the throne, which in this world means destroying Lizzie and whatever children she might have.  


The theme of these series (and admittedly a very real historical theme for royal women) has been the way the women work to secure the positions of their own children.  It makes zero sense that Lizzie would side with her brother against her own child, no matter how much she despised the father.  

 

In fact, it doesn't even make sense for Elizabeth to WANT her son to take the throne, if her daughter's fate has already been sealed with the marriage and pregnancy which will can secure the Tudor line, bring peace to everybody, and possibly enable Richard to live his life out in full in comfortable obscurity (assuming they funded him to some minor gentry position out of the country).   

Edited by kassa
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, kassa said:

In fact, it doesn't even make sense for Elizabeth to WANT her son to take the throne, if her daughter's fate has already been sealed with the marriage and pregnancy which will can secure the Tudor line, bring peace to everybody, and possibly enable Richard to live his life out in full in comfortable obscurity (assuming they funded him to some minor gentry position out of the country).   

My suspicion is that Henry won't really listen to Lizzy enough to make it ok for Richard to stay out of it.  Also, Henry or his mom could always try to take Richard out if they ever discovered him.   And Margaret Beaufort I think does know he is alive.  Richard would not be safe until he took the crown back. Though I agree, not sure why Elizabeth would be so interested in this game when, at the end of the white queen, she told Richard not to want to seek vengeance.  But also, not sure that Elizabeth will have a choice as maybe the York factions put him forward and then she has no choice but to support her son's claim.  

Follow up question... how did Henry know, mere days after Richard slept with Lizzy -- that he did? What did they broadcast it on You tube? :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

In fact, it doesn't even make sense for Elizabeth to WANT her son to take the throne, if her daughter's fate has already been sealed with the marriage and pregnancy which will can secure the Tudor line, bring peace to everybody, and possibly enable Richard to live his life out in full in comfortable obscurity.

Quote

not sure why Elizabeth would be so interested in this game when, at the end of the white queen, she told Richard not to want to seek vengeance.

I think this is the hardest 180 for me too - and maybe I wouldn't have been so aware of it if I hadn't been bingeing White Queen this month. But the character of Elizabeth W is very different. In the WQ she didn't scheme necessarily for power but for the safety of her family and in a reactionary way. In this she seems much more proactively working for power. It's an odd twist. The other part of this is the history - generally speaking historians take her agreeing to the marriage with Henry Tudor as her tacit  acceptance that her sons were dead and there was no one else to inherit. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, BooBear said:

Follow up question... how did Henry know, mere days after Richard slept with Lizzy -- that he did?

Yeah, that was a head-scratcher for me. I mean, who the hell was broadcasting that news? Also, knowing that Lizzie banged  Richard, how could Henry be sure the baby wasn't Richard's? It didn't seem like a whole lot of time had passed from the Battle of Bosworth Field, to Henry and Lizzie 'coupling', to the pregnancy confirmation.

 

12 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

as well as Margaret Plantegent. The young actress is doing a good job conveying her fear and taking care of her brother. It's obvious the court knows he's mentally disabled but he's high functioning enough to be a puppet. We all know what awaits him. 

I like this actress too; she certainly has more to do in Princess than the previous actress did in Queen. It sucks what Lizzie's future son does to old Margaret. About her brother, Teddy, so he was mentally challenged then? I just thought the young actor was really really bad at delivering his lines. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 18/04/2017 at 2:10 AM, bunnyblue said:

Yeah, that was a head-scratcher for me. I mean, who the hell was broadcasting that news? Also, knowing that Lizzie banged  Richard, how could Henry be sure the baby wasn't Richard's? It didn't seem like a whole lot of time had passed from the Battle of Bosworth Field, to Henry and Lizzie 'coupling', to the pregnancy confirmation.

 

I like this actress too; she certainly has more to do in Princess than the previous actress did in Queen. It sucks what Lizzie's future son does to old Margaret. About her brother, Teddy, so he was mentally challenged then? I just thought the young actor was really really bad at delivering his lines. 

Historically speaking there is speculation, he was referred to as "half witted". Some suggest that was due to his years of imprisonment affecting his mental state, others suggest that the boy was always disabled.

Spoiler

Isabel and Ferdinand demanded he be eliminated before they would allow Catherine of Aragon to set sail for England to marry Prince Arthur (Henry's older brother), as his claim was just too strong and given his mental disability he was a figure head for powerful factions. Margaret was allowed a bit of freedom and the ability to hide behind her married name at least until Henry VIII started getting paranoid. 

There has been a significant amount of time between Lizzie and Richard "getting it on" and Lizzie announcing her pregnancy. An uncle and niece having an affair would've made news, and the court gossip runs wild. Lizzie never bothered to deny it because she hates the Tudors so much  

Remember this is an age where everyone travels in horseback. From Richard traveling to the battle, fighting the battle, Henry's men traveling to the York house in the country, getting to London, planning a coronation.....we are looking at several months at least so that part didn't bother me. 

Edited by SilverStormm · Reason: Spoiler tag added.
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, bunnyblue said:

Yeah, that was a head-scratcher for me. I mean, who the hell was broadcasting that news? Also, knowing that Lizzie banged  Richard, how could Henry be sure the baby wasn't Richard's? It didn't seem like a whole lot of time had passed from the Battle of Bosworth Field, to Henry and Lizzie 'coupling', to the pregnancy confirmation.

To me it seems like a lot of time MUST have passed and Lizzie must have spent 4 months or longer having sex with Henry before getting pregnant. Though the show didn't make it clear. I saw that in the book Lizzie was "raped" but they changed it for the show. I suspect they vagued up the unsettling topic of sex with someone you can't stand just to get pregnant. Perhaps another reason Henry didn't have sex with her on their wedding night... he had enough of her.  Possible that Richard was the loose lips. I seem to remember suggesting to Anne that he liked to rumors because it hurt Henry to think he betrothed was fooling around with him. 

I also thought the Teddy kid was just a bad actor but on rewatch you can see he has issues. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, BooBear said:

To me it seems like a lot of time MUST have passed and Lizzie must have spent 4 months or longer having sex with Henry before getting pregnant. Though the show didn't make it clear. I saw that in the book Lizzie was "raped" but they changed it for the show. I suspect they vagued up the unsettling topic of sex with someone you can't stand just to get pregnant. Perhaps another reason Henry didn't have sex with her on their wedding night... he had enough of her.  Possible that Richard was the loose lips. I seem to remember suggesting to Anne that he liked to rumors because it hurt Henry to think he betrothed was fooling around with him. 

I also thought the Teddy kid was just a bad actor but on rewatch you can see he has issues. 

Thanks for the clarification on this. I couldn't decide whether she got pregnant after the "rape" or if she'd been sleeping with Henry for months to prove she was fertile and finally got pregnant. 

Anyway, I enjoyed the first episode. I'll admit though it was jarring to see new actors in the different roles after binge watching The White Queen and seeing different actors in all the roles. I already like Elizabeth and Lizzie  (the recasts and the characters). 

Though I like MF I cannot stand Margaret. I couldn't stand her in the The White Queen and cannot stand her here. Her constant hypocrisy and blathering about God's will is insufferable. When she was standing listening at the door on Henry and Lizzie's wedding night my eyes nearly rolled out my head. Argh. Can't say enough how much I dislike her. 

All that said, I'm in for this. I hope they can keep the momentum throughout the whole series. The White Queen lost steam IMO after Edward IV died and Elizabeth was dethroned. I struggled to complete the series after that point.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I do really wish they had kept Rebecca Ferguson and the actress who played the detestable fanatic MB for this series; it would have been so much more satisfying seeing the two face off given their history in The White Queen.  The new Elizabeth Woodville seems hokey to me.  Who wouldn't prefer Aneurin Barnard over the two dogs they've had play Henry VII?  This is fun historical revisionism, just like it's predecessor.  It is interesting to note just how soon after the war of the roses (the 'cousins war' is lame) Henry VIII's reign with all it's paranoia and desperation occurred. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder why they couldn't retain more of the original cast. I still don't find the new Henry Tudor all that compelling; he's no Edward IV (and, historically speaking, his story isn't nearly as interesting). It seems like they have to manufacture a lot of drama to make this as interesting as The White Queen.

Quote

 It seemed like it was well known throughout the court that Henry and Lizzie were having premarital sex and therefore people will know that Arthur was conceived out of wedlock. Seriously, how is that not going to come back and bite them later on? Isn't that the same situation that haunted Lizzie's parents?

I don't think it's an issue as long as he marries her before the baby is born. That will make it legally legitimate; as pointed out above, it was a different situation with Edward IV because there was some question as to the legality of his marriage to Elizabeth Woodville. No such issue with Henry Tudor.

Quote

Margaret Plantegent. The young actress is doing a good job conveying her fear and taking care of her brother. 

Who are they? Are they the children of Edward IV's younger brother George? I could have sworn he died without having any children, at least in The White Queen. I don't remember either George or Richard III having any children.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, they are George's children who were orphaned when their mother died and George was killed.  (George spread the rumor that Elizabeth had poisoned his wife.)  Richard had a son, too, but he died along with Richard's wife before he went into the final battle.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, iMonrey, Margaret and Teddy Plantegent are the children of George of Clarence.  Richard III had one child, a son, who died early which is why as King going into the Battle of Bosworth he named Pole to be his heir.  The closer heir to Richard was Teddy as his nephew and only surviving male heir.  But as Margaret mentioned due to Teddy's mental state he replaced Pole with Teddy.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The acting is really good and I think the cast is up for it and attractive, but I did roll my eyes with the constant "intrigue" dialogue. I found this in the Gregory books, too. There is no real reason for the reader/viewer to prefer York over Lancaster(Tudor) other than Gregory prefers one side over the other. And fair if you think 8th is a tyrant and 7th is an usurper, but that family that was so soon to die out really shoved England forward out of the Dark Ages and they did it in about a century. 

And maybe this would be a boring story or difficult to film but I think this idea that these two sides came together in marriage to try to end this war, which was bloody and disruptive and difficult, is an interesting one. How they pushed forward. 

I think Elizabeth's love affair with Car Park Richard is the single most irritating aspect of the Gregory novels and these movies. And she just talks about it openly with her mother, like that was a viable thing. Gregory was so invested in the Ricardian idea of Richard being a tragic, romantic hero it went a little off the rails. At least for me. 

Lucy Worsley's show British History's Biggest Fibs- the first episode is about how the Tudor PR machine went into overdrive because Henry's claim on this throne was so flimsy. I'm not sure how one would film history rewrites or a guy crafting his image, but it's interesting.

Here is the episode on Youtube. She's just the best. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Pogojoco said:

Lucy Worsley's show British History's Biggest Fibs- the first episode is about how the Tudor PR machine went into overdrive because Henry's claim on this throne was so flimsy. I'm not sure how one would film history rewrites or a guy crafting his image, but it's interesting.

I couldn't watch the whole thing before I had to go to work ( thanks for the link Pogojoco) but this does confirm that the battle with Richard and Henry took place in August and Lizzy and Henry were married in January of the next year. So plenty of time to confirm any Lizzy pregnancy was not Richards. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, NYCNJbear06 said:

Yes, iMonrey, Margaret and Teddy Plantegent are the children of George of Clarence.  Richard III had one child, a son, who died early which is why as King going into the Battle of Bosworth he named Pole to be his heir.  The closer heir to Richard was Teddy as his nephew and only surviving male heir.  But as Margaret mentioned due to Teddy's mental state he replaced Pole with Teddy.  

The barrier to  Warwick becoming king was not his mental capacity (there is no evidence to suggest that he lacked it) but the fact that Clarence had been attainted and so his children could not inherit.

I won't launch into another rant about Gregory's distortion of character to suit her narrative, but I really want to say that I cannot stand the fact that Elizabeth is referred to as Lizzie.  It's just wrong.  

The chronology isn't really problematic;  Bosworth was fought on  22nd August; Henry and Elizabeth would have met some time after 3rd September when Henry arrived in London and records suggest that they met on a number of occasions at Margaret Beaufort's house at Coldharbour.   Elizabeth's wedding ring was ordered in the first week of December and they married on January 18th (the first recorded use of fireworks in England formed part of the celebrations).  Once they were formally betrothed they were as good as married and sleeping together  would not have been an issue.  Arthur's arrival eight months later has given rise to speculation that he was conceived before the marriage but he might simply have been early.  If one is going to think about horses and zebras in regard to the date of his birth the following September - arrived early = horses;  arrived on time as a result of consensual premarital sex = zebras;  arrived on time as a result of rape = pink zebras with sparkles.

 If Arthur was full term he'd have been conceived some time in late November or early December;  if, as contemporary records state. he was "an eight month baby" he was probably conceived on the wedding night or in the next couple of days, although we now calculate the length of a pregnancy from 2 weeks before the last menstrual period, if anyone wants to get their heads around that.  Diagnosing pregnancy in the C15th didn't actually set much store by menstruation anyway, so who knows?

Still, it wouldn't be Gregory without a rape would it?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Car Park Richard just makes me laugh.  Well done.

I appreciate Gregory trying to make history more accessible to readers who might find Penman, Weir, or Mantel kind of dense reading, but her continued insistence on the Elizabeth-Richard twu luv makes me want to throw something every time I see it.  He was her paternal uncle.  Even the Tudors, who were masters of rewriting the history to paint themselves better, limited that bit of rumor mongering to something evil Richard was only plotting to do.  But then Gregory also has a princess of England who would have most certainly known that any marriage would be about strategic alliances babbling about wanting to marry for love, so there's that.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/18/2017 at 11:40 AM, Enero said:

Though I like MF I cannot stand Margaret. I couldn't stand her in the The White Queen and cannot stand her here. Her constant hypocrisy and blathering about God's will is insufferable. When she was standing listening at the door on Henry and Lizzie's wedding night my eyes nearly rolled out my head. Argh. Can't say enough how much I dislike her.

Ah, yes, the good old "God's will" justification for whatever they want to happen. I was rolling my eyes when she told Henry that God TOLD her he has to get rid of Elizabeth W once the baby is born. While I understand the need for a royal heir and hence the preoccupation with the king's sex life, there was no need for her to linger outside of the bedroom door on their wedding night except extreme creepiness. Hey, lady, she's already pregnant, remember?

The only thing Henry did in this episode that didn't make me dislike him was when he shot down Cecily and told her she should be loyal to her sister. I know that's a bit much coming from someone who essentially told said sister, "You WILL have sex with me now because I'm the king and I refuse to marry you until I know you can get knocked up with a royal baby," but at least he didn't have sex with Cecily. The bar has been set pretty low when I'm saying things like well, at least he didn't have sex with her sister!

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

The barrier to  Warwick becoming king was not his mental capacity (there is no evidence to suggest that he lacked it) but the fact that Clarence had been attainted and so his children could not inherit.

I assume that was more about Richard III's preference than English law, since Charles II was able to ascend to the throne even after his father was executed for treason. I know both Richard and George married Warwick daughters; I don't know why George's children would be Teddy and Margaret of York rather than Warwicks.

Quote

I think Elizabeth's love affair with Car Park Richard is the single most irritating aspect of the Gregory novels and these movies. 

I don't remember it being part of The White Queen (TV show) either. Was it?

Share this post


Link to post

I think that the restoration is a completely different kettle of fish.  Charles II was invited to return after the Protectorate collapsed following Cromwell's death. , and had not himself been convicted of treason.

In order for Clarence's children to have inherited Richard would have had to reverse the attainder passed by Edward IV and he plainly had no intention f doing that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Gah! Just realized that the new Lizzie is the same actress who played the main character in last year's BBC kidnapping drama "Thirteen." Amazing what hair and makeup can do!

I doubt this will get a sequel. For my money, instead of more Tudor Family Drama (see: the Tudors, Other Boleyn Girl, Elizabeth movies, Reign), I'd rather see a prequel about Edward III's sons and their progeny, to explain why the Wars of the Roses happened in the first place. Neither the York or the Lancaster branch really had a decent claim to the throne, especially by the time the Lancasters were going down through Henry VI's half-brother (via his French mother, no less) and John of Gaunt's (arguably) illegitimate Beaufort line. IMO, it's the messiest time of succession in English history, and that includes the Stuart/Hanover switch. And there would be a ton of good characters plus no need to recast!

I miss Rebecca Ferguson a lot, but I'm guessing the show will cover many years like the White Queen did, and RF did not look as old as she should have by the last ep. That said, Margaret Beaufort was only 13 years older than her son, and I think her original actress would have been more accurate than Fairley.

One last thought: after watching a LOT of the White Queen over the past few weekends (thank you Starz!) I am SO happy this production uses the same score.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

As they're based on Gregory's books the only way there'd be sequel is if she's written anything other than the awful thing about Anne Boleyn,

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/20/2017 at 0:25 PM, iMonrey said:

 

I don't remember it being part of The White Queen (TV show) eithebr. Was it?

 In the last episode of the White Queen, Lizzie and Car Park Richard (got to call him that from now on as its just perfect) are shown having sex before he goes off to battle at Bosworth's field. 

To compliment watching the White Princess, I've just recently started reading "The Winter King" by Thomas Penn, which is about Henry VII's life.   Should be interesting to see how different the work of nonfiction is from Gregory's take on the beginning of the Tudor dynasty.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Moxie Cat said:

Gah! Just realized that the new Lizzie is the same actress who played the main character in last year's BBC kidnapping drama "Thirteen." Amazing what hair and makeup can do!

And of course the actor that played car park Richard was in that too so I feel like the white queen's Richard and this new Lizzy had car park relations. 

On rewatch I feel like we were confused about the time line because no one changes their clothing for most of the first episode.  Lizzy has like that blackish dress for most of it and Elizabeth seems to be wearing that blue thing constantly. 

I must have been absent the day this was covered in history so I am excited to explore the reality. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I really loved Aneurin Barnard's depiction of Richard, and found his brief, doomed romance with Elizabeth of York very appealing and restrained rather then excessive.  I think it's good that they bucked the tradition of presenting Richard as hideously deformed and congenitally 'evil' as Tudor propaganda demanded.  Presenting the series from the side of the York's was in my opinion a more interesting move not because I actually care which family got the throne, but because we're already familiar to death with the Tudors and everything they did and accomplished.  On a slightly similar note (I haven't/won't read Phillipa Gregory and certainly wouldn't compare her with a novelist of the calibre of Hillary Mantel) I really liked the Wolf Hall novels for providing an alternate take to how Thomas Cromwell has traditionally been presented.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Mantel doesn't really claim to be offering real Cromwell;  what she does is more akin to what Shakespeare did - using historical figures to explore universal truths about power, hubris and human frailty. Gregory claims that what she writes is the result of extensive research and "probably what happened".  How she can say this with a straight face about royal women practising magic or the gross betrayal that Richard sleeping with his unmarried niece represented I don't know - and I'm a bit surprised that you found that appealing.

The problem with what Gregory does with Richard is that he becomes some sort of saintly romantic hero rather than the ruthless medieval king that he was.  Men killed to get to the throne and to stay on it and there is no reason to suppose that Richard was any different.  He was a man of his time.  All Gregory does is throw ordure at Henry VII, and the resulting distortion is every bit as grotesque as anything Shakespeare wrote.

I'd also argue that the only Tudor monarchs that have been done to death are Henry VIII and Elizabeth I;  Henry VII, Edward VI and Mary I have been largely overlooked.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, BooBear said:

And of course the actor that played car park Richard was in that too so I feel like the white queen's Richard and this new Lizzy had car park relations. 

Yes, just looked that up too! Mind blown. He played her boyfriend. And of course, Richard Rankin, the adult Roger from Outlander, played the cop she had a crush on.

My family has a saying that there are only so many actors working in British TV, which is why you see the same people pop up over and over. It certainly explains David Oakes. I mean, why hasn't this guy landed a part on Game of Thrones by now?!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Moxie Cat said:

It certainly explains David Oakes. I mean, why hasn't this guy landed a part on Game of Thrones by now?!

Had the writers included the character, David Oakes would have made a fine Hyle Hunt.

Car Park Richard wins the Internet. It also brings back memories of how uncomfortable I was when watching the documentary about finding his body. The "Ricardian' woman seemed so OTT, I didn't know whether to feel sorry for her or laugh at her.

I don't like Michelle Fairly any more than I liked Amanda Hale, so I can hiss and boo at Gregory's version of Margaret Beaufort with abandon, and feel badly about it because MB really did have a traumatizing childhood.  I do miss Rupert Graves (who also should have been on Game of Thrones by now) as Stanley. I adore Essie Davis, so this recasting works for me.

Thanks to all for the explanations of inaccuracies and the book recommendations.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I saw the first ep of the The White Princess without ever having seen The White Queen and I spent the whole episode confused about who this "Richard" was that Lizzie was in love with and had slept with.  I could not imagine how it could be King Richard III.  So I went online looking for clarification and of course there is nothing historical to back up that plot twist.  There is also nothing that I could find to suggest that Elizabeth of York was plotting behind the scenes against her husband (and therefore against the succession of her own children.)   So now I know to take anything portrayed in this show with a healthy dose of skepticism.

That being said -- I really enjoyed it.  If I can cast aside the idea that it is based on history and instead accept it as a Game-of-Thrones-like fictional riff on the long and sordid history of the English monarchy (and monarchies in general), I think I can have good time with this tale of kings and princesses and secret witchcraft and shifting allegiances.

On 4/17/2017 at 7:50 AM, Scarlett45 said:

Comparing it to the White Queen I wonder if anyone's performance will live up to Janet McTeer as Jaquetta. 

Seeing the first episode of The White Princess inspired me to start binge-watching The White Queen.  I'm four or five episodes in and my love for Janet McTeer is unbounded.

Edited by WatchrTina
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, MrsE said:

As they're based on Gregory's books the only way there'd be sequel is if she's written anything other than the awful thing about Anne Boleyn,

Wouldn't the logical successor to this be The Constant Princess about Katherine of Aragon's ill-fated marriage first to poor doomed Arthur and then Henry VIII?  As Elizabeth's sons, they're the next generation.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, nodorothyparker said:

Wouldn't the logical successor to this be The Constant Princess about Katherine of Aragon's ill-fated marriage first to poor doomed Arthur and then Henry VIII?  As Elizabeth's sons, they're the next generation.

I'd love to see a series on Catherine/Arthur/Henry's triangle as I find Catherine's story to be very compelling.   

Or they could follow Margaret Tudor to Scotland and do her story, since she's who the present day queen is a descendant of.  Blanking on the name of that particular book by Gregory but did read it and sorta enjoyed it.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

I spent the whole episode confused about who this "Richard" was that Lizzie was in love with and had slept with.  I could not imagine how it could be King Richard III.  So I went online looking for clarification and of course there is nothing historical to back up that plot twist.

I don't know about the historical accuracy, but Lizzie/Richard also appears in the historical fiction by Jean Plaidy. Of course, maybe that's where Gregory got the idea. :) IIRC, though, in that book, it's more that a rumor exists about them than any evidence a relationship was going on.

Count me in on a miniseries about Margaret, queen of Scotland, who was responsible for both the Stuart and Hanover/Windsor lines. I would love to see more about her. While I'm interested in Arthur, beyond him it gets into "Tudors" territory too quickly for me. Burnt out on Henry VIII at this point.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Moxie Cat said:

IIRC, though, in that book, it's more that a rumor exists about them than any evidence a relationship was going on.

Well, I finished my binge-watch and my take is that while The White Queen (and The White Princess) take the position that the Lizzie/Richard affaire DID happen, I found it very interesting to watch when the penny dropped for Lizzie.  She finally realized that the mere rumor of such a relationship was good for Richard in that it painted her as an immoral woman, unfit to be queen, and much less valuable as the lynch-pin of a York/Lancaster reconciliation.  She'll never know if it was "Twu wuv" between them or if Richard was just being clever and using her.  And I presume we'll see in coming episodes that the rumors will dog her for years.  

As for reality, I now suspect that such rumors may have actually been in play at court for precisely that strategic reason, regardless of whether or not there was any truth to them.

Edited by WatchrTina

Share this post


Link to post

Not commenting on the series, but the rumours didn't dog her at all.  In fact Richard vehemently denied them.

Share this post


Link to post

As far as acting goes, I am enjoying Henry VII and Lizzie's actors. They have good chemistry and don't oversell their lines. Not so much into the acting of the mothers, especially Elizabeth W, who I found rather melodramatic. Rebecca Ferguson did a better job.

Share this post


Link to post

The new episode was a bit of a drop off from the first. IMO. Not as interesting. 

Henry VII appears to be finding his own mind and therefore showing the first signs of pulling away from his mother's agenda, which is a good  However, I just don't find the actor who is playing Henry all that charismatic, which makes it difficult for me to care.

The most compelling scene in the episode IMHO was Lizzie and Elizabeth arguing about strategy. Everything else was boring and at times seemed disjointed. Perhaps I need to watch the episode again to fully appreciate what was going on. 

Maybe I missed a scene but I'm confused as to why Cecily is so against Lizzie and her mother that she's willing to side with the enemy (Margaret) against them? What is her agenda? Because right now it just seems like her actions are there moreso to serve the plot than any organic character development. 

My interest in this show dropped significantly with this latest episode, but I'll continue to stick it out since there's on 6 more episodes in the season. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Enero said:

The new episode was a bit of a drop off from the first. IMO. Not as interesting. 

Henry VII appears to be finding his own mind and therefore showing the first signs of pulling away from his mother's agenda, which is a good  However, I just don't find the actor who is playing Henry all that charismatic, which makes it difficult for me to care.

The most compelling scene in the episode IMHO was Lizzie and Elizabeth arguing about strategy. Everything else was boring and at times seemed disjointed. Perhaps I need to watch the episode again to fully appreciate what was going on. 

Maybe I missed a scene but I'm confused as to why Cecily is so against Lizzie and her mother that she's willing to side with the enemy (Margaret) against them? What is her agenda? Because right now it just seems like her actions are there moreso to serve the plot than any organic character development. 

My interest in this show dropped significantly with this latest episode, but I'll continue to stick it out since there's on 6 more episodes in the season. 

Err how did you see it? Mine doesn't air until 8 PM EST. 

Share this post


Link to post

I've been enjoying the White Princess and I like the actors, but does anyone know why there was a complete cast overhaul.  The new actors are fine and there are a few I prefer, but I really miss the actress that originally played Margaret Beaufort.  No offense to Caitlyn Stark.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×