The book of which The Other Boleyn Girl, penned by Philippa Gregory, is a very well reviewed and received piece of historical fiction. Obviously we will never know how the conversations went between the real life folks portrayed in the story of King Henry VIII and his love affairs with Anne and Mary Boleyn, but from what I can tell this film sticks quite close to the way things went down. Unfortunately, Showtime’s television drama “The Tudors” takes the same story and gives it a “Beverly Hills 90210” twist and adds far more sexual intrigue and violence making it far more compelling. On top of that, this story is simply too big for one feature film, which makes The Other Boleyn Girl only satisfactory and nothing more.
Starring Natalie Portman as Anne Boleyn and Scarlett Johansson as her sister Mary, the film tells the story of the Boleyn family and how Thomas Boleyn more or less whored his daughters out to King Henry VIII (Eric Bana) in an effort to improve the family’s standings in the King’s court. The move succeeded, but the result of the entire affair is one for the ages and one that truly changed the face of England forever, which is obviously why it has been told numerous amounts of times.
From an acting perspective Portman is the one that really stands out as Johansson slowly begins to be most unimpressive every time I see her now. Bana works on his own as Henry, but for the most part I never really believed any of the characters as a collective whole, none of them really work well together. Portman and Johansson don’t give off that sisterly feeling needed and the relationship they have with Henry also feels unbelievable. The only truly believable people in the flick are Mark Rylance as Thomas Boleyn and especially the ruthless Duke of Norfolk played by David Morrissey. Kristin Scott Thomas also gives an understated performance as the Boleyn girls’ mother that deserves a bit of attention.
For the most part the one thing that is truly lacking from this film is the lust, because that is what this story is all about. The reason “The Tudors” is so sexually charged is because there really is nothing more to the relationship Henry has with these ladies than a sexual lust for them. I understand “The Tudors” is focused on Henry and this film is focused on the girls which changes the focus a bit, but at least a little bit of the sexual energy the story calls for needs to be seen on screen. Unfortunately, when you go and hire a pair such as Portman and Johansson you aren’t really going to get that, and even if you did, that would only take away from the film as it would become more of a story of the two ladies getting naked rather than what it was really all about.
For these reasons I really wouldn’t recommend you spend your money on a film you will surely be able to watch on DVD in about three months or less. Outside of a decent performance from Portman you really don’t get anything more than a short history lesson with a lot left out.
