Fri Sep 8, 2017, 11:35 PM

Aristus (53,833 posts)

I finally got around to watching the BBC's "King Charles III". AMAZING!

For those who haven't seen it, it's like modern Shakespeare, right down to the structure of the dialogue. It's written in blank verse. But in the scenes set at the English court, the royal characters speak in a rhythm similar to iambic pentameter, whereas in scenes set elsewhere, and with non-royal characters, they speak in prose. This was the case with Shakespeare's Henry IV plays, parts I and II.

I was slack-jawed with amazement the whole time I was watching it.

7 replies, 1442 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

7 replies	Author	Time	Post
I finally got around to watching the BBC's "King Charles III". AMAZING! (Original post)	Aristus	Sep 2017	OP
Ooh, sounds good. I will look for it. thx	MLAA	Sep 2017	#1
I am intrigued indeed.	defacto7	Sep 2017	#2
I watched about the first fifteen minutes, and was slack-jawed with amazement	PoindexterOglethorpe	Sep 2017	#3
It was even further removed than that.	Aristus	Sep 2017	#4
Perhaps were I some 400 years removed	PoindexterOglethorpe	Sep 2017	#5
Oh well, Richard III didn't fare too well at the hands of historical drama, either.	Aristus	Sep 2017	#6
That's true.	PoindexterOglethorpe	Sep 2017	#7

Response to Aristus (Original post)

Fri Sep 8, 2017, 11:49 PM

MLAA (7,478 posts)

1. Ooh, sounds good. I will look for it. thx

Reply to this post

Response to Aristus (Original post)

Sat Sep 9, 2017, 12:10 AM

defacto7 (13,485 posts)

2. I am intrigued indeed.

Reply to this post

Response to Aristus (Original post)

Sat Sep 9, 2017, 01:20 AM

PoindexterOglethorpe (17,748 posts)

3. I watched about the first fifteen minutes, and was slack-jawed with amazement

at the Duchess of Cambridge character displaying a fundamental ignorance that Charles was king immediately upon the death of Elizabeth. She says that he won't be king until the coronation. Sigh. I had to stop watching, because what I was seeing was so far removed from reality.

Reply to this post

Response to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #3)

Sat Sep 9, 2017, 10:00 AM

Aristus (53,833 posts)

4. It was even further removed than that.

The Duchess of Cambridge is portrayed as an ambitious, Machiavellian schemer. I'm sure the real Kate wasn't flattered. But since it was fiction, and the rest of the play was so astounding, I let it go...

Reply to this post

Response to Aristus (Reply #4)

Sat Sep 9, 2017, 10:13 AM

PoindexterOglethorpe (17,748 posts)

5. Perhaps were I some 400 years removed

from this era I'd have found it fascinating. But there's always a huge problem with fiction about current living people, and as far as I'm concerned it's rarely done well. For me it would have worked better had it been as an entirely fictional group of people, sort of an alternate universe kind of thing.

Oh well. To each his own.

Reply to this post

Response to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #5)

Sat Sep 9, 2017, 10:17 AM

Aristus (53,833 posts)

6. Oh well, Richard III didn't fare too well at the hands of historical drama, either.

Shakespeare portrayed him as an ugly, hunchbacked monster, and that's how most people think of the real Richard.

The real Richard was a brave soldier, a talented general, a gifted administrator, and he looked like this:

Reply to this post

Response to Aristus (Reply #6)

Sat Sep 9, 2017, 10:31 AM

PoindexterOglethorpe (17,748 posts)

7. That's true.

But at least Shakespeare was writing more than a century after Richard died, so the sense of getting it wrong wouldn't have been quite so strong as it is with "Charles III".

Reply to this post

The DU Lounge (Forum)