The second season of The Tudors has started... does anyone care?

I just recently watched the entire first season within a week, and I must say that I'm fairly impressed. After working through some "identity" issues early on, the show really found its groove and became as engrossing and strong as any historical TV drama that I've ever seen. I really enjoy Jonathan Rhys-Meyers take on Henry VIII, and there are some strong, quality supporting performances from Maria Doyle Kennedy as Catherine of Aragon, Nick Dunning as Thomas Boleyn, and especially Sam Neill as Cardinal Wolsey.

I've already watched two episodes of the second season through On Demand, and the level of quality is still there. Much has been made about some of the historical inaccuracies, but I understand that adjustments have to be made to keep the series compelling for television. As much as I love Rome, I think that Showtime has really upended that with this marvelous series. Judging from the lack of support that I see for The Tudors here and anywhere else really, I'm beginning to believe I'm alone.

I'm glad to hear Season 2 has started off well.

I will watch Jonathan Rhys Meyers in anything, but don't have Showtime, so I just recently received the R2 Blu-Ray of Season 1. I have not had time to view it yet, though.

Region 2 Blu-ray? Will those discs work in American players? If so, I certainly need to get my hands on them.

There is no Region 2 Blu-ray. Blu-ray regions are A, B or C.

"The Tudors" was released on Blu-ray in the U.K. in December, and is region-free. There is no PAL issue with Blu-ray, so it will play in any U.S. Blu-ray player.

It has not been announced for Blu-ray in the U.S. because it's distributed by CBS/Paramount.

I couldn't find anything on Sunday night and landed on this show. Somehow I'd never heard of it before. I really liked the episode Sunday night. I stuck season 1 in my Netflix queue and bumped it up to the top.
I will be tuning in.
I loved Rome btw, hopefully this show holds up to that.

Yeah, sorry -- my mind was still thinking in DVD terms instead of Blu-Ray terms!

There are a couple of people selling the UK Blu-Ray over at Hidefdigest. I think they put in big orders to save money on shipping. I got mine from one of them as it seemed cheaper than ordering one item alone direct from a UK store.

A few random thoughts -


I enjoyed the 2nd season premiere. The performances are all still pretty strong.

Looks like it's going to be a pretty interesting season based on what the previews were showing.

I doubt this board will really turn out a weekly Tudors thread because it is a very niche show.

Peter O'Toole has got be about 112 years old by now, but he is still pretty spry. Looking forward to where his character goes.

Though I agree that The Tudors won't get a weekly thread on the board, I can't really see why that is? It seems to be a sizable success for Showtime, and I hear about it often in everyday life and through all media outlets. Much more than I ever did for Rome... Not to mention the most obvious thing the show has going for it: unwavering quality. I hope it isn't bias against Showtime, because pound for pound in current programming, Showtime trounces HBO right now. Without The Sopranos, The Wire, Rome, or Deadwood, HBO seems lost...

Also, Peter O'Toole is old, but I really look forward to what he will bring to the table this season.

Thanks for this thread. I forgot the season started Sunday.

Im loving this show...its come far since its 'soft-core porn' first few episodes

Anyone know if there will be a s3?

Probably. The next episode is already on SHOOD, and the previews at the end of that episode talk about the following week's "season finale", not the "series finale".

It's an entertaining show, but I hate that there might be people out there that take it seriously as history. The show is more like "Melrose Place meets Renaissance Faire" than actual, you know, history. I tried counting all the blatant historical inaccuracies this season, but gave up when I hit 950,

I dont think anyones watching as a historical survey

but I will say it does an excelent job of catching the FEEL of the time

much better that most shows/movies who subscribe to the historical timeline of

Dinosours.....Rome......Merlin/Dragons....Foppish Dikensian...Cowboys....WWII...Hippies

You'd be surprised. Whoever TV Squad has writing recaps of the series is apparently learning Tudor history as it goes along. She'll write up a recap, get assailed for accepting some obvious historical error from the show as fact, then get all defensive about her lack of knowledge of the Tudor error. I don't think anyone expects her to have a PhD in Tudor history, but she seems to accept everything in the show as fact until proven otherwise (one of my favorite blurbs: "JRM is so cute - but he's nowhere near as FAT as Henry was!".

And it's not just the big things - like combining Margaret and Mary into one character. It's also the little things, like how they play music at parties that is obviously 100 years too early, or have clothes in colors that didn't exist yet.

While most people know that the show has taken liberties with the real history of the Tudor era, I guarantee that there are people out there that take everything that happens in the show as actual history.

Am I the only one who hasn't been able to really get into this season?

I sorta had the same problem last year. I just didn't want to watch the episodes I was recording. But once I finally made myself watch last season, I thought the show really began developing and got quite good toward the end. But this season has just been a bore to me, haven't gotten into it at all. I'm at least 3 or 4 behind and am considering calling it quits and just erasing. I don't know. I loved Rome, but this just doesn't grab me in the same way.

I enjoyed the season. I mean you pretty much know where it's all going, but I've enjoyed it, nonetheless. I guess we'll have a new cast of characters new season. Which also makes me wonder, why'd they dump a few characters from Season 1? I guess he cast can get too large, but it seems odd from someone in the opening credits like Callum Blue or Henry Czerny to just disappear.

I just finished listening to lectures on tape (The Teaching company HOW TO LISTEN TO AND UNDERSTAND GREAT MUSIC - Robert Greenburg (unbelievably fantastic)) and have been saying the same thing to myself. Although I will admit that folk music is not so heavily covered

Well, since opinions were asked...we're watching it, so what can I say? It's fairly enjoyable, especially compared to most of the fare currently airing...but not indispensable by any means. Someone criticized Rhys-Myer's portrayal, saying that he only displays two emotions...pouting annoyance & rage...and it's hard to disagree. Of course, there is also the smarmy come-ons to his "conquests" (hard to call them that when it seems that all of the ladies in the kingdom drop their frocks at the slightest hint from the monarch, with the exception of those with whom he's truly enamored, such as Anne or Jane Seymour).
Anyway, we'll keep watching since it's paid for as part of the package...but will record On Demand rather than buying. I think that one of the problems is the slow pace. The entire first two seasons have been spent on the Boleyn affair, which many other fine cinema productions have presented in two or three hours. Although liberties are taken & the 'behind-the-scenes' looks at the lives of royalty can be entertaining, there's only so many alterations/imaginings that the producers can invent before the whole thing jumps several sharks. Unless they rewrote history completely (having Anne survive & form a lesbian alliance with Jane Seymour to overthrow the kingdom...which the producers probably considered briefly),the plot is pretty well-known and proves to be confining to a long series.
On the other hand, Rome succeeds because the historical figures & events serve largely as a backdrop to the two leads. Sure, the 'real' figures get a lot of screen time, but creating new characters who can be privy to big events is a tried-and-true method for expanding the parameters of the story within the larger historical background. Whether Little Big Man or Forrest Gump (and even those plots strain credulity by having the characters "coincidentally" present at EVERY major event in their era), it seems to be easier for the audience to accept & allows for the plot to move rapidly. It's sort of like the "We Were There" books I read as a kid...they were a good counterpart to the other nonfiction historical series designed for young people because they allowed the authors to create plausible drama within a historical concept (including real events & characters).
Just my two cent's worth. I'll still watch The Tudors, but it can be a bit hard to take at times...either the 'history lesson' becomes boring with TMI (or inaccuracies) or the soap opera/bodice-ripper threads become distracting. I just think the producers are having a really hard time striking the right balance (although it has improved with Season Two...and still flows better than the sloooowww Third Season of Deadwood).

We love it! Knowing only the basic high school history of the Tudor monarchy, I really enjoy watching and reading in more detail. This show has really fueled my interest in all things Tudor.

Episodes 19 and 20 were particularly well done, and I'm sad to see the season end. I'm already looking forward to Jane Seymour's brief time in the spotlight. I imagine Season 3 will span quite a few years (how much time can they spend on a one year marriage and subsequent 3 year mourning period?) Then again, it may be tough to age JRM as quickly as would be necessary, given just how fat and miserable Henry VIII became in those years.

We watch. It's good but not great. Not in Rome's class, in my opinion.