King & Conqueror

I wish this had been a reasonably historically accurate show. Sadly, it was not. The factual telling could be as dramatic and better told. Instead loads of people will think they know the history but they know only this. Some great actors. Like the costumes. A missed opportunity in my opinion. Maybe someone else will tell the real story of this place and time.

I love historic dramas and was looking forward to one set at the time of the Norman Conquest of England.

The story is in no way historically accurate, but I don't mind that, as long as it is well written and believable. The problem is it is not believable - the use of race inappropriate actors for the period totally breaks immersion. Why bother with period costumes if they are going to change the race of characters? Both are equally important for a believable period drama.

There is no evidence at all of Africans at the Battle of Hastings and none in the Norman or Saxon armies. In no way was England "diverse" in the 11th Century.

In the film Prey all Native Americans were played by actors of Native American heritage, in Shogun all Japanese characters were played by amazing Japanese actors. The same respect should be given to white European dramas. I am fed up with these double standards.

So much money spent, such a brilliant cast, why turn this incredibly important story into such gung ho fantasy drivel. Really disappointed coming from the BBC.

Some good acting. Apparently filmed in Iceland. Didnt look much like Normandy or England. Nevertheless worth watching if interested in this period.

When I'm watching dramas about history, I do like them to be at least a bit historically accurate. Normans looked very different from Anglo Saxons, but in this the wardrobe department has dressed them all the same.

The production looks good but the script and the language are too contemporary. When one of the cast said wow! I gave up it's too painful to watch.

They have assembled some great actors. Nicolaj Coster-Waldau and James Norton as William and Harold are doing their best with what they've been given. Disappointing.

Sometimes a historical drama gets a few things wrong but is still absorbing and piques one's curiosity about the period. Not here. This is no Wolf Hall. This series is so ahistorical and melodramatic that it's just an insult to viewers. The on and off bromance between Harald and William is farfetched, and every encounter rings false. The known events of this period seem to be distorted or changed outright, when the truth would have been more interesting (see, e.g. Harald's brother Tostig). Then there is the inclusionary casting (the Mercians especially) and the scenes either exaggerating the role of women or voicing frustration with their political status. Of course there is a gay romance. The timeline is absurdly condensed and travel absurdly easy. This version of 1066 is happening in a different dimension. Worst of all is the contrived relationship between the two frenemies, Harald and William.

Why does this show pretend that it's historical? Why not change all the names (they did change at least one) and present it as fully fictional? Actual fiction by Bernard Cornwell or George R. R. Martin has more history in it than this soap opera and is more enjoyable.