Charles II: The Power and the Passion [DVD] [2003]

Good actors but in every episode there were around 6 sex scenes.Catharine was very strange and strangely portrayed.Shaky cameras added to the mess.Whoever made this was some kind of pervert and should have been reigned in and made to concentrate on the plot.Did not do justice at all to the actors and their efforts.

I bought this set at a large discount, not having high hopes for it. My fears were justified to some extent, in that too much time is spent on bedroom trivia. This leaves too little time to do justice to all the historical events that are crammed in. The result is confusing, even if you already have a reasonable understanding of the period. There is no sense of the importance of each event, very little context or sense of time. The only relationship that is kept in full view, is that between the King and Lady Castlemaine. I found that to be dull, unrealistic and unimportant. Another mistress, Nell Gwyn gets several scenes, yet the bubonic plague that killed one quarter of London's population, is overlooked.The casting does not help matters. Charles comes across as a man who is aloof and indiferrent, because of Sewell's poor acting. Sewell's little boy lost routine, may be endearing to his female fans, but it is inappropriate for King Charles II who was very much a man of action.In the drama, much time is spent on Charles's insistence on having equality for Roman Catholics, but there is no clear explanation given as to why. In the extras, there is a full documentary about Charles's youth. Here we are given to believe that he was indebted to the crucial support given to his escape from England, by a network of Catholics. What is overlooked though is that by supporting religious freedom, he was allowing greater freedom for science and the arts. There is a moment in the drama where Charles does express an interest in science, but sadly that was not expanded on. Without the foundation of the Royal observatory, his patronage of the Royal Society and the religious exemption he granted Isaac Newton, the World would be a very different place today.There is a lot to suggest that the director saw Charles's adult life as being one giant act of revenge, for the death of his father and his own exile. The finale being the succession of his Catholic brother James to the throne for another reign of tyrrany. He was doing James no favour in allowing him to be his heir, so it can't have been from love.Overall======Compacting nearly 30 years of complicated turbulent history into 4hrs of entertainment, doesn't work. The roles of the female characters are inflated to provide some titilation, whilst reducing major historical events to mere footnotes. The costumes are surprisingly authentic and there are some strong acting perfomances. Sadly Rufus Sewell, is very poor as the King.Whilst I did not enjoy the drama series, the extra documentary was interesting. I have also given consideration to the lack of other dramas that focus on Charles II, when awarding 3 stars.I

All four long episodes of this classic BBC series are presented on two discs with a very extensive special feature section. Along with commentaries by Kate Harwood, Joe Wright, and Adrian Hodges,the Writers and Directors. There is a Documentary on the making of Charles II, and a more accurate historical Documentary, 'The Boy Who Would Be King'.Rufus Sewell plays Charles II, tenaciously, and Rupert Graves, plays his impulsive close friend George, The Duke of Buckinghamshire, with whom he shared his exile in Belgium and France before being recalled by Parliament after the death of Oliver Cromwell.Weaving through the intrigues between Catholics and Protetsants, king and Parliament, Dutchess Barbara Villiers manipulated Charles, and Helen McCrory recreates this fascinating sultry role with great panache.As a contrast, bright cockney Actress Nell Gwynn out lasted most other Royal Mistresses, and Emma Pierson, brings this role to life excellently. Charles is reputed to have had at least 16 mistresses.Shirley Henderson portrays his official wife, with an amazing wig from the fashions of the period, whith whom he eventually fell in love, Catherine of Braganza, from Portugal. It was at first a political marriage. Unfortunately their son was still born, and to protect them, and thwart Parliament, Charles would not name any of his children as heirs, but named his younger brother James as heir.Christian Coulson plays his eldest son the Duke of Monmouth, who led an unsuccessful rebellion after Charles's death, and throughout most of the action, his old friend and advisor Sir Edward Hyde is played by Ian McDiarmid.Diana Rigg has a small but powerful role as the Queen Mother.The power and the conficting passion makes powerful viewing. In the midst of trying to maintain a fair and balanced seat of power, Charles was faced with two disasters, the Great Plague, and the Fire of London.The only disappointing thing for me is that the music is always ponderous and heavily romantic. There was much lively Restoration music and humourous songs which could have added even more to the authenticity of the recreation of this period. This whole production as a sumptuous Costume Drama, as well as an interpretation of History.

I am an admirer of Rufus Sewell who has done fine things over the years (Zen, Lord Melbourne in Victoria, the Illusionist). In this production he certainly looks the part, but his performance is really not more than adequate. But chiefly he is let down by the now outdated production standards; the costumes look like 'costumes' and uncomfortable, interiors are unconvincing, and, sad to say, the ladies, Charles II mistresses, are really disappointing, both in performance and looks. The sex scenes are excruciatingly awkward.It just goes to show how things have changed sine 2003. A bit of 'Musketeers' dash would go a long way here.

When nothing on to it will do cheap enough