"The Other Boleyn Girl" dramatized?

[Eric_Lowe]

Yes...That made sence. The elder before the younger...Mary was also married first. 

[helenazar]

P.S. I also noticed that they changed Mary from being the youngest sister to being the oldest sister, and Anne was the youngest... I wonder why.

Perhaps to keep it more historically accurate?  Most historians believe Mary to have been the elder sister.

Yes, but what about the  incest, they obviously didn't care about that being historically accurate...

[FaithWhiteRose]

Of course they didn't. It is historical fiction, after all.

[helenazar]

Of course they didn't. It is historical fiction, after all.

Right. So that's my point, why change what the book says and make Mary the older sibling if historical accuracy is not really an issue?

[Eric_Lowe]

But Mary was the elder sister...

[mcdnab]

As Eric said Mary was the eldest sister.  The standard most commonly accepted dates of birth are Mary C1499 Anne C1501 and George C1504 - some historians (particularly Retha Warnicke- whose book is very interesting if anyone fancies a read) have argued for a 1507 birth date for Anne however most now accept that Mary was the eldest surviving child.   

[Eric_Lowe]

Which would make sense since she was the first to marry...

[helenazar]

Yes, I know that most historians agree that Mary was the elder sister. But that wasn't my point. My point was that this movie was based on Phillippa Gregory's novel, where Mary was the younger sister. I was wondering why they changed that in the movie (in other words, made it different from the book). There didn't seem to be any need for it, and if they were worried about historical accuracy, they wouldn't have made a film based on Ms Gregory's book in the first place. So why bother changing the chronology of the sisters from what it was in the book? That was my question.

[Eric_Lowe]

Well...both changed a bit from the book really. The BBC one was faithful to the book on the incest, while the film implied they didn't do it.

[helenazar]

Yes, that's what I said too. Which is why I am wondering why they would change Mary from a younger sister to the older (from the way it was in the book to which they seemed to try to remain faithful). But it's not really that important.

[Eric_Lowe]

I think both versions pick and choose from the book. Also from the DVD extras Philippa herself sounded okay on the changes. Since George was gay it would be hard for him to bed any women, least of all his sister. Although it would not be out of charecter for the desperate Anne to ask...

[helenazar]

...Philippa herself sounded okay on the changes...

Well, I sure hope so, after she completely butchered history in her book! Why would she care if changes were made...

[Eric_Lowe]

I quite like the idea of history through the eyes of the unknown (Mary Boleyn). That was the most interesting of her books...the others are not as intriging. I think people want to know more about Mary Boleyn and thus create an interest for others to find out more...

[helenazar]

I quite like the idea of history through the eyes of the unknown (Mary Boleyn).

Yes, it's not a bad idea, if you keep to historical facts... Ms Gregory tends to be - how shall I put it -  a bit fanciful  . But she is allowed I guess since she is writing "fiction" first, "historical" only secondary. I will be worried when she starts publishing non-fiction though!

[Eric_Lowe]

Yes...although the more unknown the character, the more creative the author can be with the story. It is only recently discovered that Mary was the elder sister and both Carey children are now believed to be Henry VIII's bastards. And also of the two, Catherine Carey was the elder sibling instead of her brother. That would make her half sister and full cousin to Elizabeth I. Also that would make the execution of Lettice Dudley's son, a necessity since he does have Royal blood through his grandmother...