Genres

Visitors Review

freemantle_uk 2012-05-26 07:31:30

Civil War Drama

The English Civil War has often been over looked as a subject fordrama, with most films being very inaccurate. The Civil War was aimportant watershed moment in English history, showing a king can beoverthrown, strengthen Parliament, reformed the English army and in theend limits power the power of kings and a tyrant. The Devil's Whore isalso a new step for Channel Four, because they don't normally makecostume dramas (BBC normally makes them). Channel Four focus has oftenbeen documentaries, buying good American programmes, and make comedyseries like Peep Show and the Inbetweeners.The Devil's Whore has a similar approach to Rome, focusing on afictional character who becomes involved in historical events and meetsfamous historical people.The focus of the programme is on Angelica Fanshawe (AndreaRiseborough), an aristocratic woman from a Catholic background. She hasrejected God and sees the Devil because her mother ran off to become anun. The show starts off with Angelica being a member of the Queen'shousehold just before the English Civil War. But as the Civil Warstarts and Angelica is forced out King Charles I's camp she allies herherself with political radicals like the Levellers. She also falls inlove with soldier and political radical Edward Sexby (John Sims).Angelica also gets very close to honest John Lilburne (TomGoodman-Hill), a popular political radical, and she acts as hischampion to Charles I (Peter Capaldi) and Oliver Cromwell (DominicWest).If you are excepting an action-packed war drama, you will bedisappointed because they are few battle scenes. But there is some goodsword fights which are more realistic then others in visual media. Thestrength of the show is the character drama, about Angelica and herstruggles. The other main strength is the political background, fromCharles I's struggles to Parliament, to Oliver Cromwell becoming nomore then a military dictator. The history is actuate for the mostpart, for example, in English culture some people like to idealiseOliver Cromwell as a great liberator: in real life he took over througha military coup, oppressed dissenting voices and enforced his puritanviews on the nation, as well being a butcher to Irish Catholics inDrogheda and Wexford.They is a excellent cast, having talented actors like John Sim, DominicWest, Michael Fassbender and Peter Capaldi (who I was particularlyimpressed with). Anglea Riseborough is a strong newcomer, who is ableto hold her own with all these talented people. She turns her characterfrom a lost young woman to a powerful voice of dissent. John Sim,Dominic West, Tom Goodman-Hill and Maxine Peake are also very good intheir roles. The production values were excellent, and with a budget of£7 Million, it was put to good use. The set designer and historicalscenes were created really well, showing that towns, cities and evenimportant building like Parliament were not very grant. They was anearthy feel to show. Marc Munden was a good director, able to combineall the elements together. He gets the best out of his actors and doessome good scenes. He makes the violence realistic and characters likeSexby were heavily scared.This show was not perfect, they were some problems. Some of thesubplots did not lead anywhere, the surreal elements did not work forme, especially because of the realistic sitting, and there werehistorical inaccuracies, such as the omissions of characters like JohnPym and Sir Thomas Fairfax. But the programme does show the complexpolitical background with the different schools of thought during themid-17th century.It is worthy viewing.

2012-05-25 16:22:52

Category romance with an epic background

A Ménage à Quatre Drama with brilliant costumes and an impressive assembly of characters. We follow the turmoil of the times of Oliver Cromwell and Charles I through the experiences of Angelica Fanshawe, played by a convincing and beautiful Andrea Riseborough. Through her we get to see many persons and events. From the land owning gentry to the very poor as her fortunes turn. We also get to meet visonaries who look to a better world for all men. Cromwell isn't seen in an admireable light nor is his judgement a positive one, yet neither is he demonised. The thing about the whole affair is it is rather shallow and underneath everything it has the feel of a decent Category Romance with a high production value for TV but still no masterpiece. One has the feeling it could have been something more.

mariahelleberg 2012-05-25 01:22:13

not a woman's tale

Look to the title - the devil has been added to be able to drawaudiences in. And Angelica is a sort of English "Angelique" - a pieceof human meat being dragged through history. modern dialog and modernterms are used. boring and primitive. subplots lead nowhere. but, okay,there is a amount of fighting going on. swordplay and blood. almost asbad as Tudors. avoid! this is not an epic tale of a young woman's lifeduring the English Civil War, but a badly told romp.I think that the problem is, that the creators want to write a dramafor women (: female protagonist) and men (: fighting, torture, malebonding). There is absolutely no artistic reason to create this movie.But I like all the parallels to "Angelique". avoid! I mean it!

2012-05-24 14:57:21

Fantastic attention to detail.

The moment I saw Charles I, my jaw dropped as I thought he had just stepped from a Van Dyck painting. The costumes and sets are extravagant and tasteful.Having studied briefly the various religious dissenter groups, I found it fascinating that this mini-series was able to disseminate the philosophies of such groups as the Ranters and the Diggers in a way that was believable and relate-able. Additionally, going back to Charles I, I cannot praise the actor enough for his nuanced portrayal of a tragically flawed king. He was able to evoke sympathy in a character that history has been fond to disdain. This mini-series is an enjoyable and lavish historical drama that, while taking liberties with history at times, is able to convey what I consider to be the important parts of the religious, cultural, and political themes of the English Civil War.I wish that this was more widely available. In particular, a US version would be fantastic.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU 2012-05-11 15:51:51

Good though light on a few points

The true story of Angelica Fanshawe, they say it is, but that issecondary to the real interest of this mini-series. Born close to theroyal court of Charles I, married within that closed sanctuary, closedespecially to what other people may think, and particularly repressivewith all those that represented some kind of danger for the crown, shewas confronted with a time when truth was the master word of everyone,love the premium of every one and yet the everyday reality wassectarianism and violence directed at all those who differed from you,no matter where you stood.Her story could be reduced to a series of husbands or to a series ofman friends or to a series of failures with a successful birth at theend. That's what makes this film striking if not shocking at times withthe extreme confrontation of the audience to excessive violence and allother types of executions, corporeal punishments, absolute deprivationof everything, victimization and injustice. And there is not one campin this full array of differences that is better than the others.But I think this film goes a long way beyond these details and grittysmall impressive elements. First of all it is rather clear on the"constitutional debate". The king is of divine nature and has no reasonto share his power which is divine and absolute. Parliament, notclearly identified as the representative of the upcoming merchantbourgeoisie whose power was founded on the possession of the merchantfleet, of practically all ships in England, and the control over allsailors, is unable to get out of its small petty meaningless, exceptfor them of course, effete and useless debate on some obtuse religiousquestions like predestination and the Eucharist, holy sacraments andcontact with god, and eventually the right of the people (what peoplewhen parliament was elected by a few tens of thousands of propertiedpeople?) to dismiss the king if his connection with the people (whatpeople again.) got discontinued. They were no longer in touch, if theyhad ever been, with the needs and desires of simple people.The film insists in fact a lot on the Levelers, those people whodefended the idea that the land was the property of those who tilled itand that everyone was supposed to share equally with everyone else.They were hunted by the king's men because they were seen as the mostdangerous anti-royal enemies since they wanted the end of monarchy andthe shift to an equalitarian republic. On the other side they wereequally hunted by Cromwell's supporters because Cromwell was not for arepublic, was a direct representative of the mercantile bourgeoisie andwas against equal sharing, and yet at the same time he was not for arepublic and believed deep in himself this country could only beone-handedly governed by a single man, which he resigned to do himselfwhen no compromise could be found with the king.The film is absolutely silent, alas, on the various wars in theirdetails: the two civil wars, and then the Irish war and then theScottish war and then the war with Spain. The first two were againstthe king and ended with his bodily shortening. The next one was abloody massacre based on the idea that Catholics had fallen down tolower than animals since they were able to let their own childrenstarve, if not help them a little bit. The Scottish episode is notrepresented and the Spanish caper is not even mentioned because itconfirmed a radical change that had started under Elizabeth I when shehad to mobilize the country against Spain. In both cases the Parliamentwas the key to that demand because the owners of the ships and theemployers of the sailors were all directly in parliament or representedin and by parliament. So Elizabeth gave some powers to parliament overtaxation for example, in order to get what she wanted: ships andsailors. Cromwell went even further. He had to summon and convene aparliament he had violently disbanded.Why forget these events that are just coming to the beginning of theend in Ireland, that was solved in Scotland with devolution, and thatis the basis of the tremendous move England was able to initiate in theChristian world towards a democratic parliamentary elective system thatwill take fifty years after the Glorious Revolution (1660) to establishfundamental human rights like Habeas Corpus, the freedom of the pressand of publication. That's a shortcoming of great size in the film butthat does not prevent us from feeling the happy ending of theCommonwealth in the Glorious Revolution that was to bring a new batchof difficulties and this time the peaceful revocation of the king byparliament in a law that will establish the first constitutionalmonarchy in the world, a real first step towards the AmericanRevolution and then the French Revolution.After this period no one could say like Charles I: "Give me oneinstance of a king being dismissed by a parliament!" Charles I was thefirst in 1649. James II will be the second in 1688. That's really theend of feudalism and its theory of absolute kings by divineappointment.But nevertheless the show is beautifully filmed and grandioselyperformed.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

Blueghost 2012-05-11 07:23:46

"Cold Mountain" for Brits.

Well, I had high hopes for this mini series from across the Atlantic,and some of those expectations were met, but, as I should haveexpected, others were dashed.The production values are of high caliber. Costumes, sets andlocations, particularly for a British mini series, are all exceptional.There's very little in the way of criticism when it comes to poking atthe amount of money and care that went into the recreation of laterenaissance Britain. Truly, a first rate production where all imageryis concerned.So where does this small collection of films fall flat? This is goingto sound sexist, but it truly isn't, it's a comment aimed at thecontinued market trend for television; the series was aimedspecifically at a female audience with only the superficiality ofplacating to masculine interests. Every male in this series of films isportrayed as boorish on some level. From Royalists to Parliamentarians,and shades of gray in-between, few of these men have a spine.Additionally, they're all sex starved. They either are biding theirtime for sexual favors, or are so wanton as to be willing to forcethemselves on he fairer sex. They seem to have little else on theirminds. And when they are granted female accompaniment, they thensquander their "victory" in some sort of stupidity.That's not really a comment on what I think of society as I think ofwhat TV producers think their audiences want to see. Again, as I'vewritten in other reviews, the TV producer thinking is that since womenbuy things for the home, it is therefore that audience that the showsmust cater to. "The Devil's Whore" is no different. The concepts and ideals for whichboth sides of the English Civil War fought are hardly ever mentioned.It seems to be the assumption that said notions have no place withinthe female psyche, and therefore are not worth exposition. Femaleconcerns are for family, friends and young ones.So what does one do? The man who watches this can do little but shakehis head, and maybe say "Huh, the 60's film with Richard Harris was abit more entertaining..." Which, in my view, it was.But the film with Harris had the benefit of being a high budget majortheatrical film. It wasn't some one off made for TV mini series thathad to compete with "Dancing with the Stars" or other sub-IQ fodderthat masks for entertainment.You may say, "Mister Blueghost, what were you expecting?" Look, I knewthis was going to be a TV miniseries about a woman during the EnglishCivil War, but I expected the Powers-that-Be in the UK to do theirusual bucking of American market research, and make a film for bothsexes and most ages. Something intelligent. Something with a littlemore purposeful action than the banal placation presented in thisfilm's battle-sequences.In short, it was a pleasure to see something not made by and forAmerican house-wives and professional women, but it was equallydisappointing to see something made for British house-wives andprofessional women.*sigh*Well, maybe I'll whip out my copy of Cromwell tonight, and grin as Isee Richard Harris give a high energy performance in his Irish-thespingstyle of portraying a historic figure who didn't like the Irish a greatdeal.Well, I think I've learned my lesson about splurging on a UK TV seriesof which I know nothing.Watch at your risk.

patrick powell 2012-05-10 10:21:13

A budget cutback took it's toll, but still worth your time

Well, The Devil's Whore gets two cheers for trying – OK, make that twoand a half - and if in some ways it failed, I don't think it should getall the blame. It seems that what was conceived of a 12-part series hitthe financial buffers of necessity became a four-part series and,unfortunately, in many ways it shows. What finally hit the screens overfour one-hour episodes is by no means bad and is most certainly veryentertaining, but it is something of a mongrel, a hotch-potch of this,that and t'other. The background - well, more than the background - thewhole context to what purports to be a true account of a fictionalcharacter is a period in British history which is not only fascinatingbut which led to the foundation of democracy throughout the world. Butit was anything but straightforward: it wasn't simply a question of'the people' rising up against 'the king' as many believe, but anintricate and complex realignment of authority and power. It began inthe reign of Charles I and more or less concluded when his son, CharlesII, was restored to the throne and England and Scotland once again hada monarchy. But it was a very different monarchy which now existed andover the next 150 led to the creation of parliament which Brtitainlikes to boast was the template of all other parliaments. (It wasn'treally, but that is here not the issue). But for a very nasty period of20 years, Britain was convulsed by strife and civil war in which manydied and which saw a great deal of death and brutality. In theLevellers, the country experienced what would later be known ascommunism but it also saw how privilege and property is so engrained inthe fabric of this and all other countries that it takes more thanideals and violence to dislodge them. That is the background, and a12-part series from the same team which produce this cutdown liteversion might well have made a good fist of explaining the complexitiesof that time. In the event they don't, and what we do get at thehistorical and political level is akin to a primary school textbookaccount. The Devil's Whore is also something of a bodice-ripper, andhere it perhaps scores a little more. And I suspect that element, theromance and dashing hero stuff would have found a way of fitting inquite nicely with an intelligent exposition of the English Civil Warand its aftermath. The problem is that those who see The Devil's Whoremight well remember that as their 'history', but it does take enormousliberties with the truth in the interests of creating rattlingentertainment. Thus Thomas Rainsborough, Edward Sexby, John Lilburneand, of course, Oliver Cromwell were all historical characters, but inthis version they are fictionalised to such an extent that often onlytheir names remain what is true about them. There is also the quibble,a pretty universal fault, of coincidence: blow me do the variouscharacters appear in just the right spot at just the right time. Righton cue. And they manage to travel some distances with no bother at all.Then there's the curious matter of the Devil, who appears, usuallysitting on a tree, at the strangest moments. I assume he is the Devilfor whom the heroine Angelica Fanshawe is the 'whore', but that mustremained supposition as no explanation for his continued appearance iseven attempted. And what about Prince Rupert, bosom pal of Angelica'sfirst husband who even turns up in the wedding chamber on her weddingnight, but then suddenly disappears from view never to be heard, seenor spoken of again. Odd. That, too, was probably a victim of the cutsfrom a 12-parter to a third that length. No doubt such anomalies mighthave been ironed out had the money been there and the series been a12-parter after all. As it is we have to put up with outrageoussuspension of disbelief. Overall, of course, and sitting side by sidewith other TV drama, The Devil's Whore isn't half bad and mostcertainly very entertaining. The pity is that for want of a penny ortwo more it might well have been outstanding. But that it isn't.

mampele 2012-05-10 03:38:22

Surprised by how much I loved it...

I wasn't much of a fan of the English Civil War during History lessonsat school. It was always difficult trying to decide which side tosupport. The glamorous, party loving Cavaliers or the serious,democratically minded, fair but boring round-heads....Watching TheDevil's Whore I found my self switching sides again. However, kudos toPeter Flannery for making this period of history really interesting.This difficult period has never really been covered in movies or TV.The whole cast is absolutely amazing. Peter Capaldi is great as adoomed king, Michael Fassbender is intense and stunning as Rainsboroughbut my favourites are John Simm and Andrea Riseborough. Both act theirsocks off and make me want to keep watching. The chemistry, sparringand respect between Sexby and Angelica is fascinating! Almostperfect...

Zagreb-1 2012-05-02 14:58:57

Superior, if not perfect, historical drama

An extremely-engaging and well-acted drama about the period 1642-1660covering the English Civil War and the subsequent execution of KingCharles I and his replacement with England's only republicangovernment. Whilst the history has been simplified with many importantcharacters left-out, this nonetheless sticks to the history quite well.As with HBO's "Rome" fictional characters are invented and their ownstories are told alongside those based on historical fact; somehistorical incidents are also embellished or altered slightly to makethem more dramatic.Screenwriter Peter Flannery focuses on the politics of the wars formuch of the time and helps scotch the myth deliberately built-up in theaftermath of the 1660 restoration that what happened in England was nota revolution but instead a temporary falling-out leading to an"interregnum". It's true that many of the parliamentary forces werenever interested in overthrowing the monarchy but events overtook themand they found themselves embroiled in civil strife as radical forcessuch as the Levellers and the Diggers threatened to overwhelm not justthe monarchy but the Parlimentary landed aristocracy. Whilst Englandwas a republic following the King's execution it was no democracy andthe conditions that lead to the betrayal of Cromwell's allies and hisown rise of near unassailable-power are simplistically but dramaticallydetailed.The acting was, in general, of a very high quality with the bestperformances coming from Peter Capaldi as Charles I and Dominic West asCromwell. Both managed to portray these deeply-flawed men as more thanthe monstrous caricatures history can present them as. Tellingly, twoof the most emotionally engaging moments in the series for me were KingCharles, sentenced to death and stripped of his arrogant autocracy,saying goodbye to his children and Cromwell preparing to be installedas Lord Protector talking to his old comrades in arms who had becomehis honour guard and reflecting on the fact he had betrayed his ownrevolution.For me, there were only a few flaws with this series. Edward Saxby,whilst well-played by John Simm, often felt like too much of a "modern"man with his tendency to attack what we can now see as inconsistencieson the Cromwellian side. Similarly, Angelica appeared too much of amodern woman and the scene where she addressed a church and told themthere was no heaven and hell (something that would probably have seenher attacked by a mob in the 1650s) was slightly farcical. I also feltthat the ending was too optimistic. Yes, Angelica had defeated herpersonal demons but all that her loved ones had fought for remained intatters with the restoration simply turning the clock back and I feltthat this should have been reflecting in a more sombre conclusion.Overall, though, this is a highly-enjoyable piece of historical dramaand an excellent introduction to an important and much-misrepresentedperiod of English history.

steven-222 2012-05-02 11:00:12

Compelling, Poignant, Profound

An amazingly compact narrative packs a remarkable amount of emotion andphilosophical musing into a sweeping narrative; this is television thatdelivers all the satisfactions of the old-fashioned novel.With a title like "The Devil's Whore" we are prepared for a rip-roaringbodice-ripper...and while bodices are indeed ripped...nay,shredded!...there is oh so much more going on here. Love long-deniedover decades of tumultuous civil war, labyrinthine tests of loyalty,vengeance played out over decades, and various other devices create anonstop narrative drive; try coming to the end of one episode withoutwanting to watch the next one at once. But at the very heart of thisstory is an inquiry into the deepest questions of existence: who are weamid our fellow humans, what force or forces rule the universe, andwhat does freedom really mean? A restless intelligence moves throughthis story, suffusing it with heartbreaking insight.Kudos to the whole cast, to a counter-intuitive musical track, and tothe splendid visual sense that informs the whole production.The only thing that stops me from giving 10 stars is a certaindissatisfaction with the ending. Granted, the filmmakers face an almostimpossible task to create a moment of transcendence to match all thathas come before. Maybe on a second viewing I will change my mind aboutthat.

superjaneyjane 2012-04-30 08:31:07

Enjoyably convoluted

English period productions have a reputation for restraint. While itdoesn't go as far as the almost-soap-opera The Tudors, restraint is notthe watch-word in The Devil's Whore. Instead we have plenty of sex,violence and even a few demonic visions, with some history thrown in.Concerning the events of the English Civil War, the story is toldthrough the eyes of a fictional young noblewoman, Angelica Fanshawe,played by Andrea Riseborough. Angelica somehow ends up experiencingalmost every aspect of the civil war, born into privilege and aprominent place in Charles I's court, only to lose it all when herhusband is executed. With her sympathy switched to the Levellers,Angelica becomes some sort of highwayman (sorry, highwaywoman) for atime, before marrying a senior figure of the Levellers, ThomasRainsborough, (Michael Fassbender), only for her criminal past to catchup with her. When her husband is assassinated, Angelica herselfnarrowly escapes execution. And that's only the half of it.If you think this sounds far too convoluted to believe, well, you'reright. Angelica's situation is far too convenient, to marry not one buttwo important figures of the English Civil war, to be on close termswith both the King and Cromwell, to consort with all manner of nobles,cavaliers, roundheads and puritans. It doesn't help that Angelica isfirmly in the mold of other 'swashbuckling' heroines of pop culturesuch as Elizabeth of Pirates of the Caribbean and Arwen of LOTR, who,when not looking utterly ravishing in their gorgeous frocks arebrandishing swords and smiting enemies. She also has a few politicallycorrect orations of truth, justice and freedom to deliver. Riseboroughdelivers a passionate and sympathetic heroine, but at some point, herefforts are not enough to keep an eyebrow from being raised,particularly when Angelica storms into a church and beginspontificating about heaven and hell. Maxine Peake's portrayal ofreal-life figure Elizabeth Lilburne, wife of agitator John Lilburne, isa much more historically accurate figure: she is a wife utterly devotedto her husband and to his cause, and breaks a few conventions herself.When we do get round to the factual events they are impressively acted.Dominic West may look nothing like Oliver Cromwell but he makes himinto a fascinatingly ambiguous character. In the first few episodes heseems willing to compromise with his fellow men, from Charles to hisfellow revolutionaries, but as he gains more power he becomes a moreruthless, shadowy figure. Michael Fassbender and Tim Goodman-Hill areboth excellent in their portrayal of men who passionately promote theircauses. But who could forget the ever-versatile John Simm as EdwardSexby. Sexby is driven by obsessions, first for blood, which he is sooncured of, then by the cause of the Levellers which is soon corrupted,and finally in his determination to assassinate a tyrant. But hisenduring obsession is with Angelica, and their romantic plot-line isprobably the best distraction from fact that the drama has to offer.Simm and Riseborough have an excellent chemistry which the writers drawout through the series.Ultimately, should you wish to know more about the English Civil Waryou would be better to start with wikipedia than the Devil's Whore. Butfor those who like their dramas saucy, sordid and striking, The Devil'sWhore has much in store.

2012-04-29 21:27:08

The Devil's Whore

This review is from: The Devil's Whore [ NON-USA FORMAT, PAL, Reg.2 Import - United Kingdom ] (DVD) If you love watching the Tudors you will love this DVD. Although the main character does not exist it is still filled with history about the time period. Michael Fassbender is great as usual and if you are a fan of his or the time period you will love watching The Devil's Whore.