托马斯.克伦威尔,BlackSmith's son,Low Born,身背年少受虐,妻女病亡的负重,寄身心于大主教沃尔西的麾下,然而主教大人无法帮助亨利八世从无子的婚姻中解脱,政敌们将他置于死地,克伦威尔减缓了沃尔西的悲剧,但不能阻止大主教走向末路。
为了生存,为了复仇,克伦威尔和野心勃勃的安妮.博林暂时结盟,他团结岛内的宗教力量对抗教皇,使亨利成为英伦教会的首领,从而宣布其与西班牙公主凯瑟琳的婚姻无效。
结果是,安妮.博林成为亨利的第二任皇后,克伦威尔成为枢密院首。
然而,亨利的无子噩梦仍在延续,安妮.博林也不能为其诞下皇子,她的苟且和不忠加速了亨利对他的厌烦,后者正被纯洁的西摩小姐所吸引。
克伦威尔抓住时机,扳倒安妮.博林,连同当初对沃尔西下手的博林家族。
反复无常的亨利对服帖能干的克伦威尔张开双臂,但克伦威尔浑身颤抖...
I am no history buff and haven't read the book(yet) and I basically know nothing about the history of Tudor England except that the king had many wives......however I was hooked after watching the first episode Three Card Trick and the second episode Entirely Beloved was even better but I think I need to re-watch them with subtitles to fully understand the plots...so here's my spoiler-free review. Though I knew people might dislike the dark visual effect. I for one absolutely love director Peter Kosminsky's shooting style with hand-held cameras and using only natural (candle/fire) light for night scenes. It's rare to do a television series(especially historical period drama) like that but the gloom does make the show feel more authenticity. Both Mark Rylance and Damian Lewis gave brilliant, nomination-deserving performance. Mark Rylance will surely be a serious Emmy (& Bafta)contender for best actor in a leading role this year and probably win. I'm biased obviously but I have to say it’s Damian Lewis who really steals the show every single time he appears. Wolf Hall seems likely to be one of the best historical drama ever so hopefully the upcoming episodes will live up to the hype.
相比于美剧的粗暴情色嗜血,英剧绝对要慢热许多。
去年BBC2套火爆的《狼厅Wolf Hall》就是典型的英式克制。
该剧根据英国女作家希拉里·曼特尔两获布克奖的历史小说《狼厅Wolf Hall》和续篇《提堂Bring Up the Bodies》改编而成,强大的编导(导演:彼得·考斯明斯金)服化道演团队阵容,从细节上再现了都铎王朝亨利八世时期的宫廷权力争斗,有别于正史中的冷血杀戮,全篇以托马斯·克伦威尔的视角阐述历史事件,赢得狼群中人性的呼声。
对于托马斯·克伦威尔的家庭,正史上少有记载。
只知道他1485年生于伦敦郊外的普特尼,一位伦敦郊区铁匠的儿子。
短剧第一季共六集,导演擅长通过平行历史叙事、闪回,而由老戏骨马克·里朗斯扮演的托马斯·克伦威尔,每个眼神,每一次脸部抽搐或是冷凝的动作,都耐人寻味。
他为何最终在英王亨利八世的宫廷里掌控了巨大权力,这和曼特尔在书中对他童年形象的构建不无关系。
一个饥饿、焦虑而孤独的童年:铁匠父亲时常醉酒殴打托马斯,七岁时,他住在红衣主教莫顿家,他的叔叔在那儿做厨师。
九岁时,他目击了一位八十岁的异教徒被活活烧死。
十五岁时,他在遭受父亲毒打后离家出走,此后的十年生活,加入了法国雇佣军,远征意大利,在佛罗伦萨的某家人家做仆人,又在罗马、威尼斯、安特卫普间旅行,成为银行家和布商……再回到英国,已是而立之年。
时值亨利八世在位,英国和当时的欧洲诸国一样,受制于罗马天主教教廷,晦暗不明之时,托马斯·克伦威尔曾游历诸国的见识令他看到了向上攀爬的契机。
他以其精明、和善、野心勃勃,顺理成章成为红衣主教沃尔西的律师和商业咨询师。
沃尔西初见他时,说: “噢,终于有一个比我还卑微的人出现了!
”托马斯不以为然,隐而不发。
此时的沃尔西是他立足英国进入上层的垫脚石,他必须视沃尔西为朋友,听沃尔西倾诉,为沃尔西分忧。
当沃尔西迫于天主教教规,未能如亨利八世所愿帮助他与西班牙公主阿拉贡凯瑟琳离婚后,克伦威尔及时出现,当他了解到亨利八世想要再婚繁衍皇室子嗣,他开始逐渐靠拢安·博林,四处安插眼线,支持当时的新教改革,大胆建议亨利八世对抗罗马教廷。
最终,英国国会脱离了罗马教廷,大主教宣布亨利与凯瑟琳的婚姻无效,于是他与女侍官安·博林的婚姻由此合法。
托马斯因为安·博林的成功上位立下汗马功劳,令亨利八世刮目相看,也借此埋下了个人权谋欲望的种子。
托马斯·克伦威尔大权在握,自诩只有亨利八世一位朋友。
当亨利八世因参加骑士比武意外昏死场面混乱,托马斯·克伦威尔迅速嘱咐手下迎接照管好废王后凯瑟琳之女玛丽公主。
这一举动,在克伦威尔的角度,唯恐陷入王室纷争维护正统,而并非私心,却成为后来安·博林的心梗。
片中的克伦威尔,在妻女突然病逝时显现出为人丈夫为人父亲的温存,嘱咐儿子在骑士格斗中需忘记保全生命最后一刻出击拼杀,以及他在搬倒政治对手时对其遗孀的怜悯,恐怕只有他的门生更能体察。
托马斯·克伦威尔不是不知道王权的至高无上不可侵犯,不是不知道伴君如伴虎。
作为一个卑微的铁匠之子,穿梭于波诡云谲的宫廷,他能做到察言观色,时刻掌握亨利八世的喜怒哀乐,竭尽全力地扶持亨利,为亨八的欲望付出刽子手的代价,他其实内伤戳戳。
譬如,作为亨利八世的首席谋臣,他为玛丽公主设计了远嫁西班牙的计划目的是避免战争却遭到亨利的怒斥和羞辱,他举起交叉的双手,沉默走开,镜头回向童年,他的铁匠父亲告诉他,双手交叉可以减轻疼痛。
片中我们看到王后安·博林没能给亨利八世诞下王子,已成为亨利八世厌弃王后的最大理由。
此时的托马斯·克伦威尔,一边要应付博林家的宫廷势力,老贵族权臣们的虎视眈眈,一边又要为亨利八世出谋划策罢黜安·博林。
其实,无论是在国王亨利还是王后安·博林的眼里,克伦威尔都是一只随叫随到可以随时踹死的狗。
只是,克伦威尔再一次选择了亨利。
他暗中调查安·博林,设计审判博林家的贵族势力。
都铎王朝第二任王后安·博林的斩首现场,克伦威尔在人群中抓紧门徒的手臂目不斜视地盯着刀斧手砍掉博林的头,那一刻,他的内心戏足够丰盛。
在这些历史事件中,导演遵循曼特尔的叙事,并没有试图重建一个铁匠之子年少的失落岁月,而是让克伦威尔的举止和不得已的阴谋周旋在都铎王朝宫廷上空。
所谓的历史,无非是人与人之间的狼性竞争,在权谋政治中,更是由歪曲的流言、轶事组装起来。
第一季《狼厅Wolf Hall》的结尾,亨利八世庆祝安·博林的罢黜,拥抱了托马斯·克伦威尔。
镜头定格在克伦威尔刻板的脸上,我们看到一张细致、细腻、自觉、自律并且忐忑不知未来的脸;一个白手起家的下层屌丝,永远不可能褪去铁匠之子的身份阴影,也必须将喜怒哀乐隐藏的更深,为王者的王权不停沦为权谋政治世界中的棋子。
题外,剧中安·博林的扮演者气场上差了很多意思,若是凯拉·莱特利出演,该完美许多。
期待第二季《狼厅Wolf Hall》的上映,曼特尔笔下搅动都铎王朝更加鲜活生动的克伦威尔。
那么好,现在开始谈狼厅。
很幸运的是,我把科目三已经通过了,历时五十天,这的确我得说是一件不太容易的事情。
现在就还差一个科目四了,科目四本来这周是可以考的,但是由于学校办公室人员说什么“科三的成绩还没有发到学校之类的原因”,便阻止我约考科目四,无妨,再等一周也无妨。
考完科三之后,这两天我看了看《狼厅》这部剧,还有《叶问4》这部电影。
顺便和森一起打发了很多时光。
《狼厅》不错,背景放在刚刚迈出的欧洲中世纪社会,视角瞄向了英国皇室以朝廷中以克伦威尔等为代表的上流社会,共刻画了皇帝、皇后、废后、红衣教主、大法官乃至铁匠、女仆、乐童等相对较低等级的人物。
第二任皇后是否有罪,有网友倾向于认为是完全没有罪的——虽然我认为完全没有罪似乎也不太可能,但是话说回来这里到底有罪还是没有罪已经不重要了,毕竟“欲加之罪何患无辞”
153X年,大明嘉靖年间,皇帝一言九鼎,辅佐他的是史上著名奸臣严嵩,就是用处女给他暖被暖脚的那个。
此时在弹丸小国英格兰,国王亨利8世正为无继承人而烦恼,他与凯瑟琳结婚20年,生产5次,只养活一个玛丽公主(未来的英格兰女王,拥有血腥玛丽之称号),其余均夭折,凯瑟琳已失去生育能力。
玛丽公主和凯瑟琳王后凯瑟琳是西班牙阿拉贡王国的公主,3岁时就许配给英格兰王位继承人亚瑟,1501年结婚,但是5个月后 亚瑟 去世了,他的弟弟成为王位继承人,11岁时,亨利和 17岁的凯瑟琳 订婚,并在 亨利 年满18岁时成婚。
西方国家,男人只能娶一个,但可以有N个情妇,只是她们的后代没有继承权。
亨利想废王后另娶年轻貌美的 诺福克公爵之侄女 安妮-博林,而教廷不同意,此时教皇是 尤利乌斯二世,凯瑟琳的外甥——神圣罗马帝国皇帝查理五世 。
在离婚法庭上,有人污蔑王后非完璧, 凯瑟琳 当众辩称,自己虽然与 亚瑟 结婚5个月,但仍然是处女,并声称 亨利 行房时已经判定,随后羞愤离去。
亨利权力真的不大,莫尔这个赤裸裸的卖国贼,都无法立即揪出午门斩首,或者金瓜击脑。
非得开法庭,让这家伙在众多看客面前发布反动言论,最离谱的是,竟然有刁民在法庭上念出国王器小活差的故事,引发观众哄堂大笑。
最终 亨利 通过强行修宪的方法,与教廷决裂, 1534年,亨利和议会通过了《至尊法案》、《继承法》、《叛国法》等法案,建立英国国教 ,任命自己为英格兰宗教领袖,随后流放凯瑟琳,娶了安妮-博林。
Anne这角色演得好,人长得漂亮白净就不多提了,这强大气场,这快捷语速,这坚毅目光,将急于上位的心情体现得淋漓尽致,可惜她也多次流产,应该是穿着不当,贵族男人们都是穿厚皮草,而妇女们都是露出上半身,让半球,明显受凉了。
贵族妇女的日常:组团绣花这帮贵族妇女,每天就是围坐一起绣花,没有麻将的生活真枯燥。
Anne也太不检点了,竟然主动给国王带了无数个绿帽子,失败在所难免,你唯一的依靠和成功之路,就是不断和国王交配,密切注意保胎。
克伦威尔则全程苦大仇深脸,谈不上什么演技。
亨利8世 一共娶了6位王后,第一部娶了2位。
后来他娶了 珍·西摩 , 诞下一子,是为爱德华(未来的爱德华六世) 。
狼厅,应该就是指 西摩 家族的住宅。
珍·西摩 生下 爱德华 后2周去世,在克伦威尔的牵线下,亨利娶了 德意志克里维斯公国的安妮 ,但是2人关系不好,新婚之夜没有圆房,然后离婚娶了 安妮的侍女凯瑟琳-霍华德 ,为此砍了克伦威尔的头。
但是有人举报 凯瑟琳-霍华德 不是处女,于是奸夫和 凯瑟琳 均被砍头。
(是时候引入太监这个伟大的制度了)最后亨利又娶了一位凯瑟琳,31岁的 凯瑟琳·帕尔 ,曾经结婚2次。
这个女子一直陪伴亨利到他死去。
亨利 留下的著名文学作品:《Green sleeves》 ,绿袖子 Alas my love,you do me wrongTo cast me offdiscourteouslyFor I have lovedyou all so longDelighting inyour companyGreensleeves wasall my joyGreensleeves wasmy delightGreensleeves wasmy heart of goldAnd who but myLady GreensleevesI have beenready at your handTo grantwhatever you would craveI have bothwaged life and landYour love andgood will for to haveThou couldstdesire no earthly thingBut still thouhadst it readilyThy music stillto play and singAnd yet thouwouldst not love meGreensleeves nowfarewell adieuGod I pray to prospertheeFor I am stillthy lover trueCome once againand love me。
他给很多女子写了很多情书,流传下来的不少。
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/22/thomas-cromwell-fixer-wolf-hall?CMP=share_btn_fbCromwell, the fixers’ fixer: a role model for our timesMartin KettleThomas Cromwell is the politician of the moment. We seem entranced by him. How cunning and deep he is. How clever and calculating. With what skill he acquires, husbands and uses his power. How precise he is in his judgment of when to speak and when to stay silent, when to watch and when to act, absolutely ruthlessly if need be.We are a nation hooked on Cromwell, as a result of Hilary Mantel’s novels. And now perhaps in even greater numbers than before, thanks to the BBC’s dramatisation of Wolf Hall that began this week, whose centrepiece is Mark Rylance’s Cromwell: the outsider who mesmerisingly watches, plots and thinks his way into the heart of the English Tudor state.On one level, the current national embrace of Cromwell is easy to explain. The Tudors are box office. And Cromwell was a big Tudor figure. Mantel’s books expertly draw the reader into Cromwell’s reflective world, where his words are the tip of an iceberg of unspoken feelings and thoughts. After just one episode, Rylance’s portrayal is already a masterpiece of suggestion, tempting us to overlook Shakespeare’s advice that there’s “no art to find the mind’s construction in the face”It is sometimes implied that Mantel’s reimagining of Cromwell has overturned the way we see the reign of Henry VIII. But this shows what short memories we all have. This is not the first time in English history that Cromwell’s stock has been so high. After his death, many Elizabethans saw him as a heroic martyr to the English protestant cause. And after the second world war Professor GR Elton – uncle of Ben – placed him on a very different pedestal at the heart of what he called the Tudor revolution in government.Elton’s Cromwell was the man who blew away the medieval system of government based on the king’s household. He replaced it with a departmental bureaucracy that was the forerunner of the modern constitutional state. In Elton’s judgment, Cromwell was “the most remarkable revolutionary in English history”, and his intellect “the most successfully radical instrument at any man’s disposal in the 16th century”. Mantel’s Cromwell owes much to Elton’s heroic reinvention.Yet Cromwell, even in the Elton-Mantel version, is a very improbable hero for our times. Cromwell’s essential attraction is his mastery of statecraft, his ability to identify a political goal and achieve it unerringly but pragmatically. He is unsentimental, cold-blooded, secular, and ruthless. He is a master of detail and of small moves in the service of larger ones. It is not clear whether Cromwell ever read Machiavelli, but there have been few leaders in English or British political history who better embodied Machiavellian ideas. In short, he is the sum of much that the modern era dislikes, or affects to dislike, in its politicians.What is even more unlikely about Cromwell’s place in the sun, as Mantel’s readers and viewers will know, is that he was an enemy of a man who in so many ways is the sum of everything that the modern era admires, or affects to admire. Thomas More remains the incarnation of individual conscience, of rising above the quotidian, and doing the morally right thing in difficult and dangerous times. It is no surprise that in postwar Britain, it was More, especially as embodied by Paul Scofield in A Man for All Seasons, who ruled the Tudor roost.By rights, More ought to be the man for our season too. He is pre-emenintly the Tudor politician who embodies sticking to firm principles, upholding moral authority and obeying the dictates of conscience. He refuses to do the politically convenient thing because he believes it is wrong – and pays with his life. Not for him Cromwell’s cynical survive-the-day relativism. If anyone is the man for an age that feels tarnished by illegal wars, mistreated by the power of corporations and banks, betrayed by MPs’ expenses, demeaned by the banality of modern politics, it is surely More.And yet our age has embraced not pious, high-minded More, but aspirational, crafty Cromwell, who stands for everything we say we dislike about modern politics and statecraft. It is a very odd disjunction. It could simply be that we all love a costume drama with great actors. But it could also suggest there is some hope for politics yet.Politicians could hardly suffer from lower esteem than they do at the moment. A survey published this week by the Edelman PR company confirms the overwhelmingly negative picture of the past few years, with trust in the doldrums, and with the reputations of government, business and media all flatlining. “People are desperate for honesty and fair play,” the report concludes. This is one reason why support for the established political parties is so low and why a proportion of the electorate is now embracing parties that offer easy answers to complex and difficult real problems.Cromwell stands against all that. He stands for the art of politics, not for fantasy politics. It has often been said, including by RA Butler, who chose the phrase for the title of his memoirs, that politics is the art of the possible. I prefer Robin Cook’s characterisation that politics is also the art of the impossible. Cromwell was the vindication of that view – and his distant and later relative Oliver wasn’t bad at the game either. Cromwell knew precisely where he was trying to get, and he was pretty effective about getting there.There is no point requiring every politician to have Cromwell’s gifts. It would be a scary political scene if they did. But there is a great deal of point in valuing and celebrating the statecraft and the political calculation that Cromwell mastered so well. Honesty and fair play are all very well, but effectiveness and continued support count for more in the end.I read somewhere that the late Caroline Benn, wife of Tony, thought that political leaders fell into three categories: , which she called pedestrians, fixers or madmen. Allocating British prime ministers to the three categories is an entertaining exercise, especially if you remember that no category has all the virtues or all the vices. Tony Benn, apparently, was confident that if he had become prime minister he would have been one of the madmen.I like fixers. The pedestrians frustrate me. The madmen frighten me. True, fixers aren’t always the best politicians. But the best politicians are almost always good fixers. Think Lloyd George or Franklin Roosevelt. And Cromwell, a fixers’ fixer, is right up there too. As long as we understand that knowing what you want is utterly useless unless you also know how to get it, then politics will have a storied future as well as a storied past.
亨利八世的王后常常难以善终,凯瑟琳王后在孤寂愤懑中死亡,安妮·博林王后在战栗胆怯中被斩首……但她们的死亡又有着不同常人之处:一个死后回避了男性的凝视;一个死后禁止男性的触碰。
所以,如果说摩尼教是全体无身体,天主教是部分无身体(教士阶层无身体),清教徒是好像没(as if not)身体,那么,国教运动前后的王后有几个身体?
肯定不是2个,她们并不拥有不朽的政治身体,但也不是1个,她们的身体总被赋予特殊的政治与宗教意义。
也许有1.5个,多出的0.5个显示出其不充分的政治权力,但也许只有0.5个,缺少的0.5个源自肉身的意义总是被无限的政治化。
但也许只有1个。
王后死了,不可挽回,不会复活,没有不朽的天国,没有身穿白衣的圣体,身体彻彻底底地灭亡了。
甚至是0个!
王后从未拥有自己的身体,甚至死亡这一本该证明身体实存的事件也被用于证明身体的匮乏。
王后之死均与无法诞下子嗣有关,国王承认了王后缺乏身体,缺乏可以生殖的身体。
凯瑟琳死后,唯一可能的吊唁者是教宗的大使,一个同样被拒绝拥有身体的神父,然而他并未成行,为什么?
这既是因为国王的阻拦,另一具身体的阻拦,更是因为王后从来不曾有过身体。
博林临刑前后,侍女充当隔绝男性亵渎与污染身体的作用,不是为了保护身体的神圣与纯洁,而是为了强化身体空无的白色神话,空无的身体在常人的目光中消失,或者说从未存在。
死刑真的发生了吗?
王后真的尸首分离了吗?
也许王后的身体从不存在,唯有通过禁忌的设定,才能塑造不可触碰者的存在。
那么,国王为什么需要王后?
为什么需要既可交媾寻欢又可诞下子嗣的王后?
王后的身体是怎样的身体?
王后真的有身体吗?
本剧从Thomas Cromwell的角度讲述了Anne Boleyn从上台到上断头台的历史,需要对英国历史有一定了解程度才能看得比较明白。
我在看《另一个波琳家的女孩》的时候,就觉得电影为了追求讲述波琳姐妹故事的传奇性,太过强调爱恨情仇和个人的影响力,将帝国之命运置于姐妹花的角色美貌自然是太过幼稚。
《狼厅》则向我们揭示君主制政治个人情欲、宗教信仰和党派斗争交织的复杂性。
我对《狼厅》所描绘的亨利八世统治下的英国社会和政坛最大的印象就是人的兽性。
群众在看两次断头的时候的表现就像当年北平菜市场斩戊戌六君子时群众的反应一样,不但愚蠢,更表现出一种嗜血性。
议会权贵在几次审判的时候(Kahterin of Aragon, Thomas More, Anne Boleyn)那种喧嚣狂躁的表现,像围在将死的动物身边徘徊的秃鹫。
而亨利八世在决定了要抛弃断头皇后另立新后以求能诞下子嗣后,他和波琳皇后以及公主殿下在一起的画面中一点都不阖家欢乐,他直盯盯地看着母女,用手掏了掏牙缝里的肉屑,极像要咬死猎物的猛兽。
所以说,群众是无情之人,议员是无情之人,国王是无情之人。
克伦威尔在一群群人之间周旋,演员用比较收的表演,像是一面镜子一样反映出了一幅政坛的浮世绘。
除了全剧的克伦威尔,我最喜欢的两段表演,是克伦威尔和Thomas Moore在伦敦塔的周旋和皇后上断头台的那两段,演员做了非常精彩的诠释。
另外我比较喜欢的设定,是克伦威尔,这个忠于自己的master,即使在他失势之后依然衷心耿耿的有情之人如何变成一个设计逼死皇后的无情之人的。
克伦威尔在剧的前半部分还是比较温情的,忠心地帮助失势主教、和自己妻子和女儿的互动也比较友爱。
但在自己和女儿相继死亡、主教被逼死之后,克伦威尔的视野就基本上转到了政治活动上来。
他慢慢地收到亨利八世的宠爱,接近了权利的中心,步步高升,在遵从皇帝懿旨处理并赐死自己尊敬的Thomas More的时候才发现自己已经无法后退了。
亨利直接帮他戳穿了现实:你觉得我是因为你的人格魅力而重用你的吗?
我就是要你去帮我办这些“棘手”的事。
所以在后面亨利和他的交谈中明确表现出后悔和安波琳结婚的时候,他很清楚的了解到,"Henry wants to divorce her... I have to push her (to death)."亨利八世需要一个无情之人来帮助他做无情之事,比如帮助他和皇后离婚,那么他就要揭发皇后和多人通奸(我们在剧中从来没看到有任何证据真的能证明皇后偷情了),那么他就要想尽办法威逼利诱“情夫们”认供,制造证据。
他需要设计皇后偷情,做无情之事,好让皇帝做那个无辜之人,有情有义的perfect prince。
至于皇后是否真的偷情了?
Doesn't matter anymore. 我们可以看到演员在开头演绎克伦威尔的时候还比较放,虽然是个谨慎之人,但还开得起玩笑、唱的出小调,到最后亨利拥抱他庆祝砍掉波琳皇后脑袋的时候,他的眼神你已经读不出来什么信息了。
另一方面,他“陷害”的基本上都是当年还是主教的人,报仇又是一个有情的举动,使得克伦威尔的人格更加的复杂化,组成了我们所见到的这样一个有情与无情之人。
I read New Yorker’s profile of Hilary Mantel in 2012 after she became the first female writer to win two Man Booker Prize. I was very intrigued by Mantel then, and put “Wolf Hall” on my to-read list. But never got around to do so.http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/10/15/the-dead-are-realBBC’s 6 episode “Wolf Hall” mini TV series got lots of praise. It is said that the screenwriter adapted Mantel’s work very nicely and captured the essence of the book.I fell in love with it after watching Episode one.The custom, setting, lighting were so well done, every frame looked like a painting. The acting was marvelous as well. Even though most of them were not familiar to the US audience. But supposedly all of the main characters were seasoned stage actors in England, and it showed.See the album link below for some interesting comparison between the actors in the TV series and their actual portrait from the 16th century. Mostly by Hans Holbein the Younger, who was the official painter for the court of Henry VIII.http://www.douban.com/photos/album/155586258/Apparently the soundtrack of the TV series was also a hit in Britain. Too early to tell how it will fair in the US. I myself really loved the music.http://music.163.com/#/album?id=3111229The Guardian had episode by episode explanation of the story line, it was very helpful for people who is not familiar with the Tudor history (such as myself), which was pretty complicated. http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/series/wolf-hall-episode-by-episode
1克伦威尔可以跟三教九流对话,丝毫不显得威势逼人。
他那双老虎般的眼睛,一直关注着周围的变化。
他观察着每一个人,剥析的眼睛毫不留情,把每一个人像洋葱一样撕扯的层层清楚。
他总迈着稳健的步伐,走向他被需要的人。
第1个,他当年的靠山:沃尔西大主教。
第2个,迫切想离婚、娶安的英国国王亨利八世。
第3个,用身体钓鱼的安,以及她的舅舅诺福克公爵等一干同党。
曼特尔的得体写得恰如其分,这便是高妙。
它让读者不断产生兴趣,一个都铎时代的人会怎么说话?
如何应对各种挑战?
他看得太清楚了,权力就是被需要。
而性,就是权力一母双生的兄弟。
而在这场血腥的情色游戏中,连穆斯林的军队打到了贝尔格莱德的消息,都成了电视机上的白色噪音。
克伦威尔以“从不拒绝”为心诀(Never Refuse),像一个忠实的心理医生呵护着患者的欲望。
只要不拒绝,并达成心愿,肮脏的交换条款,都不需要他启齿。
别人追求一言九鼎,他只喜步步为营。
他是一只多么耐心的大猫啊。
就像中国书法的藏锋一样,只要你学会把自己的欲望压抑的嵌入到别人的欲望里,你就会渐渐发现:别人都要来玩你的游戏,连皇帝都不例外。
2虽然一切权力来自于渣男皇帝,不理朝政,情人无数,但某种程度上,是大家在玩一个带“皇帝”棋子的游戏。
人来人往,升升降降,都如芸芸众生,而我归然如山不动。
这才是权力。
连常被人提及自己是铁匠之子的侮辱,都不过是个游戏。
语言的双关极为巧妙。
比如第3集亨利8世喝醉,克伦威尔主动把他的肩膀接过来说了一句,lean on me。
也像是种请求的意味:依靠我吧。
亨利八世吐露心言,“在安面前,我会颤抖。
” I shake。
在莎士比亚时代,粗俗的双关语中,就是我打飞机的意思。
连handshake都可以是那意思。
不要忘记,从都铎亨利八世开始,英国抛掉了天主教的道貌岸然,追寻无节制的世俗欢愉。
哪里管什么圣女的克里斯玛大指责呀?
毕竟当年,连教皇都把他当成宠儿,把这个喜怒无常好大喜功的男人,可以和任何人翻脸。
文艺版的暴君,成了臣民晚上的噩梦。
近期看过最好的最有深度的剧了。可能我就迷恋这种大叔型的?人狠话不多。
Mark Rylance的演技我在間諜之橋就領教過了,屬於內斂型的,但總一直這麼演就覺得有點面癱,我是不是可以理解為喜怒不形於色?總體來講還是比較到位。這段歷史我很熟了,所以感覺這部戲還行吧,服裝、美指不錯。最後一集Mark Rylance的演技比較爆發,內心戲很足。
第一集刚好演到我看原著看到的部分
获过布克奖就是不一样,改编的剧比《白王后》可要对味儿多了。麦哥可萌( ^_^ )///对里朗斯产生了深深的好感,竟然是演亲密的那位大叔!
e1
躺床上看了一天,终于看完了,感觉一般有点无聊。
先去熟背欧洲近代史。
这段历史讲得真是索然无味。
+
飞机上看完了第一季,超!好!看!最近少有的优秀历史剧,Cromwell的表演尤其好,很内敛含蓄,又很有层次。看上去就是一张扑克脸,但是怎么看怎么觉得好有味道~~~好喜欢这样的男人啊~~~
配乐太加分了
too much slow to go on it.
期望值太高导致落空。这个叙事方法接受不能,每次插叙都不给点提示,经常看着看着就乱了要倒进度条。
戴米恩路易斯,兄弟连 亿万 国土安全 美剧最熟脸之一 2集弃 慢 无趣 平淡
不论中外,自古庙堂皆都是虎狼之地,虽然谁也不喜欢安妮,但最后的砍头戏还是看恶心了,历史从来都是残酷
自己国家历史都没搞懂,别人更看的稀里糊涂的
难怪丹琼斯说都铎的君主们不如金雀花,反正这个版本的亨八真的像迷茫青春期少男2333 克伦威尔这塑造要不是剧集整体都还克制平静,看起来也好白莲花啊()非常不喜欢Claire Foy的表演,感觉表情非常匮乏且面部肌肉总是过于紧张无法正常控制。总体来说最吸引我的应该是服化道和亨八对克伦威尔依赖关系?期待看第二季克伦威尔失宠,嘻嘻。
背景音乐可以循环听一整天。
里朗斯太细腻了。
3.5星。古代剧的服化道看得很舒服,有代入感,但是剧情太温吞老成了,而男主苦大仇深的脸又让人爱不起来,最大的惊喜反而是克莱尔·芙伊。宫廷权谋没太看得出来,可惜了。