Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,939
- Location
- newcastle
Just started watching King and conqueror, and quite impressed, I’m surprised it hasn’t been mentioned on here
King and conqueror
- Thread starter the wopster
- Start date
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,939
- Location
- newcastle
It’s Very good, I’m 5 in currently
Unfortunately not available over here yet, so I've mostly just seen historians complaining about how inaccurate it is. I'll probably watch it when I can anyway, since I do love a bit of historical drama, but it does look more inspired by fantasy than history from the images and trailers.
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,939
- Location
- newcastle
I think accuracy in tv programs like this will make it quite boring, on the other hand do we know what accuracy in that time period really is.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 6,516
- Location
- West Sussex
I gave up after one episode, as already mention not very accurate, heart is in the right place, but the execution is seriously lacking
I don't expect total slavishness to history and we are hardly going to know exactly words used in every conversation or even many of the conversations were had, and doing things like using historical appropriate language is going to make it inaccessible to much of the audience. But I do think that anything that claims to be historical should be trying to accurately represent events where possible. The real history here is plenty interesting enough, at least in my view, and I do wish that we'd get a more visually accurate view of the past presented on screen. I'm tired of the mud, leather, and bare walls.
is it diverse culture and black people all over the shop because the BBC made it? probably even some female knights right, or Palestinian ones
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,939
- Location
- newcastle
I tend to ignore that if I’m honest, why let it bother you?
it must be some form of OCD but I hate out of place characters it breaks the immersion.
weirdly I love series like God father of Harlem, Snowfall, Black mafia family, Power ETC.
so it's not racism... I'm autistic so maybe it just triggers something in my brain, I need logic, reasoning and facts to "believe" kinda thing when its anything that's supposed to be based on history.
I guess it's a me problem.
Morgan freeman in robin hood atleast they tried to make it make sense and his character added to the story.
most of the time its just forced inclusion to have people included even if it's historically complete rubbish.
We have a census going bacl to 1841.... so we don't need to guess the population make up of earlier times.. we know it's set in stone, it's part or OUR history.
Imagine how it must go down in south africa if the whites there do what the BBC does and tries to white wash their history...
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,939
- Location
- newcastle
I wasn’t implying anything of the sort mate, the way I see it, it’s out of my control so I try not to let it bother me, what makes me laugh the most is when you tell people that are religious (which I’m not) the Jesus if he existed, wasn’t actually white
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,939
- Location
- newcastle
Yeah just released on bbc iPlayer
Enjoying it here also.
I must admit, i like history, particularly the same period. I was a big fan of Vikings, Valhalla and the Last Kingdom.
As always, its made me want to find out if Harol and William actually knew eachother before the big day in 1066
I must admit, i like history, particularly the same period. I was a big fan of Vikings, Valhalla and the Last Kingdom.
As always, its made me want to find out if Harol and William actually knew eachother before the big day in 1066
Last edited:
I enjoyed Vikings and The Last Kingdom - just finished King and Conqueror and I enjoyed it as well.
I watched the same as the other two shows and was not bothered about any historical inaccuracies.
If I wanted this, I would have watched a documentary about 1066 instead.
I watched the same as the other two shows and was not bothered about any historical inaccuracies.
If I wanted this, I would have watched a documentary about 1066 instead.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,660
Small inaccuracies are fine, and in the case of dramatisations often necessary due to the nature of the storytelling medium.
The only problem is when pivotal events are blatantly incorrect.
The only problem is when pivotal events are blatantly incorrect.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 8,220
The whole thing is made up bobbins so to be bothered by one thing as inaccurate and then ignoring all the rest seems a bit pointless to me. You might just as well throw some dragons in there as well but that'd probably blow the CGI budget.
You don't have to walk in goose steps to find it distracting.
Find what distracting? One black face in a sea of white? You know there were black people in 1066 Britain, right? Just like every other period of history. There's certainly historical dramas and other representations that have taken this too far, maybe King and Conqueror is one of those (it's not available over here yet so I don't know) but even then, why is this to be considered more distracting that the other errors and inaccuracies?
The 1841 census didn't collect data on race or ethnicity (the first census to do so was 150 years later) so I'm not sure why you think its relevant but, even if it did, why would a census from 1841 tell us much at all about the population make up in 1066?