ROTTEN TOMATOES: An Early Look at Boleyn's Girls Comments

An Early Look at Boleyn's Girls

by Jeff Giles | August 07, 2007

Summary

Movies about 16th-century royal intrigue are normally anathema to non-female American audiences, so when casting its adaptation of Philippa Gregory's The Other Boleyn Girl, Columbia smartly signed Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johansson in the movie's lead roles. The gambit seems to have worked, because JoBlo is reporting on its first look at the film's poster. Back to Article

(1-24 of 24 posts) | Reply

jacog writes:
on Aug 07 2007 06:21 AM

Couldn't they find actual English stars who can talk with actual believable English accents?

(Reply to this)

synergyred writes:
on Aug 07 2007 07:33 AM

Does anyone know if they can do good British accents?

And yay for Eric Bana!

(Reply to this)

Crenshaw writes:
on Aug 07 2007 07:38 AM

I think I'll stick to watching The Tudors on Showtime. Great show.

(Reply to this)

jacog writes:
on Aug 07 2007 08:20 AM

Natalie Portman's accent was not all that great in V For Vendetta... not sure about Johansson.

(Reply to this)

pmazun writes:
on Aug 07 2007 08:39 AM

In reply to this comment (#1017873)
umm portman is english tar

(Reply to this)

skasforfags writes:
on Aug 07 2007 08:57 AM

In reply to this comment (#1018768)
She was born in Israel and has never lived in England, and now resides in NY. Yes I looked it up on IMBD, but your comment looked wrong and I had to refute it.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Aug 07 2007 09:28 AM

Yikes, that cover/poster is terrible! The Photoshop work is just bad.

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Aug 07 2007 09:39 AM

Scarlett's okay at accents; I think she'll be able to handle it. Natalie? We all saw V for Vendetta. Halfway there. Maybe she'll be all there for this one.

(Reply to this)

larrygreg writes:
on Aug 07 2007 10:27 AM

Does Natelie Portman have on Ugly Betty's necklace?

(http://abctvstore.seenon.com/detail.php?p=12075&v=abcugbjso)

(Reply to this)

nathanpoitras writes:
on Aug 07 2007 10:38 AM

I'll be going to this one, end of story.

(Reply to this)

Azlam Orlandu writes:
on Aug 07 2007 12:37 PM

Who cares about accents? Scarlet Portman = drool

(Reply to this)

Greenmooncheese writes:
on Aug 07 2007 04:00 PM

Anne Boleyn was married to Henry VIII, not Henry VII. I think Natalie Portman is a pretty good choice for Anne.

(Reply to this)

Drew914 writes:
on Aug 07 2007 06:10 PM

There's just four things I want to see in this movie...

(Reply to this)

Drew914 writes:
on Aug 07 2007 06:15 PM

There's just four things I want to see in this movie...

(Reply to this)

Crystal77 writes:
on Oct 13 2007 05:57 PM

This should be better than Shotimes Tudors. They may have the accents down but they are so far off on historical facts it makes me cringe. The book was great, can't wait for this movie to release.

(Reply to this)

CHG writes:
on Oct 15 2007 07:59 AM

In reply to this comment (#1017873)
I seem to remember a similar statement involing the casting of a British girl to play one of the most famous women in American literature. The actress was Vivien Leigh and the character was Scarlett O'Hara. The rest is history.

(Reply to this)

CHG writes:
on Oct 15 2007 08:18 AM

The only concern I have about the casting is Eric Bana as Henry VIII. He is a wonderful actor and I'm sure he can handle the accent but he just doesn't fit the historical and visual appearrance of Henry VIII. If anyone read the book, I am totally dismayed at the casting of Mary Boleyn's 2nd husband. His discription in the novel conjures up no less than a "man's man". A tough and handsome man afraid of nothing, with calloused hands and hard, thick body. He is going to be played by an actor named Redmayne, who may in fact be a good actor but is almost androgenous looking and has played a gay man in 2 major productions. Elizabeth(HBO) Elizabeth: The Golden Age. The character of William Stafford would have been better served by someone like Daniel Craig, Kevin McKidd or Ray Stevenson.
That's All

(Reply to this)

hoothoo writes:
on Nov 06 2007 05:06 PM

No, Anne Boleyn always wore a necklace with the letter B on it.

(Reply to this)

spacedog76 writes:
on Nov 17 2007 07:45 PM

Anne Boleyn may have worn a B, but the costume director should have known better than to give her Ugly Betty's B necklace--which she wears in EVERY episode! I saw the trailer for this and just couldn't take it seriously with Betty's necklace staring me in the face! Who was the idiot stylist for the movie?!

(Reply to this)

carrieanne writes:
on Nov 24 2007 08:41 AM

In reply to this comment (#1284747)
Anne Boleyn didn't just wear a necklace with a B pendant, she wore THAT one. Well, not that same necklace, of course, but the same design. Google Anne Boleyn, almost all of her portraits feature that same necklace. I have no idea why Ugly Betty wears the same one, which strikes me as just odd. But Anne famously wore that necklace and almost every depiction of her features it, so it would strike me as odd if she didn't in this one.

(Reply to this)

ChoccyJoJo writes:
on Nov 29 2007 03:08 PM

Journal Description:
Ok, couple of points. I'm English and quite happy for Americans to play English historical characters as long as it's done well so hopefully these girls will. Secondly, most of the actors in the Tudors, as terrible as the series is historically, are actually English or Irish so, yes, i would imagine that they do "nail" the accents! Thirdly, The Other Boleyn Girl also has major historical inaccuracies. There is no evidence whatsoever (infact, plenty to the contrary) that either of Mary's children were Henry VIII's. It's a good romp of a book but no take it as historical fact. Fourthly: Ugly Betty is wearing Anne Boleyn's necklace NOT the other way around!!!!!!! You have no idea how much that pained me to read!The stylist on UB should be the one hanging their head, not the other way round.

(Reply to this)

cpminky writes:
on Jan 14 2008 05:46 PM

Yeah ChoccyJoJo,
And another thing Phillippa Gregory said in a recent interview when asked about the movie "which she said she loved" she said she gave the book over to the "movie guys" and let them make the movie their way because she had written the book in her art form and they should be allowed to make the movie in their art form. And lets be realistic, no movie will ever be able to follow a book exactly, unless of course we plan on attending 12 hour movies with the occasional potty break.

(Reply to this)

hsheffield writes:
on Feb 18 2008 05:57 PM

In reply to this comment (#1019166)
No, Ugly Betty has on Anne Boleyn's necklace (documented in a famous portrait of Anne)

(Reply to this)

ksellnow writes:
on Mar 17 2008 06:45 PM

In reply to this comment (#1019144)
ARE YOU SEROUS!! Apparently, you didn't pay attention in history class!! Anne Boleyn (changed from Bullen when the family began to rise and gain power, I might add) is famous for wearing the B necklace. Ugly Betty just decided to copy it. Now, I was a fan of the movie, but there were a few things wrong. First, I can't believe that they would use the same necklace that the character of Betty has on in "Ugly Betty!" That's a mishap on the part of the costume designer. That style of necklace (although traditionally wore by Anne Boleyn) is now know as the necklace for Ugly Betty, and I'm not sure that the vast majority of people that have seen the movie did not know that that was actually Anne Boleyn's necklace. Second, it didn't follow the book, much less the real history of what happened with the Boleyn's and Henry VIII. Lastly, the movie took too long to start and flew past at the end.

All in all, a pretty good adaptation of the story. Now we get a taste of what went on and if people are interested and pay attention, they just might learn a little history (ever if it is not exactly correct) while watching this movie! Scary, isn't it?!

(Reply to this)

Related Links

The Other Boleyn Girl

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links