[ SECRET POST #3687 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3687 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.
[Viewfinder]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Final Fantasy VII]



__________________________________________________



07.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 28 secrets from Secret Submission Post #527.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

04. http://i.imgur.com/x4p3HPx.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with you so, so much about Philippa Gregory's bullshit/lack of research (like don't get me started about her murderer of the Princes in the Tower).

Wolf Hall wasn't dull, though.

[(Anonymous)]

THIS. Wolf Hall was brilliant and Mark Rylance mesmerising in the lead role.

[(Anonymous)]

Thirding. Rylance was amazing to watch.

[arcadiaego]

I don't know how anyone could think those scenes with Mark Rylance standing off against Anton Lesser were dull.

[(Anonymous)]

Aw man, what'd she say about the Princes in the Tower?

[sarillia]

Philippa Gregory is a guilty pleasure of mine. I'm all for better-researched stuff getting more attention though.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm sick of seeing works about the Tudors. Tudor and later dynasties have all been done to death (especially Charles the First). The Plantagenets, Normans, or event he Saxon monarchs of England, now they could give great material to mine for drama. And there is all the stuff with the pre-Saxon dynasties before the Unification. That is near untouched.

[(Anonymous)]

Have you seen this? It's relatively new.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Kingdom_(TV_series)

[arcadiaego]

I'm not sure why we're so obsessed with the Tudors (or at least Henry VIII and Elizabeth - it's not as if Henry VII gets much attention). I'm sure someone's written a paper on it somewhere.

[scripsi]

Or other countries. Swedish 16th century have invading Danes, a massacre of important noblemen, an uprising, a new total dynasti, kings who semi-forced Young noblewoman into Mariahs, a handsome, but crazy king who proposed to Elizabeth of England, but ended up Maries a giirl sho SAS dirt poor. His brothers imprisoned him, and, most likely poisoned him. And that was just a quick round up of the first half, or so.

And I forgot the unmarried princess with the sex scandal.

[(Anonymous)]

Adding your favorite to my to-read list, thanks for the rec. ♥

[saturnofthemoon]

I wouldn't mind an adaptation of her Mary, Queen of Scots either.

[arcadiaego]

I'd be interested in reading those books as long as they're not sex obsessed - I hate how all dramas about Elizabeth are obsessed with her relationships and ignore everything interesting about her reign except maybe the Spanish Armarda so they can get the speech in. I disagree that Wolf Hall (the books and adaptation) is dull, though it is very hard on Anne because of the POV.

[dahli]

Have you seen The Virgin Queen series? Dunno if it's super duper accurate but it's a good watch and has gorgeous music, imo.

[(Anonymous)]

I have an MA in medieval history and am very mixed feelings on historical novels. On one hand, of course deliberately spreading misconceptions and falsehoods doesn't do historical studies any favors; neither does an author pretending to be a historian.

On the other hand, I'm also a lover of literature, and the fact is, not all interesting historical stories make for great novels. Sometimes they need to be tweaked and reworked, for pacing and drama. I think that's okay, as long as going into it, we treat it more as a historical fanfiction than a textbook. I also think this is completely within the spirit of historical novels - medieval-contemporary or not. "Sagas" based on pseudo-facts and rumors have always been hits, and that's okay.

So, I actually enjoyed The Other Boleyn Girl, because it was a fun, decently written story. But that period's also not my period so maybe that's why I'm not particularly defensive if it fucks up the facts. lol

[(Anonymous)]

As a writer, I'm in favor of some poetic license when it comes to historical fiction. But I'd have to agree with OP that in this particular case, it wasn't needed. The idea that Anne Boleyn really was a witch (WTF, seriously) who committed incest and boned half the court is nowhere near as interesting as the far more probable truth: that she was an extremely ambitious woman with powerful enemies, who made the "mistake" of not bearing Henry VIII the son and heir he so longed for, which made her vulnerable to a political and personal fall. She wasn't a saint by any means, but neither was she guilty of all the things she got accused of. It was a political hit job that succeeded... no reason why that wouldn't make for amazing television or fiction.

[(Anonymous)]

My problem with Gregory's books is more that she picks one character to be the Great Shining Perfect Hero and everyone else is either on their side (therefore good) or EVIL SO EVIL and also JEALOUS. It's total Mary Sue stuff pasted on to some history. I can deal with a bit of history splinching, but the total recasting of everyone and everything in the Perfect Hero's drama is deeply annoying and not a good narrative.

[(Anonymous)]

Not familiar with those books, but thrilled to find someone else who was bored by Wolf Hall. I heard so many great things about it and really expected to like it, but I just couldn't get into it at all and gave up after the second episode.

[(Anonymous)]

I got thrown out of it ten minutes into the first ep. For all their vaunted attention to detail, glorious flowering wisteria three centuries too early was a massive no-no for this viewer. Also historical paramedic Cromwell, which I regret to say made me laugh. Also faded tapestries, also pristine white stone carvings. I kept on watching it, but couldn't regain the sense of immersion.

I've ranted about these elsewhere. But honestly, there was a time when the BBC cared about such things. Sic transit gloria mundi.

[(Anonymous)]

Anyone else like The Tudors even though it had many problems, not just historical inaccuracy? There were so many B and C plots that never went anywhere! Anyway, I think the acting was all around good and Natalie Dormer's performance really was something special.

[(Anonymous)]

There was so much that was wrong about that series (costuming, time shifts, characters that were amalgamations), but it was ridiculously entertaining. And Natalie Dormer is my favorite Anne Boylen.

[otakugal15]

Uh...you DO have The Tudors. It was a tv series that ran for a while.

But I agree with you on Queen Elizabeth.

[(Anonymous)]

OP called it crap.

[(Anonymous)]

The book Wolf Hall is amazing. It's a pity the TV adaptation ended up with a mediocre cast and incredibly boring.