domino1003 "Henry VIII" is a Cliff Notes version of the story of Henry VIII, King of England. They managed to squeeze a lot of history into a 4 hour miniseries that aired on "Masterpiece Theater," and casts Ray Winstone (Nil By Mouth, The Departed, Sexy Beast, etc)as the monarch. He is a passionate, violent, nasty person when you look on the surface: He dumps his wife Katherine of Aragon (Assumpta Serna)just so he could hook up with Anne Boleyn (Helena Bonham Carter) and have a son with her (He's INCREDIBLY obsessed with having a boy to rule England after he dies). Doing this caused a break with Rome, but this is only the beginning. As he marries over and over again, we watch Henry's moral decay and decadence, the destruction that he causes along the way (The dissolution of the monasteries, the burning of so-called heretics), and his advisers who use the king to claim more power and money (And often with fatal results). Things get incredibly bloody (Like Anne Boleyn's execution), and hearts are broken. This gives the first time viewer who are just getting into the story of Henry VIII, but don't expect to see accuracy in this adaptation. And although the casting is superb (Winstone and Carter spark up the screen beautifully), you get a bit disappointed when they skip over other people (Anne of Cleves and Catherine Parr don't get much time compared to the other 4 wives). However, as I said, the performances are incredible. When Katherine of Aragon defies the king by refusing to give into his demands of divorce, it breaks you into goosebumps.You may do better watching "The Six Wives of Henry VIII" with the magnificent Keith Mitchell for a better look inside the Tudor court. Otherwise, as mind junk-food goes, this can satisfy the hunger.

FloatingOpera7 I think this was a great made for TV series, but it was divided into only 2 parts when I felt it could have been a lot longer. It first aired on BBC television in England and then made its way to PBS KCET on Channel 28 here in America. Ray Winstone heads a cast of primarily noted British actors portraying in very modern mood the life and times of Henry the 8th and Tudor England. There is nothing really wrong with the series but I felt that such a panoramic story could have been a lot longer and broken up into several episodes. I felt it was very rushed, especially at the end. His marriages to the 6 women was all done very fast and the film didn't explore his relationship with them or their characters too deeply. The focus seemed to be on Katherine of Aragon and Anne Boylen. One thing viewers have found frustrating is the anachronistic use of language. There are moments when the dialogue gets very modern and loses the formality and Shakespearean style. Also, Ray Winstone speaks in a common vernacular called Cockney, when as a King, he was able to speak lofty English and even Latin. But such inaccuracies are dismissed as we are swept by the intensity of the dramatic material and the way the actors bring it to life.Anne Boylen was played by Helena Bonham Carter. Her scenes with Ray Winstone are quite dynamic. The actress in the role of Queen Katherine of Aragon is quite powerful, even more so than the bland Helena Bonham, who portrays Anne as a fickle lady who at first didn't want anything to do with Henry but later revels in her position as Queen. Though her innocent looks did effectively portray the wronged queen (I never believed that Anne Boylen did any of the "sins" she was accused falsely of). Above all, this is a vehicle for Ray Winstone as Henry the 8th. His portrayal is laser-sharp and towards the end he does start to look EXACTLY like the overweight, arrogant and cruel king. I wish the series had been longer, like the previously filmed "Forsyte Saga" on Masterpiece Theatre. Also, I wish somehow they had used more popular and famous British actors such as Judi Dench, who has already portrayed royal figures- Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria. But the series is gorgeous to look at. Though the ending was very rushed, I like the final words of the narrator that elevates Queen Elizabeth as the only true great result of Henry's troublesome life. Elizabeth was born of Anne Boylen and Henry the 8th. Warning: the film contains adult material including violence and graphic sex. Its suitable for mature audiences only.

wgkyle There is no doubt whatsoever that the producers of this work have taken extreme liberties in the telling of the story, and employed a few outright falsehoods. Nevertheless, if one is able to leave behind expectations for a true-to-the-books account, it is a fun show to watch.Bad Things: Some of the costumes were not great, but there were also some that were spot-on for the period; the armour was atrocious, and the jousting pretty hokey (coming from someone who's done it before). And I certainly don't think Henry was as pliable and weak-willed as he is made out to be. The dissolution of the monasteries wasn't nearly so bloody and violent (another reviewer correctly described it as looking like a scene out of a viking rape-and-pillage film).Good Things: I think the acting was superb, especially from the supporting cast: Cranmer, Cromwell, Wolsey, Gardiner, Robert Aske. And speaking of Aske, for all the inaccuracies in the movie it is the only one that has given the Pilgrimage of Grace the incredibly significant role it actually played during Henry's reign; the details of the Pilgrimage are far too complicated to go into here, but even though much of the details were abbreviated or changed, the very fact that the producers gave a nod to this important event went a long way with me. Suffice to say that Henry's rule could have been swamped and swept away by the Pilgrimage, something Henry and his contemporaries were well aware of and was a consideration which guided their domestic policies for many years afterwards. The movie was limited by the length it could be to go into details concerning the 36-year reign of the monarch, and understandably had to 'pick its battles'. As such, it did leave a lot out about the religious crisis and split with Rome, as well as the effects of religious turmoil on the political situation at home and abroad. If they'd had another 4 hours, they could have covered more things to a greater extent, but most folks have trouble sitting through a ninety-minute movie.Overall, a worth watching but don't expect a history lesson. Besides, we need to worry about anyone who DOES expect a history lesson from a movie...

ejj1955 I second most of the comments already made about the historical inaccuracy of this program, but want to add yet another quibble: the scenes that purport to show the dissolution of the monasteries. What a bunch of hooey! I thought I was watching a scene from some movie of the Vikings raiding and pillaging the English coast. What actually happened was that inspectors were sent around and anything of value was methodically stripped and either taken for the royal treasury or sold; the monasteries were then pulled down, bells were melted, etc.; the monks and nuns were given pensions. It's true that servants were turned off without work, causing hardship; it's also true that those who were especially obdurate were tried and executed, but the slashing swords and burning monks fleeing from buildings were complete inventions of the filmmakers. I just don't see the point--fiction is the name for this (not even historical fiction--just fiction).