Mary & George
- Mini-série télévisée
- 2024
- 1h
Suivez l'histoire de la comtesse de Buckingham qui a façonné son fils pour qu'il séduise le roi Jacques Ier et devienne son amant tout-puissant, par le biais d'intrigues.Suivez l'histoire de la comtesse de Buckingham qui a façonné son fils pour qu'il séduise le roi Jacques Ier et devienne son amant tout-puissant, par le biais d'intrigues.Suivez l'histoire de la comtesse de Buckingham qui a façonné son fils pour qu'il séduise le roi Jacques Ier et devienne son amant tout-puissant, par le biais d'intrigues.
- Nommé pour 1 Primetime Emmy
- 9 nominations au total
Parcourir les épisodes
Avis à la une
The first two episodes I loved. Cutting dialogue, smart humour, silly sexiness... it reminded me of why I used to love shows on Starz like Spartacus.
Escapism, basically.
The production values are top notch, through location shooting and costuming it felt realistic. But measured by that humour that I mentioned, I know not to take it too seriously as a documentary. Just go along for the ride.
In terms of casting I want to particularly note Julianne Moore is amazing and Nicola Walker as Lady Hatton proves she is one of our top talents.
But the weird thing is... it got boring, and serious. It did a bait and switch. It started off as a dark comedy then turned into a rather sober and serious take on history.
Julianne Moore - the initial anchor, so funny - just becomes an extra almost in the later episodes. And they create a plot for her that feels a step too far even within the silliness of the plot.
And the show stumbles on them goes out on a daft whimper.
I think the hardest thing for me is the change in tone. Witty dialogue/humour of the first few episodes gives way to melodrama. It's like they started with one show, and changed their minds halfway through. For a show of only six episodes is jarring. This isn't a show that has seasons to build motivations and change characters.
It's not a terrible show by any means. And as I said production value wise it's very good. It's just a shame it couldn't make out what it is in such a short span of episodes.
Escapism, basically.
The production values are top notch, through location shooting and costuming it felt realistic. But measured by that humour that I mentioned, I know not to take it too seriously as a documentary. Just go along for the ride.
In terms of casting I want to particularly note Julianne Moore is amazing and Nicola Walker as Lady Hatton proves she is one of our top talents.
But the weird thing is... it got boring, and serious. It did a bait and switch. It started off as a dark comedy then turned into a rather sober and serious take on history.
Julianne Moore - the initial anchor, so funny - just becomes an extra almost in the later episodes. And they create a plot for her that feels a step too far even within the silliness of the plot.
And the show stumbles on them goes out on a daft whimper.
I think the hardest thing for me is the change in tone. Witty dialogue/humour of the first few episodes gives way to melodrama. It's like they started with one show, and changed their minds halfway through. For a show of only six episodes is jarring. This isn't a show that has seasons to build motivations and change characters.
It's not a terrible show by any means. And as I said production value wise it's very good. It's just a shame it couldn't make out what it is in such a short span of episodes.
Juliane Moore is not a serious actress. If Meryl Streep were playing this role she would be speaking as an English woman. She would have taken the time to learn dialect. Lazy American actors speak like Americans in French and British films. Interesting that the British actors do learn how to speak like US people. Just as ridiculous is the fact that this review sight will not publish reviews unless they are around 600 letters in length. What could possibly be the non-sensical reason for that? Looks like I still don't have a mini novel's worth of words to publish this review. I went to the grocery store the other day and bought some kale and carrots and yogurt and two of those dark chocolate salty almond bars which were absolutely delicious.
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)
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.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesEven 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.
- GaffesLord and Lady Somerset have Scottish accents when in reality the real life couple and the actors that play them were and are English.
- ConnexionsFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 TV Shows of 2024 (So Far) (2024)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How many seasons does Mary & George have?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Мэри и Джордж
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What is the Canadian French language plot outline for Mary & George (2024)?
Répondre