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 so wanted this to be great but immediately you can tell its been knocked together on a budget.

The locations are unconvincing. Scenery is non existent. Journeys that would take days or weeks are made in what appears 10 minutes.

Heavy with exposition because its so poorly written nobody can tell who's who and what the plot is until episode 3 The acting is hammy and bordering on Horrible Histories. Juliet Stevenson thinks she's in Game of Thrones.

Tired old comical clichés like: "we ride out at dawn"

King Edward is a cartoon character and far from the real personality who was on the contrary a very astute , well respected and pious King who established Westminster Abbey and his tomb takes pride of place in it.

William has no charisma whatsoever and the Godwin's dialect is an anachronistic 2020's Estuary English.

This should have been the quality of Wolf Hall or the Hollow Crown.

Its more like Carry on in Normandy.

Having watched the first episode, I was very distracted with the cast selection. Most of the characters do just not seem to fit. Maybe it will improve as the series progresses, but I will await the TV airings. A shame as it's obvious a lot of work has gone into the series. Good sets and costumes. For me it just doesn't work.

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.

If you want to disappoint the history buffs, late Dark ages enthusiasts and spin it all with inappropriate casting then this production has succeeded. This subject has long been sought after as far as a full length epic feature and to treat it with an over abundance of artistic license is flat out disrespectful...particularly given the historical significance of Anglo-Saxon England.

The details, timeline, armor, helmets and a couple of the main characters cast diversely are all so obviously incorrect as to beg the question, "We're any of the producers or historical advisors on set, ever?" The hope lies in the resurrection and resumption in producing the feature length film Godwinson 1066. It showed promise and now certainly has a blue print of how not to proceed.