Wolf Hall 1.01. Three Hat Trick

[selenak]

So far, so well done. They kept the jumping between eras of Mantel's first volume - but imo at least, it was not difficult to follow which time period we were in at which point - , and for the first episode, focused on the fall of Wolsey as a unifying theme, with Cromwell not meeting Henry (as in, actually talking to him) until the very end. Naturally, there's a lot of exposition - this is where everyone gets introduced - but the only time it came across as "as you know, Bob" clumsy to me was when Wolsey summed up Henry's marital history with Katherine for Cromwell. All the other times the information felt like a natural part of the dialogue.

Mark Rylance is very good as Cromwelll, getting across the man's intelligence and constant observation of everyone else. Not yet the ruthlessness because at this point he hasn't had a chance to exhibit it yet, but the toughness. The first episode's main emotional emphasis was in his relationship with Wolsey (and they kept the flashbacks to Cromwell Senior's treatment of him until we're two thirds in, so the audience is allowed to conclude Wolsey is Cromwell's replacement father on its own before that) and with his wife and daughters. (If you've read the novels, the younger daughter wearing her angel wings willl make you wince for more than one reason.) By contrast, the various courtiers and later players are briefly sketched. Mark Gatiss wins for character with only a few lines yet completely getting the personality and type of relationship with Cromwell across, very memorable. (He plays Gardiner.) Damian Lewis is no slouch, either, in that last scene as Henry VIII., whom everyone keeps talking about in the course of the episode, so basically he's the Harry Lime of Wolf Hall with the heavily delayed entrace. Said scene paints Henry as intelligent, still having some residual affection for the Cardinal but also no intention whatsoever to save him, and quickly deducing Cromwell can be useful.

Scenes only of significance if you either are aware of history or have read the novels: Mark Smeaton (though the last name hasn't been spoken out loud yet). "You may not think of us, Mark, but we think of you" indeed. I wonder whether anyone is watching it unspoiled by both und what they make of them?

They've cast Thomas Brodie Sangster as Rafe, and he's adorable (again); I've never had much investment in Rafe in the novels, so that was welcome (considering Rafe is one of Cromwell's most constant dialogue partners in upcoming events).

Lastly, the look: is gorgeous. All the candlelight minus electricity when filming certainly paid off. The costumes certainly look authentic (especially when compared to, err, certain other productions set within the same era). Oh, and bonus points for a Katherine of Aragon who isn't black haired but auburn (which according to all descriptions she was). She still speaks with a Spanish accent, though, which personally I doubt she still did at that point of her life (I mean, the woman has lived in England since she was 16, now it's more than two decades later).

Comments

[kerrypolka]

The lighting was absolutely stunning; I was impressed with a lot of it (the acting, the casting, the script) but the lighting was the part that is still making me go WOW two days later.

I do have to say I winced at an As You Know Bob fairly late in the episode, when they made Gatiss (who I agree was excellent) drop some info about the Holy Roman Emperor then say something like, "Oh, I see your boy doesn't understand." and explain why that was important. I was like, "okay, by 'your boy' you clearly mean 'the audience', but surely the set-up for Political Motivation Exposition could have been a little less OKAY IT IS TIME FOR EXPLAINING NOW"

[selenak]

To me, the sublime snideness of "your boy doesn't understand" saved it, as opposed to the earlier Wolsey & Cromwell "let me give you Henry's marital history so far scene", no slight to Jonathan Pryce intended.

[cadma]

I really enjoyed it. I was pretty shocked by what happened to Cromwell's family -- when he got home I was expecting one child to have died. I couldn't tell how long before Wolsey's fall it happened but it seems to be setting up his political career as the only thing he has left. He has male relatives left but he's getting them (or at least Ralph) involved in politics too. I'll be interested to see if his son appears.

I saw what you meant as well when you said before that Mantel was a bit in love with Cromwell -- he did come off as almost flawless. If some ruthlessness shows up later maybe that will change it a bit. I found him much more interesting when he was in conflict with someone, especially Anne Boleyn but More was good too. Looking forward to the next episode for more of that. It's a good performance even when he's just watching or agreeing with Wolsey though. Gatiss was great too, I hope there's more of him as well.

[selenak]

Cromwell's son Gregory will show up (he's an important supporting character in the novels); the deaths of his wife and children will continue to haunt him, though. (BTW, the sweating sickness really was that vicious, i.e. you could die that quickly. You could also survive - Anne Boleyn did - if you made it through the early stage, but the death rate was incredibly high.

Re: ruthlessness, it's got to come if they follow the novels. (As it is, this episode contained a lot of set up for later actions in terms of motivation. Which is why "you may not think of us, Mark, but we think of you" is such an incredibly chilling line in future context.) Ditto Cromwell/Anne and Cromwell/More conflict, and also more Gardiner (Gatiss' role).

[cadma]

OK, some distant childhood history lesson memories are slowly filtering back through and I think I know when he's going to be ruthless (episode 2 helped). I'm in a weird position with spoilers for this show I guess because I know what the big events are going to be but not much about Cromwell as a person.

[d_generate_girl]

I'm not a huge fan of the books (or most of the period in general), but I was intending on binge-watching it mostly to perv over Damian Lewis. Gatiss and Brodie-Sangster and Rylance sound like nice bonuses, and considering my girl Joanne Whalley is apparently rocking it as Catherine, I'm moving this up my list.

[selenak]

She was very good in her scene of shaming Henry and the sham trial re: her marriage, yes.

[kalypso]

when Wolsey summed up Henry's marital history with Katherine for Cromwell

I rolled my eyes at that point. How exactly was Cromwell supposed to have missed out on that story?

I'm not sure about it yet, particularly Anne, but probably there isn't anyone who could live up to the Anne in my head.

Re Katherine, she may be the sort of in-between person who still sounds Spanish to the English but would sound English if she went back to Spain.

I did shudder when we met poor Mark.

[selenak]

How exactly was Cromwell supposed to have missed out on that story?

That was certainly the most clumsy dialogue of the entire episode. Mind you, I get that they needed the exposition for the audience (not all of whom would know, even in this day and age), but it might have been best to let, say, Rafe, who is young enough to have been born in Henry's reign, ask how the King came to be married to Katherine in the first place. Or Cromwell's daughters, even.

Anne: well, Mantel's Anne isn't my idea of Anne, but she's a hostile version within plausibility (as opposed to, say, Philipa Gregory's Anne, who is ridiculous), and that's, going by that one scene, is whom Claire Foy plays.

[kalypso]

The saving grace was that it gave Wolsey an opportunity to reminisce about how hot the young Caterina had been... but he could have done that anyway. And I agree that having Rafe or the precocious Anne ask Cromwell to explain the details would have been much more plausible.

I don't particularly expect Anne B to be sympathetic, but I want to be bewitched. That probably makes her impossible to cast, as so much of bewitchment lies in the eye of the observer. I don't know who I'd pick. Dorothy Tutin ought to have worked, back in the 1970s, but for some reason didn't convince me. I think a youngish Harriet Walter might have done it well.

You know, it had somehow escaped me that Oliver Cromwell was a several-greats-nephew of Thomas, hence the significance of Richard asking to take his surname.

[selenak]

Now you're making me wonder about screen Anne Boleyns and my own attitude towards them. Let's see: Dorothy Tutin I liked, especially in her trial scene, but while she was great as Anne in her final stage, young Anne getting to the top didn't come across as compelling, true. Though to be fair, at that stage she was a bit character in someone else's story, since that part was still in the Katherine of Aragon episode and the Anne Boleyn episode started at the beginning of her downfall already.

Genevieve Bujold: was very young when playing her and showed it. Not always in a bad way, since Anne in Maxwell Anderson's play starts out young, but it's noticeable throughout. All in all more Scarlett O'Hara in the Renaissance than Anne, I thought; a good performance as this, and no matter how fictional and implausible, I do enjoy watching that final scene between her and Henry.

Natalie Portmann: let's not speak of The Other Boleyn Girl. Not N. Portman's fault, but ugh.

Mind you, a not good source material actually produced my favourite screen Anne so far. Natalie Dormer in The Tudors, who is also an example of tireless actress lobbying paying off. The first season writing for Anne - and most other people - was dire, with a very few exceptions. The second season of The Tudors was still very soapy, but between seasons Dormer had done her lobbying to include more, gasp, actual history, re: Anne, and so it did, making most of Anne's scenes very compelling. She also is the only Anne so far to do her execution scene with the real Anne's actual death speech instead of a more modern sensibilities accomodating rewrite. If The Tudors weren't such a soap with only occasional bright spots I'd reccommend it, but anyway, Natalie Dormer. Has the charisma, the charm, the ruthlessness. Here are some of her scenes, including some of Anne Boleyn's most famous lines. (Such as "...a desire for apples" and "I have but a little neck".)

The Oliver & Thomas Cromwell connection: now that I had known about for some reason.

[kalypso]

I don't think I managed more than one episode of The Tudors, or maybe it was two. Was that the one where Henry started off having to deal with a rebellion by his uncle - if Henry had a living uncle you could see why he might think he had a better claim to the throne - or did the mysterious uncle belong to Ray Winstone as Henry, whose Anne was Helena Bonham Carter? HBC as AB was disappointingly disappointing, too, though that version did throw up my favourite Cromwell until now, in the shape of Danny Webb (no thanks to the script).

You're right, Tutin is better at the downfall than the rise. I don't dislike Bujold. I avoided The Other Boleyn Girl, having heard an extract from the novel read out on the radio, but stills suggest Natalie Portman looked quite plausible as Anne, in a way that her Dormer namesake didn't to me.

Something that hit me during last night's episode, however, was that Patrick Troughton is my One True Thomas Howard Duke of Norfolk. (Were there any politicians at Henry's court not called Thomas?) Every time Bernard Hill stalks down a corridor, my mind protests "You are not the Duke of Norfolk!"

[selenak]

Oh, I wouldn't want to put you through The Tudors. Especially the first season. It has its moments, but they're far and isolated. It offers some good acting and visuals, but mainly it's simply not a good show. But no, Henry doesn't face a rebellion by a fictional uncle at the start. Otoh he does face something equally fiictional and ridiculous: an uncle with the Tudor last name who just got killed in Rome by person's unknown.

However, just to be thorough, I have to insist Henry actually had a living uncle through his early reign, from his mother's side. Arthur Plantagenet, one of Edward IV.'s acknowledged by blows. How do I know this without looking it up? Because after executing his dad's tax collector, Edmund Dudley, in a cheap bit for public favour (a successful one, too, but it showed Henry didn't need Anne Boleyn or Thomas Cromwell to committ Justizmord), Henry married Edmund's widow to Arthur Plantagenet. She didn't get to raise her son John, though. John's wardship was lucratively given, as was the custom, to his later father-in-law Guildford, whose daughter Jane he married and had 13 kids with, including Robin "the Gypsy" Dudley, the later Earl of Leicester. Arthur must have lived long enough for an adult and newly influential John to argue with him via letter on his (John's) sister's behalf, when he felt Arthur had done her financially wrong. In conclusion: living uncle for Henry VIII! (Not that anyone ever used Arthur Plantagenet in fiction...)