Eh...it was okay. Not something I'd willingly see again

Rating: 2/10 (24 March 2009)

I went into this movie having an urge to read the Gregory book and wanted to see what the big deal was. I love Tudor history so it was a must to see...as I thought to believe I was immediately disappointed and lost the urge to read the book. Mary Boleyn was not a virginal naive girl when she married Carey. my god she was already the whore of France by then and married Carey after the affair with Henry since he was the one who had her betrothed to Carey. Johannson did an okay job, not too thrilling.
Natalie Portman's portrayal of Anne Boleyn who was one of the most intriguing and controversial women ever was lacking. I mean the whole role fell flat. She wasn't very seductive or dominant in Anne's shoes. She seemed very submissive to Norfolk and Wiltshire more so than other portrayals.
This movie played more like a soap opera than a Tudor period piece. It was missing a lot of important pieces in the romance of Anne and Henry. And to even suggest that Elizabeth I Gloriana was even the product of rape is horrifying. And even the suggestion that Henry would even rape Anne. the shame. Henry was obsessed with Anne (which it was easy to arrest her for witchcraft and treason). when she finally submitted to him in late 1532 it was purely consensual.
Wolsey, who played a major part in the King's Great Matter was missing and he was truly missed. More, Suffolk, Katherine of Aragon and Jane Seymour were either small parts or reduced to scenery.
It seems to me that the only historically accurate moment in the movie was Anne's execution. Everything else was just shameful. Gregory the author should not be considered an historian as she claims she is. The people who made this film are not at fault for bad source material. but honestly they should have researched.