User Reviews

With a surprisingly strong script and good performances, the film delivers as a late 1960s production that reveals a cinema that was in transition into the modern era. As a historical drama it deserved its one Oscar win and 9 other nominations. It avoids the plodding performances of most costume dramas of the time, while not quite delivering the stunning intimacy that was achieved by the BBC two years later in its landmark "Elizabeth R" mini-series 1971 - (achieved through micro-direction, dedication to detail and precision use of the small screen close-up - who ever said film is the same medium as broadcast television?)

Richard Burton turns in arguably the best performance of his career as Henry VIII. Had his performance revealed just a shade more gravitas and reflection, he surely would have picked up an Oscar.

I'm glad to say that British commercial TV managed to air a decent print of this picture over the Christmas season 2006, even though the cinema-scope frame edges were cut off. Well worth watching, but if you shop for a DVD, do make sure it is in the correct format so the full 35mm squeeze / 70mm letterbox frame is visible. A classic from the '60s and a rare achievement.

This magnificent and well-crafted historical costumer is set in Henry VIII (Richard Burton who garnered an Academy nomination and Golden Globe) age , concerning his life and lovers , and especially his relationship to Anne Boleyn . Based of the playwright by Maxwell Anderson which is particularly accurate as a history lesson . The origin conflict takes place when Catherine of Aragon (Irene Papas ) was previously married to Arthur , Henry VIII's older brother . Cardinal Thomas Wolsey (Anthony Quayle) was the most influential member of Henry's council , but Wolsey failed to obtain the Pope's permission for Henry 's new marriage to Anne Boleyn (Genevieve Bujold , in her breakthrough international film role) . Wolsey came swiftly in distress and his possessions including the Palace of Hampton Court passed to King . Then Henry breaks with Catholic Church and secretly married Anne , creating the Anglican religion . When the King proclaimed himself as Head of the England Church was inevitable that Henry and Thomas Moro would clash . Those who stood in Henry's way , even those he claimed to love, invariably ended up on the scaffold and many catholic priests were led from their cells in the Tower of London and beheaded . Later on , Henry falls in love with a young favourite named Jane Seymour and he wishes to marry her . But the marriage to Anna did not last long and she was accused of adultery with his brother and four Communers .

Interesting screenplay based on the source stage play "Anne of the Thousand Days" by Maxwell Anderson that was originally produced on Broadway in New York at the Shubert Theatre, it describes "England between the years 1526 and 1536" . Dynamic performance by Richard Burton , though he hated both the film and his interpretation and was amazed when he received an Academy Award nomination for Best Actor . Burton had been the second actor to do so for playing Henry VIII, and the first to win for playing a role that someone else had already nominated an Oscar for playing the same character was actor Charles Laughton , he first played the monarch in 1933 for The private life of Henry VIII (1933) and won the Best Actor Academy Award for his performance . Burton and Genevieve Bujold make an extraordinary battle of wits , they were two of the foremost talents of the time . Actresses Olivia Hussey, Julie Christie , and Faye Dunaway all turned down the role of Anne Boleyn , Hussey was the first choice for the part but she declined due to personal problems she was dealing with at the time , as the leading female part in the end was cast with French actress Geneviève Bujold who gives a marvelous acting . Understanding and charismatic acting by large secondary cast as John Colicos as the ambitious Thomas Cromwell , Irene Papas as suffering Catherine of Spain , Michael Hordern as Thomas Boleyn , Peter Jeffreys as Duke of Norfork , among others . It appears uncredited Elizabeth Taylor as masked courtesan in a lush ball , in fact she wanted to play Anne Boleyn, but was rejected as too old at age 37 .

Sumptuous cinematography by Arthur Ibbetson , reflecting glamorously the spectacular sets and luxurious gowns which won an Academy Award . Evocative and emotive musical score by Georges Delerue . Lavishly produced by Hal B Wallis, fitting accurately to Renaissance time , though the film received mixed reviews, it was a financial flop on release . This engrossing motion picture was brilliantly directed by Charles Jarrot who continued in similar style with ¨Mary queen of Scots¨, about Henry's great-niece, he directed two years later and again a wills duel , this time starred by Glenda Jackson as Queen Elizabeth and Vanessa Redgrave as Mary Stuart .

Around 1525 Henry VIII fell hopelessly in love with his wife's newly acquired maid-of-honor, Anne Boleyn. A seemingly uneventful, probably unimportant infatuation changed the history of England radically and the history of the world forever. Who in Great Britain at that time ever dreamed that the events unfolding in their king's castle was about to change their lives so much. And it's true. Henry VIII, fascinating in himself, probably didn't even realize what his love for this woman was going to mean. Has there ever been a more tantalizing historical figure to study? This man moved -- literally -- heaven and earth to win the heart of this reluctant, uncooperative, insignificant girl. And no one plays Henry better than Richard Burton, combining wit, cruelty, and selfishness in one unforgettable character. This movie is such a charmer, even if it does take some historical liberties. Bujold is superb as the spiteful, spoiled Boleyn. But even in her transformation in this film is tragedy: she goes from the crown to the block with such speed that even her "head" must have spun! Any student of Tudor history, or anyone just wanting to see a good-old-fashioned epic, will love this movie. I like to think that Burton comes the closest to portraying what Henry VIII must have really been like. But even if you don't like history, Tudor England, or the stars in this movie, watch it anyway. You'll be glad you were born when you were and NEVER the object of a king's love.

It is a memorable film, well nominated, exquisitely costumed. I like Richard Burton best of all in this one. He takes up the role of Henry VIII and gives it many subtle shades of feeling so that you almost understand what might have really transpired in such a king's turbulent soul. He was somewhere between a rock and a hard place and rushed headlong into history with his determined efforts to change the rules of kingship.

Anne Boleyn, here played by Genevieve Bujold, was caught up in these events and ultimately became a casualty of circumstances. I'm not a history buff so can't fill in the true story but it's obvious there was much political intrigue taking place. Also, it rather reminded me of "Othello" in which the ill-fated Desdemona was victimized by Iago's slander. Genevieve portrays Anne with deep conviction and her tremendous vehemence at times sweeps us along through happy moments as well as fiery clashes with family, king, and authorities.

I was enthralled by the excellent supporting actors who formed the king's entourage, and hope to know them by name one day. In particular was their exchange of witty dialogue in the captivating scene which ended in a reference to a "venison haunch." I believe one of these actors later appeared in "Mary, Queen of Scots" (1971) as I recognized the same wonderful voice, and I think it's Vernon Dobtcheff. Well, it's a bit of detective work I must do to confirm.

Anthony Quayle's portrayal of Cardinal Wolsey was right on. Oh the glories of power in high places, so many titled positions he held! Yet in the end the Cardinal could hold onto none of them in a true sense. I feel this is one role where Quayle really excelled as an actor and a very dramatic presence.

For me this film goes hand in hand with "A Man for All Seasons" and "Mary, Queen of Scots" for some great drama on screen.

This is an interesting biopic of the ill-fated Anne Boleyn and her relationship with Henry VIII. The acting is top notch with Richard Burton, Genevieve Bujold, Anthony Quayle and the rest of the cast turning in great performances. But like most costume dramas that came out in the 60's and early 70's, it is too long and overproduced. The story is intriguing, even though we know the outcome, but it bogs down in the middle when the King tried political ploys aplenty to rid himself of Queen Katherine so that he could marry Anne Boleyn. It picks back up again near the end when the King then has to rid himself of Queen Anne (because she could not give him a male heir) so that he can repeat his own history and pursue the young Jane Seymour. This is better than many films of its genre, but nothing spectacular. 6 of 10

Despite historical inaccuracies necessarily prevalent in historical dramas (i.e. not documentaries), this film is exquisitely conceived, written, directed, and performed. In my opinion, it is perhaps one of the best historical dramas ever produced, and both Bujold and Burton are remarkable. It's a pity that this film is not more widely known. I highly recommend it.

Based on the play by Maxwell Anderson, Anne of the Thousand Days is one of those great historical dramas they do not make anymore. Rich in color, costumes and settings, and supported by the superb performances of the whole cast (outstanding Richard Burton as King Henry VIII and Genevieve Bujold as Anna Boleyn) make this a still fine and shining piece of a historical drama. Like The Lion in Winter published one year earlier, Anne of the Thousand Days is another great game of love, drama and intrigues at the Court of a English king.

King Henry VIII is the most Oscar-nominated character in history, having earned one for Charles Laughton who held chicken drumsticks like no on in "The Private Life of Henry VIII", his sole nomination for Robert Shaw who stole the show in "A Man of All Seasons" and last but not least to join that prestigious line-up: Richard Burton. Of the three, he might be the most sensible hence the least memorable. Henry was remembered for his flamboyance and exuberance and somewhat Burton decided to play him coolly yet with the vulnerability of a child bullied by a great divine instance that refuses him male heirs. After watching "Becket", I read Burton wished he could play the part of Henry who had a richer range of emotions, but the more I get into Burton, the more I feel his weary and contemplative approach to acting, he's got charisma and yet authority hardly emanates from his because he's too tormented to even control himself, which isn't too unwise an actor for a character like Henry VIII.

That's why his reign is just a darling for Hollywood. It has everything: obsession, love, lust, passion, hubris, politics, conspiracy, trials and many heads ending on the ballot. It's below-the-waist matters leading to the most pivotal episode of British history and producing one of its greatest monarchs Queen Elizabeth or as Pauline Kael put it "Anne's posthumous triumph". So, who needs books to learn about British monarchy history when you have Best Picture nominees (and occasional winners)? After having been inspired by Thomas More's integrity in "A Man of All Seasons", mesmerized by the rising charisma of "Elizabeth", now I feel like I almost completed my knowledge about Henry VIII's tumultuous reign with Charles Jarrott's "Anne of the Thousand Days", adapted from Maxwell Anderson's play. And I'm so proud to recognize some names like Norfolk or Cardinal Wosley (remarkably played by Anthony Quayle) And as Anne, Genevieve Bujold, is the perfect match for a Burtonesque character, a woman who can control the man who wants to control everything.

Anne is a young experienced girl, deprived of that virginity upon which the legend of her daughter would be built. She's lively and has a personality that throws sparkles all over the court. We first see her being lifted by her fiancé Lord Percy (Terence Wilton), she's in the air short enough so one head turns to her direction and notices her, it's the king. From that moment, he'll only have eyes for her. These three seconds are simply perfect and give that edge to cinema over the play where eye-language can't be perceptible. That look is the first brick to pave the road of a cultural revolution in Britain but it's handled in a rather trivial way. The Queen Catherine of Aragon, played in all matrimonial dignity by Irene Papas who specialized in roles of martyred wives, leaves the royal ball, the music stops but the King insists the show must go on. That scene find a powerful echo later in the film when Anne is the Queen and Henry starts having eyes on Jane Seymour, showing that the reign of Henry VII was all but a series of new beginnings.

The whole challenge of "Anne of the Thousand Days" is to make this transition from one Queen to another a riveting experience on both a human and political level, with Bujold's performance as a queen who wouldn't sell herself cheaply to a man who absolutely adores her is full of surprisingly unpredictable scenes. That Burton makes his King a little more accessible allows her to play 'hard to get', she has reasons to loathe him as she was prevented to marry her true love but on the other hand, she was advised not to give herself too easily for Henry would immediately renounce her. It is a slight possibility that she truly loved him and thus feigned indifference. And it is possible that Henry followed his courts' advisers to show his tender side. The film is a like a romantic game of hide-and-seek that hides graver diplomatic matters (with Spain and the Vatican) and one woman's personal ambition.

Anne wants to be the Queen and she promises sons if he can make her so and if he can't divorce Catherine, he'll use his power to cancel his wedding. It all can be summed up in Thomas More's warning to Norfolk "tell him what he ought to do, not what he's able to do". It's the most dangerous thing to tell a man such as Henry for what he can do because he'd realize sooner that he can do anything The catch is that Anne must fulfill her promise and if a king can make himself marry anyone, he can't control which chromosome he gives. The film is then a series of political machinery that all end up breaking on the wall of destiny: Henry can't have a male child, not one that can live after birth anyway. And divorce is like murder, one you do it once, the second time is no other and so.

The little weakness of the film is that we get from a passionate sequence between the two to Henry's immediate rejection of Anne after the second "failed birth" and so her demise seems rather abrupt, not as smooth as Thomas More's slow descent in disgrace in "A Man for All Seasons", but then-again Burton's performance redeems these flaws as he never really displays true hatred, he's just a man who wants to convince himself that he's doing the right thing. And Anne is not a heroine either, she has the blood of purer souls in her hands but it was worth having the future of England in her womb. The film is the collisions of two dangerous convictions: "I will have a son", "I will bear the future monarch of England", guess who was right?

Henry VIII's male chauvinistic desire to begat a male heir for the throne of England is a tale often told from many points of view. In Anne of a Thousand Days it's told from the point of view of Anne Boleyn, second wife of Henry VIII and mother of the infant child who became Elizabeth I.

Anne Boleyn, a high spirited young lass of 18, catches Henry VIII's eye at court. One of his previous dalliances was with her older sister Mary and that paid off well for the Boleyn family. Father Tom sees riches and glory even more and persuades her to really keep the king panting.

Anne succeeds all too well. Henry divorces Catherine of Aragon and marries Anne. But all he begats is another daughter. And Henry still wants a son and he's got an eye on another. It all ends tragically for the Boleyn family.

It's important to remember that as the film opens Henry VIII having caught sight of Anne at his court denies permission for her to marry some young lord whom she is in love with and vice versa. Had he looked elsewhere, had he moved on, all this might never have come to pass.

Anne of the Thousand Days took 21 years to come to the screen. It ran on Broadway for a year in 1948-1949 and starred Rex Harrison as Henry VIII. Richard Burton joins a great list of actors who've portrayed Henry VIII on the screen. Probably the young Charles Laughton did him best, but Burton is certainly fine.

Genevieve Bujold in her screen debut is a stunning and fetching Anne, too fetching for her own good. Poor kid though, in other than a monarchist society that was becoming more absolute during Henry's reign, she'd have married the man of her dreams and lived happily ever after.

Anthony Quayle is a fine Cardinal Woolsey though I prefer Orson Welles in A Man for All Seasons. Michael Hordern as Thomas Boleyn destroys more than one member of his family through his own ambition.

Irene Papas makes a tragic Catherine of Aragon. By all accounts Catherine was a pious woman who had incredible rotten luck with her pregnancies. Only daughter Mary survived who grew up to be the Queen known as Bloody Mary. She settled some accounts when she became Queen.

I think the best supporting portrayal is that of John Colicos as Thomas Cromwell. This Cromwell was the great uncle of the more well known Oliver Cromwell. Oliver has his supporters and detractors, but I've never seen a good word in any history books about Uncle Tom. Colicos has him pegged just right as a serpentine intriguer. By the way after the period of this film is over, Thomas Cromwell made one too many intrigues and got on Henry VIII's wrong side. People usually didn't live long after that and Cromwell was no exception.

When he wrote Anne of the Thousand Days, Maxwell Anderson grew up in a society of law. I think a fine appreciation of that fact comes into the moral of the story. Even an absolute monarch has to obey laws or no one is safe. Until Henry VIII was off this mortal coil, no one was.

Costume melodrama concerning stormy relationship between King Henry VIII of England and Anne Boleyn is less a historical account of their tempestuous marriage than it is a florid rewriting of history. Adapted from Maxwell Anderson's popular play, the material offers feisty Geneviève Bujold one of the juiciest roles of her career. Bujold, who looks gorgeous in period dress, doesn't seem to be a Method player and never approaches the part of Boleyn with overdrawn pomp; instead, she gives over the inner-workings of her character, and lets Anne be human, womanly, facetious and smart. Unfortunately, she's paired with hammy Richard Burton as King Henry, and he stomps about with a snarl, spitting out his lengthy speeches like a rabid dog. Charles Jarrott (never a reliable filmmaker, but usually an old-fashioned one) was probably a good pick for director, though his lack of spirit or vitality makes itself apparent early on, and his handling overall seems a bit indifferent and callow. Nominated for a slew of Oscars, the film picked up just one trophy for Margaret Furse's medieval attire, which is entirely appropriate. ** from ****

Burton and Bujold are majestic in this brilliant costume epic about King Henry VIII's relationship with wife Anne Boleyn. The period is captured beautifully in its set design and costuming. There is great support from Irene Pappas, John Colicos and Anthony Quayle as Cardinal Wolsey. This would be a nice film to double up "A Man for All Seasons" with.

We all know the story. Henry VIII is the King of England. He has been unable to sire a son with his first queen. He is now married to Anne Boleyn (Bujold) who has the same "problem." Of course, Henry wants the marriage annulled, and it has to be through the church. Of course, if she is convicted of adultery, she will have to be executed. The strength of the movie has to do with the amazing performance of Bujold, how she faces the inevitability of her demise. This is a true tragedy. I don't know how accurate the performance is. This was originally a stage play and at times it seems rather stagy. Our hearts bleed for the young woman who has committed no crime, only that she stands in the way of succession. This is an extremely well produced and directed movie.

This retelling of one of history's most famous love affairs features Richard Burton as a vain, selfish Henry VIII and Geneviève Bujold as his second wife, the beautiful, headstrong, and ill-fated Anne Boleyn. The story is well known: Henry, tired of his first wife and desiring a male heir, forces annulment of his marriage, thus driving a wedge between England and the Papacy. He is smitten with young Anne but, unlike her sister, she refuses his advances until he promises to make her Queen. The break with Rome leads to the banishment of Cardinal Wolsey, the death of Sir Thomas More, and the rise of Thomas Cromwell all of who are excellently portrayed in the film (by Anthony Quayle, William Squire and John Colicos respectively). As the titular thousand days pass, Henry becomes more and more dissatisfied with Anne, whose grim fate is a famous moment in British history. The film is excellently made, with sumptuous costumes, bright and colourful cinematography, excellent acting (especially by Bujold), and a good script.

ANNE OF THE THOUSAND DAYS tells the story of the ill-fated Anne Boleyn, Henry VIII's second wife. I've seen this story so many times now, in everything from THE TUDORS to HENRY VII AND HIS SIX WIVES, that it would take a special kind of film to really get me interested in the story again.

Sadly, ANNE OF THE THOUSAND DAYS isn't that film. Oh, it's a perfectly adequate costume drama to be sure, but it never feels like anything more than that. The film looks good but the script just lacks the kind of intrigue, excitement and drama that the material demands. It's also at least an hour too long, dragging the early stages of the marriage out far too long and to little reason.

The relationship between Anne and Henry is depicted in soap opera-ish ways and occasionally feels trite, despite the best efforts of both actors. It's always apparent that these two are acting the parts, rather than inhabiting the roles; there's something very mannered about both Burton and Bujold. A lack of really interesting supporting performers hurts it too.

Not a bomb, then, just a passable movie that I have no great desire to rewatch. Certainly no classic. Natalie Dormer's vixen-like turn as the scheming Anne in THE TUDORS is still my favourite portrayal of the doomed queen.

I enjoyed this film immensley but felt that Bujold was not quite fiesty enough as Anne. Burton played a blinder as Henry and the scenery and costumes are stunning. Historically some of the details are "romanticised" but the final scenes of Anne counting the number of days she has been Queen are very moving - as is the final frame and the prophecy spoken by Anne as her little daughter trudges the lonely path that was to be her life.

I have mentioned elsewhere that the Tudor family (particularly those two main pillars: Henry VIII and Elizabeth I) are the most popular British reigning family in Anglo-American films. Only Charles II (of the follow-up Stuart family), Henry V (of the Lancastrian Plantagenets), Richard III (of the York Plantagenets), Henry II (of the Plantagenets), and Victoria (of the Hanovarians) rival the Tudors, but only for their own immediate story or stories. In telling of all the intrigue and tragedy and glory the Tudors still beat the others.

Yet this wonderful film study of Henry VIII and his second wife was somehow not as successful as it should have been. Although it gained Oscar recognition, it did not win anything notable - and that is due to an ironic delay in it's production.

"Anne Of A Thousand Days" appeared in 1948 on Broadway, and was a critically acclaimed triumph (his last one) for the overrated Maxwell Anderson. Anderson and his "blank verse" Elizabethan tragedies ("Mary Of Scotland"; "Elizabeth The Queen") had been popular in the 1930s and both were turned into films (with Katherine Hepburn and Frederic March in the first and Bette Davis and Errol Flynn in the second). One might say "Anne" was the conclusion of a trilogy on Tudor tragedy and history. Anne was also a great dramatic triumph for it's star, Rex Harrison, who won the Tony Award for his portrayal of Henry VIII. It was a personal success for him as well, for he was currently being pilloried in the press for being the man who (supposedly) caused Carol Landis to commit suicide as their love affair ended.

Unfortunately the story of Henry's courtship, pursuit of Anne, his divorce from Katherine of Aragon (and the resulting English Reformation), his disappointment when Anne only produces one living child - a daughter named Elizabeth, and his destruction of Anne (literally taken to the executioner's block at Tower Hill) included bits and pieces of infidelity, illegitimacy, and incest: the three "I" taboos of motion picture codes in 1948. So we missed out on Harrison making a film record of his great performance. And the play did not appear on the screen until twenty years passed.

Despite the pomposity of Anderson's mock-Tudor writing, the play was actually good due to it's story. Anne is a brave woman, and an ambitious one. She is a fit wife for Henry - but she is unlucky to have the same problem that Katherine had (a problem that only Jane Seymour did not have) of not fathering a legitimate male heir who survived. Even Jane's child, the future Edward VI, would only live to be an advanced teenager before he died in 1553. There may have been something physical wrong with Henry (who did die of syphilis) that prevented his sperm from producing strong males. By the way, he did have an illegitimate son, Henry, Earl of Richmond, who was considered a possible heir on several occasions, but died in 1536.

Burton gave a wonderful interpretation of Henry, the complex man seeking happiness but also determined to have his way as he is King. Critical reaction to his performance was only negative in that Henry VIII had red hair (which trait he passed to his daughter Elizabeth), not black like Burton's. But that was a minor flaw. Genevieve Bujold was quite memorable as Anne (who was brought up in France - ironically one of the last "favors" Henry gave her was to allow her to be beheaded by a French swordsman from Calais, not an English axeman). Anthony Quayle was certainly thoughtful as Cardinal Wolsey, watching his great power collapse in his failure to secure a papal divorce for his real master. John Collicos is a properly ruthless Thomas Cromwell, while William Squire is adequate as Thomas More and Joseph O'Conor gets a chance to show Bishop Fisher's moral strength.

But that's just the problem here. This history lesson was given to the public - brilliantly given - just three years earlier in "A Man For All Seasons", which emphasized Thomas More's struggle of conscience over gratitude in the English Reformation of the 1530s. It is not to disparage "Anne" as a film to say that "All Seasons" covered the same or most of the same territory better or just or well. But it got there first. This is why "Anne" is rarely revived while "All Seasons" has been. One also has to admit that altruistic More is a better figure to sympathize and honor (as his fellow martyr Fisher is) than the unlucky but ambitious Anne. So the public felt. Both are first rate films, and "Anne" does go a step further into the matter of how she's framed by Henry and Cromwell for divorce and execution purposes. But we heard all this before - and from a morally higher position.

I would probably rate this between a 6 or a 7, at a 6.6 but since I this site has whole numbers only, I've gone with the 6. I love Tudor history and am interested in the different portrayals of Anne Boleyn. Was she ambitious, deductive, a victim? I enjoyed this portrayal as it seemed to have different nuances to it than many of the others. It is one of the few I have seen where Anne appears, at least for a while, genuinely young, and I mean that not in age so much as her emotional sophistication. They show her going through a progression before she gets to the state that we see her depicted as more often-ambitious and manipulating.

I also enjoyed the costumes and sets, which seemed more authentic than many of the modern productions, with actual castles and landscaping. There were some minor historic errors, such as Mary Tudor being at her mother's death bead, something which I believe Henry denied her in real life. but I am not bothered by such minor dramatic changes.

The main problem with the film was that it was very one dimensional and linear, with very basic writing. That made it seem a bit long, and not long in a good, "epic" kind of way. They didn't elaborate on the historical forces at work or the real emotional complexities of the characters. While I often prefer simple movies to those that are too convoluted, this film presented as just a re-telling of the occurrences. It didn't feel very compelling to me, and given the historical events, it really should have been.

Worth seeing if you enjoy history or costume drama, but not emotionally rich or compelling.

I won't go into the Historical inaccuracies that are present in the film apart from the fact that Anne Boylen was not responsible for Henry's suspicions about Wolsey's ambitions,or responsible for Thomas More and Bishop Fischer's deaths..What I will do is tell You what an astounding film this is. Its films like this that makes one recall what a brilliant Actor Richard Burton was,before the alcohol and second marraige to Liz Taylor ruined him. He is first rate as King Henry,appropriatly Loving,tortured and cruel. Bujold is also strong as the object of his affections and political manuvers,Anne Boylen. She is gutsy,headstrong and in some ways as dangerous as the King.

Sir Anthony Quayle is perfectly cast as the Tragic manipulator Cardinal Wolsey,He earned a well deserved Oscar nomination for the role. it is a tribute to this fine actor that even though Wolsey was unscrupulous,you still feel for his plight in the end. Also riviting is John Colicos as court lawyer Thomas Cromwell,he plays the role with such grace and slyness that you find yourself playing along with his games. Sir Michael Hordern and Irene Papas are also strong in their supporting roles as Thomas Boylen and Queen Catherine. The dialouge sparkles and the full flavor of Tudor England comes to life in this touching,emotionally charged film.

A Tudor costume saga diligently sensationalizes the folie-à-deux of King Henry VIII (Burton) and Anne Boleyn (Bujold), the queen he falls in and (a thousand days later) out of love with, one vacuously succumbs to his hardened promiscuity and the fixation of begetting a male heir, whereas the another tragically falls victim of her own delusional abuse of power.

Hardly as operatic and opaque as Anthony Harvey's THE LION IN WINTER, the movie doesn't mince words in depicting the outrageous predisposition of Henry VIII, a horny, spoilt, reckless, cold-blooded pig might be quite an apt description if one can pay no heed of lèse-majesté and Mr. Burton's rendition is competent more than somewhat, drumming up his sonorous rhetoric with blistering confidence (he acquired his penultimate Oscar nomination), but overtly and uncompromisingly, he is shy of any trace of compassion in portraying a famous monarch, which may deter even the most devout monarchist to concoct rational excuses to his inexcusable wantonness and callousness, a stratagem doesn't seem to be out of sync with the makeup of the movie's targeted audience.

On the other hand, we have the Canadian Francophile actress Geneviève Bujold in her first English- speaking film, a career-making opportunity which earned her an Oscar nomination, her Anne Boleyn is a much complicated character than Henry VIII, her metamorphosis from a headstrong ingénue to a queenship-coveting hard-liner strikes home through the agglomeration of her implacable gaze and intractable ferocity (she only relents when she becomes love-struck, a tangible human touch never materializes in Henry's front), to a point we feel impelled to rally our antipathy to let her be answerable for the ongoing persecutions (both religiously and maritally), and in fact, there is only one man who has the power to allow all those things to happen, that is how good Ms. Bujold's performance is, not to mention her Tower of London monologue, her resounding delivery is quite an unparalleled showstopper in almost every aspect.

The Greek goddess Irene Papas (although miscast for her ethnic looks), brings about ample poignancy as Queen Catherine of Aragon, and British thespian Anthony Quayle circumspectly treads the board as Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, a piteous prey of a king's whims but also eloquently registers that vice is never devoid within his consecrated remit, another Oscar-calibre feat shouldn't go unnoticed. But the same merit cannot be related to John Colicos' Thomas Cromwell, a peripheral but important character marred by Colicos' repugnant haughtiness.

Directed by Charles Jarrott with due mettle and moxie, ANNE OF THE THOUSAND DAYS might be a worthy period drama gallantly grappling with unsavory subjects such as adultery, incest and illegitimacy, but in this day and age, its uncritical overtone jars by testing one's moral line in the sand, even Anne's prophetic revenge of a gyneco-sovereign doesn't really pay off in the end of the day.