This was a well acted movie from top to bottom. Yes, it is historical fiction but it was well researched by the book's author Phillipa Gregory (like all her books are). I am very pleased to have this DVD movie in my personal collection. The DVD extras are very informative and I urge everyone to watch them in connection with the movie itself to get a greater overall appreciation.
Verified purchase: Yes | Condition: Pre-owned
Having read the book, and found it fascinating, I was somewhat disappointed in the movie. Henry VIII had red hair & blue eyes -- yet they chose an actor with dark hair & eyes. Also, Ann Boleyn was known for her "black eyes" -- yet, Natalie Portman has blue eyes in the movie. Those discrepancies aside, I found the acting mediocre. If you enjoy reading, by all means, read the book of the same title by Phillipa Gregory. Fascinating! As for the DVD itself, it was shipped quickly, and in excellent condition. But after watching it, I passed it on to a friend, knowing that I wouldn't spend the time watching it again.
Verified purchase: Yes | Condition: Pre-owned
I love time pieces and if you love them you might like this one. Natalie Portman delivers a truly disturbing performance filled with deception, betrayal and lust. Scarlett Johanson was also surprisingly talented. It was a nice change to see her play a role where she is innocent and genuine. The best attribute this film has to offer is the way it captured all emotions perfectly and grasped the idea of sisters and their unconditional love no matter how unbelievable a situation. Often brutal in its content, the scenes were a pleasure to watch.
Well done although I think the casting had some failings. The actor playing Katherine of Aragon makes Katherine look old and ugly, which was not the case. Amazing as it may seem, I also feel that Natalie Portman is not pretty enough to play Anne Boleyn. I don't know if it's the way her hair is or the way she looks in the costumes but she just doesn't pull it off well. (I do think Portman is usually gorgeous.) The actor playing Henry is not well cast as far as appearance, but he does a wonderful job as Henry. Scarlet Johanson steals the show as Mary. She delivers a flawless performance while she has that "glows from within" look. Despite my criticisms, I love this movie as the acting is well done and the story is one that is usually not referred to in other Henry movies.
If you want a good movie about Henry VIII and Anne Bolyen, rent Anne of the Thousand Days. That was a film that used history to tell a story about real people who had a love to change a nation. In this version of the eponymous Phillipa Gregory novel, historical inaccuracies abound. Approximately fifteen years are compressed into two hours with no indication time has gone by except for various babies. None of the characters ever change or grow any older. The characters in this movie are completely one-sided. Anne is ambitious. Henry is a womanizer. Mary is simple. No one has any complexities. The sisterly rivalry plays out like an underdeveloped soap opera. On the other hand, the film is engaging and the costumes lovely. Same with the gorgeous palace settings. Eye candy it is. Truthful or realistic it isn't.Read full review
Such a shame... they could've really made this movie good. It's okay - but doesn't stand out. The costumes and sets are beautiful! The storyline is a classic! But it's certainly not based 100% on Historical fact. The drama is good. Captivating enough to keep you interested. But there's no real Romance. It's not what you'd call a 'Love Story'. Ultimately, I found this film lacking. I wonder if the problem is with the casting? To me, some of the main actors seemed misplaced. They didn't portray their characters very well. Just so-so. The scenes can be a little over-dramatized. ((Fake accents and all)) A movie like this needs stronger, older, more experienced actors. Just because a young actor/actress is popular at the time.. does not mean they are perfect for every part thrown at them. This film is proof of that. Basically - it's a Hollywood version of a timeless classic tale... only semi-based on actual fact. And lacking a bit in genuine performance. If you're a major History Buff and you're searching for Anne Boleyn or Henry Vlll - this film will probably disappoint you. If you're a casual Movie Buff - you might enjoy this flick. To the History Seekers: I recommend this movie - "Anne of the Thousand Days" or... "Elizabeth l: The Virgin Queen" with Anne Marie Duff - Excellent Film!!! Also look up books by David Starkey and Alison Weir. Both of these authors are very precise and informative. Partically when it comes to the Tudor Dynasty.Read full review
This movie was a huge disappointment. It was not accurate to the book or to history (really? Henry rapes Anne Boleyn and she is pregnant with his rape baby on their wedding day?), and HUGE plot points are simply ignored (such as Mary Boleyn's husband dying). The casting was overwhelmingly stupid. Watching Scarlett Johansson ferret around on the screen, trying to pull off demure and sweet is actually physically painful. I don`t think they could have cast a more unlikely or insulting William Stafford. The characters are 2-dimensional in this disappointing rendition, and seem to have absolutely no redeemable qualities. One of the reasons I liked the book so much was because it was a gritty examination of human ambition and explored the lengths people would take to gain power. Anne and George's incestuous relationship was one of the ways this overwhelming ambition manifested. In the movie, they glossed over such agonizing details and instead of bringing the viewer to the brink of madness with the characters as we are in the book, we are left feeling only mildly uncomfortable and slightly used. This movie was a disappointment in so many ways. They had a chance to make a masterpiece, and they threw it away. People who read the book will be wildly disappointed at the watered-down plot and unlikeable characters. Those who haven`t read the book might not be able to care about (or may even actually hate) the characters and get lost chasing after the shifty, fractured plot. I hated this DVD. Don`t spend your money on this unless you just want to look at the pretty clothes, because that is pretty much the only redeeming quality of this visual garbage.Read full review
It seems like everyone who watched this film either loved it or hated it. Bottom line: if you want a documentary about Anne Boleyn, you won't like THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL. But if you want an exciting costume drama full of love, cruelty, and royal intrigue, this film is riveting from beginning to end. Scarlett Johansson, usually cast as a seductive temptress, plays sweet Mary Boleyn, while Natalie Portman is also cast against type as the conniving Anne. Both turn in outstanding performances. The barebones history is correct --- King Henry 8th did divorce Katharine of Aragon, appoint himself head of the Church of England, marry and then behead Anne, and have an affair with Mary Boleyn. But, as is pointed out in the Special Features, many details from an era that predated newspapers and television can never be known for certain. For example, there is a record of three Boleyn siblings but not their birthdates, so the film arbitrarily makes Anne the oldest. Other historical facts have been changed or re-arranged to make the story more dramatic. While I find it somewhat annoying when such license is taken, there's no denying that EVERY movie "based on a true story" has done it, including some of the great ones like THE SOUND OF MUSIC and TITANIC. (Not to mention changes made in films based on novels; GONE WITH THE WIND is a greatly abridged version of Mitchell's novel that eliminates many major characters, while the movie version of Jodi Picoult's MY SISTER'S KEEPER has a completely different ending!) So, while I acknowledge that THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL is not 100% historically accurate, it held my interest and made me want to learn more about the Boleyn family, Henry VIII, and his other wives.Read full review
I always enjoy books by this author. However, I have studied the Tudor Dynasty for years, and she took many liberties with the historical portion of the book. She made Anne Boleyn look like an angry slut, instead of the poor Queen who suffered because of Henry the V111's obsession with having a son. Examples: During the execution of Anne Boleyn, Mary was not at the execution. Most of the Boleyn family were as far away from court as they could get because they feared for their lives. Also, once Henry discarded Mary as his concubine she was not seen at court. She retired to the country with her husband, and her child was born there, not at court. Henry never indicated that the child was his. What disturbs me about distorting historical facts, is the people who read the book, see it as fact, and get a distorted idea of what really happened. Actually, I disliked the DVD, and would not recommend it to anyone.Read full review
I really disliked this movie, more than any movie I've seen. The book was just soooo good --- 750 pages and I couldn't put it down. Just sitting through to end of the movie was really difficult, I had to force myself to finish it. In the book you get the perspective of Anne & Mary's thoughts, so you understand and care for them, knowing what they are thinking and feeling, but in this movie I didn't like any character, I didn't care if they all got the scaffold (that would have been at least some interest). It was like they were going through motions (saying some lines and doing some things) and you weren't experiencing or feeling anything. It didn't flow. I wish I had not purchased this movie.
Current slide {CURRENT_SLIDE} of {TOTAL_SLIDES}- Best Selling in DVDs & Blu-ray Discs
Current slide {CURRENT_SLIDE} of {TOTAL_SLIDES}- Save on DVDs & Blu-ray Discs