Just so...so bad

brilliant actors, brilliant editing

Am I Missing Something?

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

King Charles II in comparison to other monarchs (primarily Henry VIII, Queen Victoria and Elizabeth I) is not a monarch that I know as much about. As someone who takes a great interest in history, kings and queens fascinated me from an early age, 'Charles II: The Power and the Passion' was an entertaining and riveting watch.It is more than easy to see why it is so praised by many. At the same time, not everybody will be totally enamoured by it, especially those expecting rigid historical accuracy (something that 'Charles II: The Power and the Passion plays fast and loose with). Not everything about 'Charles II: The Power and the Passion' entirely worked for me. Narratively, it does feel jumpy in parts and time scales, events and dates are not always clear, a little narration or captions may have solved this a little without being too much of a documentary approach.A couple of the characterisations felt a bit off, not the acting but the writing. It is agreed that Henrietta, despite being wonderfully played by Diana Rigg who has a blast with the role, is too vindictive and that her vengeful side is greatly exaggerated to sometimes pantomimic effect. It is further agreed also that Louise is made too clueless and the role is more annoying than charming.Conversely, 'Charles II: The Power and the Passion' looks fantastic, beautifully photographed and richly and exquisitely designed costumes and scenery wise. The music is luscious and with energy and vibrancy without being intrusive or heavy-handed. All four episodes are very intelligently scripted, with little rambling and nothing feels too wordy with few of the characterisations ringing shallow too.The story is not perfectly done, but is absorbing and makes one interested in knowing more about Charles and his life. The sexual element is played to the hilt, but done with taste, raw sensuality and passion, as is the rest of the storytelling. And there is nothing to fault the acting either. Rufus Sewell is just majestic in the title role and it has to rank up there with his best performances. Likewise with Rupert Graves as Buckingham. Helen McCrory is suitably cunning and Shirley Henderson really does touch the soul.In summary, a riveting if imperfect series, definitely worth checking out as long as you take it for what it is and not a history lesson. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Even for not-very-familiar-with-British-history beings, this movie is excellent! I liked Rufus Sewell very very much as Charles II. He was really very much "in" the historical person. Even in case you are not familiar with the time of Charles II, you get very interested to read more about it.I would liked this film to show some more persons and European "connections" from this time, appearing in the movie. Just to get a closer view of the time. But WOW this movie was excellent. I wish there were movies like this one in Germany.And I very much liked that all actors were able to speak very clear. I understood everything, no subtitles needed!!! Henry VIII was not talking that clear and understandable. The Specials on DVD2 could have been "more"!!!!

I truly enjoyed this show. The production values were excellent and it was historically quite accurate. The acting was superb, with Sewell, Graves and McCrory as standouts. I had a real sense of the history of the period... considering that it was more a dramatic biography than the historical and political record of an era. This was not meant as the definitive documentary on the Restoration, but rather a portrait and narrative on the lives of Charles and his court during a period of great intrigue and change.One cannot cover the 25+ years of Charles' reign in 3 hours and include everything. Instead, it's there as background, for those interested in paying attention. As for sexual intrigue, that's as accurate as was the political. Charles was, from all accounts, a licentious man with many mistresses, several of whom caused no end of trouble.

The BBC's 'Charles II: The Power, The Passion' is absolutely drenched in clichés of every sort. Here's a period that is really interesting in English history: we get the licentiousness, the decadence of the merry monarch's court, but what we don't get is a sense of the great religious and political debates that were happening at the time.The question is what is the point of this? It looks cheap. The acting is fine. Rufus Sewell plays Charles with equal doses of high camp and grotesque excess; Ian McDiarmid, Rupert Graves and others fare adequately. Unfortunately, the BBC used to do this a lot better. Standards, it seems, have slipped and I don't know what they're playing at.