Mary & George
- Miniserie
- 2024
- 1 Std.
Die Gräfin von Buckingham, die ihren Sohn durch Intrigen dazu brachte, König James I. zu verführen und seine allmächtige Geliebte zu werden, wodurch sie reicher, hochrangiger und einflussrei... Alles lesenDie Gräfin von Buckingham, die ihren Sohn durch Intrigen dazu brachte, König James I. zu verführen und seine allmächtige Geliebte zu werden, wodurch sie reicher, hochrangiger und einflussreicher wurde, als England es je gesehen hat.Die Gräfin von Buckingham, die ihren Sohn durch Intrigen dazu brachte, König James I. zu verführen und seine allmächtige Geliebte zu werden, wodurch sie reicher, hochrangiger und einflussreicher wurde, als England es je gesehen hat.
- Für 1 Primetime Emmy nominiert
- 11 Nominierungen insgesamt
Folgen durchsuchen
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Practically concerned with George Villiers and his mother, Mary, as they traverse the wild post-Elizabeth 1 monarchy, and try to improve their standings in court by attaching George as the next-in-line male concubine of the King James, son of Mary Queen of Scott.
I think it was very well noted how George took advantage of the King James's and Charles I's affection. Unlike the show, it was unanimously seen unfavorably. A lot of his charms are pretty much publicized with the vast number of arts pieces centered around him. His mother was less written about, but the characterization was similar to the show - greedy and ambitious, deeply unpopular.
The writing is meant to show the messiness of it all, and it works for the most part since it is really salacious history. This was meant as a show of flesh and trashiness. It is a not that inspired if you think about it BUT its hits enough checkmark for fun tv viewing. I would say that it could have been less on the nose, with all the mother knows best storytelling AND could have made paced the storytelling for the first and last two episodes better but it is what it is.
Also, a lot of other reviews are really riled up by its historical inaccuracies BUT I think you watch this not for those reason. It was not meant to be this deep show anyhow.
Acting wise, I still find Galatzine not that good. He has his moment but I felt that he strays in moments of ineptitude. Its so glaring sometimes that he looks like he does not know what emotion should he show in a scene. He should thank god his pretty because I think that was the only prompt he stood well on. I think Moore and Curran faired better but pretty much was phoning it in with 'camp' aspect. They are in the end, somewhat of a caricature.
Overall, I think this is fair introduction to the Villiers. Reading about them a lot, and I think they are fascinating. If I would compare it to what I saw, there clearly is a huge real estate that the show jumped out off BUT this would be fun if your into this kind of material. Recommended.
I think it was very well noted how George took advantage of the King James's and Charles I's affection. Unlike the show, it was unanimously seen unfavorably. A lot of his charms are pretty much publicized with the vast number of arts pieces centered around him. His mother was less written about, but the characterization was similar to the show - greedy and ambitious, deeply unpopular.
The writing is meant to show the messiness of it all, and it works for the most part since it is really salacious history. This was meant as a show of flesh and trashiness. It is a not that inspired if you think about it BUT its hits enough checkmark for fun tv viewing. I would say that it could have been less on the nose, with all the mother knows best storytelling AND could have made paced the storytelling for the first and last two episodes better but it is what it is.
Also, a lot of other reviews are really riled up by its historical inaccuracies BUT I think you watch this not for those reason. It was not meant to be this deep show anyhow.
Acting wise, I still find Galatzine not that good. He has his moment but I felt that he strays in moments of ineptitude. Its so glaring sometimes that he looks like he does not know what emotion should he show in a scene. He should thank god his pretty because I think that was the only prompt he stood well on. I think Moore and Curran faired better but pretty much was phoning it in with 'camp' aspect. They are in the end, somewhat of a caricature.
Overall, I think this is fair introduction to the Villiers. Reading about them a lot, and I think they are fascinating. If I would compare it to what I saw, there clearly is a huge real estate that the show jumped out off BUT this would be fun if your into this kind of material. Recommended.
Given what the producers of this show have chosen to highlight -- the passionate love affair between King James and the Duke of Buckingham, along with countless other dalliances, treachery, lust, and basically every sin you can think of-- the show is strangely cold and distant. It's a character drama without the characters: all the participants are drawn as though from fifty feet away. We never really get into the heads of anyone, we never have a sense of their internal dialogs, we never quite get to know them outside the obvious lust for power, or sex, with which each character is aflame.
There is also the matter of historical rewriting: the show rather pretends to be based on facts, but it's really not; many of the most interesting plot developments are fictional, and much of what could have been actual, factual plot turns are left out (poor Francis Bacon comes off the worst: instead of portraying him as the fascinating and spectacular intellectual he was, here he is only a weak, ineffectual loser).
All in all, there's much to like here if you want scenery, costumes, and sets, along with some remarkable acting (especially from Samuel Blenkin and Tony Curran), but the show leaves a slightly bitter taste, as though you were expecting champagne and instead got ale.
There is also the matter of historical rewriting: the show rather pretends to be based on facts, but it's really not; many of the most interesting plot developments are fictional, and much of what could have been actual, factual plot turns are left out (poor Francis Bacon comes off the worst: instead of portraying him as the fascinating and spectacular intellectual he was, here he is only a weak, ineffectual loser).
All in all, there's much to like here if you want scenery, costumes, and sets, along with some remarkable acting (especially from Samuel Blenkin and Tony Curran), but the show leaves a slightly bitter taste, as though you were expecting champagne and instead got ale.
Just finished ep7. An unrelenting rush to destruction. Not even the winners could be envied. This play is about animals rutting in a political trough.
Nicholas Galitzine plays the ingenu no longer. Within the ensemble, he's a beautiful, weak, psychopathic puppet, who fails because he thinks he's cleverer than the puppet master, his mother. This is his 14th film/tv role and his grittiest. He has the range, the charisma, the acting chops to climb to the top perch. I hope he soon gets the role that will push him from 'wow' to 'superstar'.
Julianne Moore plays a woman who doesn't need to quibble about pronouns to rule. Rule? She rocks.
Tony Curran gives a sly performance, allowing a brilliant humanity to peep though cracks in the orgy.
All of the cast deserve mention, it was a flawless ensemble.
Would you enjoy a sexy romp on the Titanic as it was cracking apart and sliding under? This show was a bit like that, the atmosphere was so fraught it overpowered any loveliness in the frequent coupling.
Nicholas Galitzine plays the ingenu no longer. Within the ensemble, he's a beautiful, weak, psychopathic puppet, who fails because he thinks he's cleverer than the puppet master, his mother. This is his 14th film/tv role and his grittiest. He has the range, the charisma, the acting chops to climb to the top perch. I hope he soon gets the role that will push him from 'wow' to 'superstar'.
Julianne Moore plays a woman who doesn't need to quibble about pronouns to rule. Rule? She rocks.
Tony Curran gives a sly performance, allowing a brilliant humanity to peep though cracks in the orgy.
All of the cast deserve mention, it was a flawless ensemble.
Would you enjoy a sexy romp on the Titanic as it was cracking apart and sliding under? This show was a bit like that, the atmosphere was so fraught it overpowered any loveliness in the frequent coupling.
👑 Ignore ALL those reviewers that claim this 7 hour miniseries isn't excellent.. Because it most definitely IS. Those viewers are just "morality-entertainment police" who allow their moral judgment to paint their views on superb cinematic art. They obviously HATE the Fact that this historical miniseries is based on the King James who we know as the man behind the King James Version of the Bible that most modern Christians use as their most prized edition. Given that King James was historically a well known extreme homosexual who surrounded himself with handsome younger men to fulfill his sexual needs daily. This theatrical quality level 7 hour film shows what we already know, that royalty over the centuries is filled with Betrayal, Corruption, Cruelty, Murder, Ambition, Sex, Manipulations, and Lust For Power at Any Cost. But, what this movie has to offer is Superb Performances by a very professional cast led by Julianne Moore in a very juicy diabolical lead role. Also, a very enigmatic performance by Nicholas Galitzine as her son who is a pawn in his mother's chess game for power and wealth. The production is very detailed and wonderfully written. Locations, Sets, Costumes are historically accurate. You can't go wrong with this handsome production and its not an accident that it's been critically acclaimed around the world at every Film Festival it played in. Don't Miss It (and forget about those morality police)
Julianne Moore is wickedly delicious as Mary Villiers, a somewhat noble mother of four who had her sights set on rising above the ranks of nobility with the help of her son, George (cheeky performance from Nicholas Galitzine, who at last sinks his teeth into a real role).
Together, mother and son plot and weave their way through the depraved King Charles' court (Tony Curran effective as the king). What unveils before ones very eyes will fascinate those who seek not to judge, but watch in a perverse sense of wonderment how this all took place in the 17th century.
Creator and writer, D. C. Moore, has crafted a telling tale of what could have occurred behind the King's golden secret doors, delivering treachery of the highest order and other wild shenanigans one has to endure in order to climb that royal social ladder.
Together, mother and son plot and weave their way through the depraved King Charles' court (Tony Curran effective as the king). What unveils before ones very eyes will fascinate those who seek not to judge, but watch in a perverse sense of wonderment how this all took place in the 17th century.
Creator and writer, D. C. Moore, has crafted a telling tale of what could have occurred behind the King's golden secret doors, delivering treachery of the highest order and other wild shenanigans one has to endure in order to climb that royal social ladder.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesEven given the taboos both of the historical period and of the next several centuries of research into and writing about history, there is a fair amount of historical documentation of contemporary rumors and reports that King James I (played in this series by Tony Curran) was gay, or perhaps bisexual, giving a historical basis to this aspect of his depiction in "Mary & George." His close relationships with a series of male courtiers were often remarked-upon in letters and other documents of the day. Two of the men whom many historians agree were likely his lovers are depicted in this series: Robert Carr, 1st Earl of Somerset (Laurie Davidson) and George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham (Nicholas Galitzine); Sir John Oglander, a contemporary politician and diarist, wrote that James "is the chastest prince for women that ever was, for he would often swear that he never kissed any other woman than his own queen. I never yet saw any fond husband make so much or so great dalliance over his beautiful spouse as I have seen King James over his favourites, especially the Duke of Buckingham," and a Royal Navy officer, Edward Peyton, observed James "tumble and kiss [George] as a mistress" in view of the court. James I was the same King James who sponsored the translation of the Bible that is still known today as "the King James Bible," which is another reason that religious interests may have been eager to deny or expunge from history the possibility that James was gay or bisexual.
- PatzerLord and Lady Somerset have Scottish accents when in reality the real life couple and the actors that play them were and are English.
- VerbindungenFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 TV Shows of 2024 (So Far) (2024)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How many seasons does Mary & George have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Мэри и Джордж
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
- Laufzeit1 Stunde
- Farbe
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen