Review - King & Conqueror

So as I write historical drama, I also watch a lot of it too (surpirse!) - and I've been meaning to write a few reivews for shows that I've seen for a long time, but just now starting. I hope you enjoy them and hope that you are able to watch them yourselves too and maybe comment back after, and let me know what your thoughts are as well!

Also this review contains spoilers - if you love English history then you may already know the outcome but this review will delve into particular points about the series itself, so be warned!

It's out now in the UK.

About/Premise: It's about William (the Bastard) of Normandy and Harold of Wessex and the rush to claim the English throne when Edward (later known as Edward the Confessor) eventually dies, but we see the build up to 1066 and all that and then of course the battle.

What's to love: Juliet Stevenson and Eddie Marsan having a ball as Lady Emma of Normandy and Edward the Confessor respectively; Clare Holman as Gytha bringing her anchoring to the role as the Godwin matriarch, it's a smallish role at first but it expands as the series goes on and provides a hub for the whirl of the warring brothers and as things spin from Harold's fateful decision; the strong Clémence Poésy, in fact, the series has tried to do it's best to make the female characters strong and more important agents of the facilitation of the action and of course the historical record goes on to show that Matilda (of Normandy and Queen of England) was regent of Normandy many times in William's absence, so it's good to see the women not just as the incidentals but as the powerful women in the game too - also see Lady Emma, Queen Gunhild, Edith not the swan neck and Gytha; the costuming is fab, as well as the interior sets.

What's to like:

As it's a collaboration between BBC and CBS, there's been a good deal of money spent on it, so the production values are really good, you don't have the feel that things are going to fall down, the costuming/ sets are really great; and great actors of course. Of course there's a bit of CGI going on, it isn't too painful and fairly decent but it's nice to see the construction of Westminster in London, you get to see some nice working castles in Normandy, and of course the acting all round is more than above good.

Good that it sways you one way or the other for the main characters, and makes you questions which faction you want to back for the crown - first setting up you want the Godwins to claim power then making you root for the Normans and then back again, and then back and then back...and that it also makes all the characters involved have with lots of shades of grey and gain your sympathy at times.

What's to get annoyed with:

It's already been said by a couple of historians I follow, and I agree but they are all so dirty! Yep, it was a filthy age BUT nobles and people, even if they did not fully body wash all the time in baths, cleaned/washed their faces and hands on the regular, but here the characters were so grubby it honestly made me feel like a mother wanting to tell the actors to wash their faces all the time - and that really pulled me out of the drama.

Timeline / History changing - look I get it! I wrote a play were I changed the timeline to make stuff fit! Plus they've had to truncate all that history into only 8 episodes, but some of it, I feel was wrong, I mean, if you're doing a history thing why kill off Judith (i know, I know you want to give Tostig a reason to hate his brother and align with Hararda) and you made him at first a kind kid so you need a reason for him to turn against Harold BUT you're if trying to align with history and stuff why kill her? she goes on to be Countess in Bavaria, and you've tried to already make the history not so changed but this choice? It seems a little bit wrong - I mean, why not have made her a more Lady Macbeth kinda character (especailly as you killed off Lady Emma who had LM's tendencies) instead of killing her off and she's related to Baldwin - another strong female character and you could have shown her and Tostig maybe wanting to develop their own power together and break from both their families?? Also the reasons that upset Tostig that Harold didn't come to Northumbria don't really make much sense, I mean, even if Harold were in London and not Normandy, it's at least a week's ride to London and back then there wouldn't have been much Harold could go anyway? Also, don't they have midwives in Northumbria? This was, for a me, a little bit not great.

The history has the Godwins and the Norman's are all tangled up pre-1066, in fact the whole upper echelons of the time were, but also understand that to tell one narrative clearly you have to dispense with to much complication...but it would have been nice to have a longer lead up, although I understand there's only a certain amount of money available...

Edith (Harold's first wife in the Danish way - don't you know!) - had the nickname of Swan neck, because she had a long neck - again, understand about casting choices, but no long swan neck.

Hair - now, it's not what you think, lol, but it's the men's hair. I mean, the ladies have had the courage to go grey (especially Lady Emma and Gytha) but the all the men seem to have hairdyed up, especially Harold's father Earl Godwin and Baldwin, Count of Flanders. William's hair looks perfectly shiney at the age of being meant to be in his mid to late 40s (as well, to be fair as James Norton; but it could be that both of these actors haven"t yet started the silver turn )..just not 100 percent sure they would have had 'Just for Men' then -although if you're a historian and dying hair in the 11th Century was a thing, please correct me!); also it's been pointed out that the ladies would have been wimpled and their hair would have been covered but even if this was a tad bit annoying, I have to say I liked the Anglo-Saxon hair styles on them and their hair being shown.

Harold's moustache and the Norman's hair style - this interpretation of Harold, although dirty of face, didn't have the iconic mustache that he is seen with on the Bayeaux tapestry which is a shame - indeed only Swyen has a moustache (abeit with a beard comb) and Harold's dad have one so, a shame but at least the Angelo-Saxons hairsuite style was sorta of represented The Norman's hair - the iconic hair cut which also featured in the Bayeux tapestry does not happen; only William seems to have the anything nearing the iconic cut, although it's more a kinda mop-topish cut and at times you want to give it a good ruffle. Maybe the producers didn't fancy having to ask the extras to get hair cuts, and I suppose a lot of the extras that played Norman soliders would double up as other extras in other scenes as English or Vikings, and having a distintive Norman haircut would be problematic to work around/with, but still, it would have been good to have a least a few and at least William with the pugnacious, proto-type punk, iconic and agressive Norman hairstyle.

Ages of the characters - ...I get that you may want actors for certain roles, and also understand that sometimes that roles demand actors with more experience / heft, and also that an actor would fit the role in essence rather than this is what history is / plus that's the script and you need to find actors to then fill that role, or you want to work with a certain actor and it sorta fits or that's just the choice you're going for, even if it's written as a certain age, but, most of the ladies were under or over their ages of the characters; so just a couple of examples - Queen Gunhild renamed here in the series from Edith (she was the renamed historical Gytha Godwinson renamed Edith when married to Edward the Confessor - Gunhild was the name of another of the Godwin children but not the one married to Edward the Confesser - still with me rigth?!) was probably around the right age gap between her and Edward the Confessor - 20 years or so - but the Queen would have been in her 40s at the time of 1066, rather than in her twenties; also Matilda would have been in her early 30s and probably would have had most of her children by then rather than just having her first....also the men, Edward the Confessor would have been in his 60s (not sure what age Eddie Marsden was supposed to be playing as his hair was dyed but assume he was playing seemingly mid-40s?); Harold was about right for his age but his elder brother Sweyn seems to be in his mid-fifties, although died in reality around his 30s, Tostig is in his late teens / early twenties here but around his late 30s in reality in 1066.

Hardrada / the Vikings - yep this gets a whole section. Just, just...it was painful. Not sure if it was a production choice, the script, the director or a combination of all but that first scene when the messenger from England turns up to Norway, it was so, I nearly nearly laughed, it was just so so nearly too much...cutting off the messenger's head and throwing the head to Hardrada...the wearing of dark furs and dark everything - I mean, I had a moment where I thought, and it seemed that this introduction to the Norwegians wouldn't have been out of the realms of, if they had an exploding volcano in the background with Hardrada standing in front of it and laughing mancially with a bloodlied mouth eating a elk straight from carcass he had just killed with his bare hands. They did tone him down a bit in the following episodes but but it was just full of nearly nearly full on parody - espeically when he's at Stamford Bridge and standing in his tent in front of a blazing fire that a shoots more flames then it really would, plus the beheading and sticking heads on a multi-spike...t was super annoying as it seemed they weren't playing this production for laughs or trying to be over the top with things, or maybe they were but, yeah, it was bad.

Game of Thrones - (yep, I said it unfortunatley) it was starting to turn into Game of Thrones with the scenes between the Dukes of Normady and Brittany...with the Duke of Brittany giving his best Baron Greyjoy and having had Alain of Brittany (his son) his hand chopped off and in chains and sitting in a corner near his him, guarded by soliders....it just reeked of having the Duke of Brittany being protrayed as a Baron Greyjoy with his sea fleet....Also why was the Duke of Brittany in a camp all the time, sitting in a tent with his son next to him? Was it just to be near his sea fleet (the largest as was reiterated numerous times)? Why? Was he planning an invasion of someplace, or just wanted to be near his ships? The way he was also depicted, I half expected him to start eating raw fish too, he was shown as being slimy and wet, as though being Duke of Brittany meant that he was turning into a bit of a mer-man, it was all a bit weird, and as I said, seemed that the writers/directors/producers were strolling into GoT terriorty. Also the way the Duke of Brittany died, death via toothpick, it was just too much of a convience and a bit silly (although bloody), and also very handy that his son was sitting by his side to take over and give William what he wanted (the sea fleet)

The main conflict - just felt the reasons that the two went to war - Harold and William - there was so much ambiguity in the central reason, history is vague on it, and there is so much scope to make it really interwoven and why Harold claimed the crown, as well as William of course, just think it could have been so much more interesting and full of more incident - such as did Harold decide to give his promise because he wanted to escape Normandy, and he even make a promise anyway? It could all have been a lie on William's part to maybe? But then writing historical drama is so difficult and there are choices to be made, and you need to streamline the story, plus add the historical background.....

I could go on, but I think it's time to stop tapping on this. Loved that they helped to create this immersive world, loved that they focused on this time period, loved that they showed that behind the scences women have always been involved in desicion making at the highest levels and weren't just there doing their emboriday and having kids all the time, and had good skills and intelligence, as well as being involved in the king-making....loved the look (apart from the grubby faces).....but with the other things above and also the sometimes weakness in the script, at times letting it down - such as using the term Majesty, which wasn't used until Henry VIII some five hundred years later - and the script swaying a bit from being 'normal' everyday speak between the characters to more formal declarations and stiff speech (as it were), and along with the above points made it all a bit uneven, so I'll give it a good 6.5 out of ten. However, please watch it! there aren't too many shows produced about this transitional time in English history. I hope it also helps you to encourage you to find out all history behind it! It's really intertweined and makes you wonder what really happened, for William to become the Conquerer in England and if that was a good thing, or not...