Reply to Predictions on how Reign will end?

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Predictions on how Reign will end?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]For every link you post critiquing the show as not historically accurate, [b]I can post a link saying it is clearly historical fiction.[/b]..again, noting that historical fiction isn't a historically accurate documentary.

Saying the show isn't historically accurate doesn't mean it isn't historical fiction. Historical fiction isn't meant to be 100% accurate.

The modern twist on clothing and the contemporary soundtrack (which is amazing BTW) don't negate the genre.

The subplots with characters created for dramatic storytelling don't negate the genre.

It's interesting to me that all the critiques of the show online focus on the fact that it isn't 100% accurate. Well, duh! Historical fiction isn't 100% accurate, nor does it portend to be. If they were striving for factual accuracy, they would have made a documentary.

This show is a more modern take on historical fiction as compared with The Tudors---which had little appeal to young audiences. Despite the cool clothes (which have actually won awards and critical acclaim) and soundtrack, the show is no different than The Tudors: they are both historical fiction.[/quote]

Go ahead and link review sites that say it's historical fiction--you'll find one wikipedia site saying it's historical fiction and another saying it's historical fantasy.

It's nothing like the Tudors.  The Tudors was a historical drama.  Yes, they created characters or left out actual people.  For example, the series starts with a mythical cousin of Henry being assassinated.  Why?  b/c this was a plot device to dramatize and spark Henry's ire toward the French.  In Reign, the show's creator, Laurie McCarthy, says, "“In each episode we'll educate people on what element of history helps our story."  Meaning the historical backdrop is the inspiration.

King Henry didn't go mad (most likely the show writers had seen The Madness of King George) and although he did die in a joust just not with his son on the other end of the pointy stick.  Catherine de Medici did not have an affair--she would have been executed for treason if so, and certainly didn't have a child as a result.  She also didn't murder Henry's mistress.

Mary grew up in French court with Francis.  She didn't live in a convent then meet him for the first time right b/f their marriage.  That's for theatrical flavor or the big reveal.  They created the Bash character to make a love triangle. Francis II, a weak and sickly child didn't have an illegitimate child either----in fact he had undescended testicles.  It's not much of a triangle if one guy doesn't have balls.

No one expects these shows to be documentaries or 100% historically accurate, but making up BIG historical facts to drive story takes it out of the realm of historical fiction and puts it in the realm of fantasy.  You can't have Ann Boleyn live and call it historical fiction.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics