The Pillars of the Earth

Mark CMG

Creative Mountain Games
I've no idea what a Netflix or a Comcast is. Or, in short - no!


Follow the links. Comcast won't help, I imagine, but you might be able to sign up for a Netflix free trial. Double check the airing dates of Pillars on IMDb and know that they appear on Netflix pretty quickly after that. You might have to wait until mid-August to start the free trial if you want to watch all of the episodes via that method.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Follow the links. Comcast won't help, I imagine, but you might be able to sign up for a Netflix free trial. Double check the airing dates of Pillars on IMDb and know that they appear on Netflix pretty quickly after that. You might have to wait until mid-August to start the free trial if you want to watch all of the episodes via that method.

Netflix is not a service available outside the US.
 


El Mahdi

Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
Just started watching the series today. It's a good story that I'm enjoying, but I'm finding the historical inaccuracies hard to swallow.

First, the White Ship is depicted as a Cog. Most accounts describe it as a Norman Longboat (much like the Norse Longboats of the Normans ancestors). Second, no account I've read of the sinking ever mentioned a Fire...only that the boat foundered on partially submerged rocks.

It also shows Henry I being told of the disaster, while a 9 or 10 year old Matilda sits at his feet. In 1120, Matilda was 18 years old, and had already been married to the Holy Roman Emperor for 9 years.

Then, the show opens (after the sinking) in 1138.

In 1138, Henry I had already been dead for 3 years (died in December, 1135), and there was already open warfare between Stephen and Maude (Matilda). That's a pretty glaring mistake that's hard for me to ignore.

It also shows Stephen present at court when Henry I dies. Stephen was not present.

It shows open hostility between Robert (Earl of Gloucester and illegitimate son of Henry I) and Stephen (Count of Blois and grandson of William I) even before Henry I dies. Not so. In fact, Robert actually declared fealty to Stephen after his seizure of the throne (much to Maudes' consternation), and only turned from him after more than a year of Stephens rule.

Stephens charactarisation is wrong also. Tony Curran's portrayal of Stephen casts him as a hard, ruthless opportunist. Contemporary descriptions of him, portray him as genial and friendly to the point of being considered soft. Case in point: Stephen very much wanted the aforementioned Robert of Gloucesters loyalty...wanted it so badly that he was willing to allow Robert to choose his oath. Rather than complete fealty, Robert vowed that he would remain faithful to Stephen, only as long as Stephen remained Faithful to him. A demand that would have found anyone in chains until they relented, had they been dealing with Henry I. This percieved softness of Stephens was one of the reasons why the Barons wanted him over Maude (besides the obvious fact of her being a woman). Maude was very much her fathers daughter, strongwilled and passionate. And her husband at the time, Geoffrey, Count of Anjou (as her first husband, the Holy Roman Emporer had already died), was a strong battlefield commander with a fiery temper. Also, being an Angevin, Geoffrey was a longtime enemy of the Normans. They didn't know if they would get Maude as Queen, or Geoffrey as King, but either possibility was unacceptable to them. The only reason they swore loyalty to Maude in the first place, was because Henry I would brook nothing else from his Barons. Nobody crossed Henry I.

All of the above is within the first ten minutes of the first episode! I haven't read the book that this was made from, so I can't attest to it's accuracy or inaccuracy. But as far as the mini-series goes, this doesn't bode well for accuracay throughout the rest of the series.:erm:
 
Last edited:

Mark CMG

Creative Mountain Games
Just started watching the series today. It's a good story that I'm enjoying, but I'm finding the historical inaccuracies hard to swallow.

First, the White Ship is depicted as a Cog. Most accounts describe it as a Norman Longboat (much like the Norse Longboats of the Normans ancestors). Second, no account I've read of the sinking ever mentioned a Fire...only that the boat foundered on partially submerged rocks.

It also shows Henry I being told of the disaster, while a 9 or 10 year old Matilda sits at his feet. In 1120, Matilda was 18 years old, and had already been married to the Holy Roman Emperor for 9 years.

Then, the show opens (after the sinking) in 1138.

In 1138, the Henry I had already been dead for 3 years (died in December, 1135), and there was already open warfare between Stephen and Maude (Matilda). That's a pretty glaring mistake that's hard for me to ignore.

It also shows Stephen present at court when Henry I dies. Stephen was not present.

It shows open hostility between Robert (Earl of Gloucester and illegitimate son of Henry I) and Stephen (Count of Blois and grandson of William I) even before Henry I dies. Not so. In fact, Robert actually declared fealty to Stephen after his seizure of the throne (much to Maudes' consternation), and only turned from him after more than a year of Stephens rule.

Stephens charactarisation is wrong also. Tony Curran's portrayal of Stephen casts him as a hard, ruthless opportunist. Contemporary descriptions of him, portray him as genial and friendly to the point of being considered soft. Case in point: Stephen very much wanted the aforementioned Robert of Gloucesters loyalty...wanted it so badly that he was willing to allow Robert to choose his oath. Rather than complete fealty, Robert vowed that he would remain faithful to Stephen, only as long as Stephen remained Faithful to him. A demand that would have found anyone in chains until they relented, had they been dealing with Henry I. This percieved softness of Stephens was one of the reasons why the Barons wanted him over Maude (besides the obvious fact of her being a woman). Maude was very much her fathers daughter, strongwilled and passionate. And her husband at the time, Geoffrey, Count of Anjou (as her first husband, the Holy Roman Emporer had already died), was a strong battlefield commander with a fiery temper. Also, being an Angevin, Geoffrey was a longtime enemy of the Normans. They didn't know if they would get Maude as Queen, or Geoffrey as King, but either possibility was unacceptable to them. The only reason they swore loyalty to Maude in the first place, was because Henry I would brook nothing else from his Barons. Nobody crossed Henry I.

All of the above is within the first ten minutes of the first episode! I haven't read the book that this was made from, so I can't attest to it's accuracy or inaccuracy. But as far as the mini-series goes, this doesn't bode well for accuracay throughout the rest of the series.:erm:


Are you also familiar with the Cadfael series of mystery novels by Ellis Peters and the series of episodes brought to television based on them with Derek Jacobi? And, if so, how does that depiction of the period stack up to this? Also, does this stick close to the novel or is the novel mkore or less true to actual accounts? Thank you, I will sit and wait for my answer. :)
 

El Mahdi

Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
Are you also familiar with the Cadfael series of mystery novels by Ellis Peters and the series of episodes brought to television based on them with Derek Jacobi? And, if so, how does that depiction of the period stack up to this? Also, does this stick close to the novel or is the novel mkore or less true to actual accounts? Thank you, I will sit and wait for my answer. :)

Never read them (or even heard of them), but I just looked them up on Wikipedia and they sound intriguing. I'll have to check the library and see if they have them. I haven't read Ken Follet's novel, so I don't know how accurate it is or not (although I've read that Ken Follet heavily researched the period, so that bodes well for the book). It sounds like others in this thread have read it. Perhaps they can attest to the books accuracy or inaccuracy. As far as Historical Fiction set in this period, mostly all I've read in depth is Sharon Kay Penman. But I'm definitely going to add the Cafael books to my reading list.

Just finished watching the second episode (online). Despite the inaccuracies, I'm enjoying the story. It's really good so far. My wife is really digging it. That also means I get to tell her all about the history around the story without her rolling her eyes at me.:D
 

Mark CMG

Creative Mountain Games
I think the producers have taken a lesson from the success of The Tudors in regard to how closely they feel they need to cleave to history, though I am keen to hear how some who have read the book feel, particularly those who read the book and know the true history as well.


I am a big Cadfael fan both written and filmed. The little details that permeate the stories are a definite must-see/read for anyone who enjoys medieval fantasy gaming. I am seeing some of the same attention to detail in the Pillars episodes.


The third epsiode is now available on Netflix (link above). Though not on Fancast yet I suspect it will arrive some time this weekend.
 
Last edited:


Remove ads

Top