Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The DU Lounge

PoindexterOglethorpe

(25,845 posts)

7. That's true.

Reply to Aristus (Reply #6)

Sat Sep 9, 2017, 11:31 AM

Sep 2017

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".

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

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