Acompanhe a história da Condessa de Buckingham, que moldou seu filho para seduzir o Rei James I e se tornar seu amante todo-poderoso, por meio de intrigas, tornando-se mais rica, com mais tí... Ler tudoAcompanhe a história da Condessa de Buckingham, que moldou seu filho para seduzir o Rei James I e se tornar seu amante todo-poderoso, por meio de intrigas, tornando-se mais rica, com mais títulos e mais influente.Acompanhe a história da Condessa de Buckingham, que moldou seu filho para seduzir o Rei James I e se tornar seu amante todo-poderoso, por meio de intrigas, tornando-se mais rica, com mais títulos e mais influente.
- Indicado para 1 Primetime Emmy
- 9 indicações no total
Explorar episódios
Avaliações em destaque
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.
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.
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.
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.
👑 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)
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesEven 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.
- Erros de gravaçãoLord and Lady Somerset have Scottish accents when in reality the real life couple and the actors that play them were and are English.
- ConexõesFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 TV Shows of 2024 (So Far) (2024)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How many seasons does Mary & George have?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Мэри и Джордж
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h(60 min)
- Cor
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente