UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Drama >

Anne of the Thousand Days

Anne of the Thousand Days (1969)

December. 18,1969
|
7.4
|
PG
| Drama History Romance

Henry VIII of England discards his wife, Katharine of Aragon, who has failed to produce a male heir, in favor of the young and beautiful Anne Boleyn.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

FuzzyTagz
1969/12/18

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

More
BallWubba
1969/12/19

Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.

More
ThedevilChoose
1969/12/20

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

More
Bumpy Chip
1969/12/21

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

More
JasparLamarCrabb
1969/12/22

It's not a bad movie, but director Charles Jarrott shows little style putting together what is essentially a filmed play. Richard Burton blusters appropriately as Henry VIII and Geneviève Bujold is the strong willed Anne Boleyn. They have some great chemistry, but after the fifth or sixth confrontation, it all becomes a bit too exhausting to care what is going to happen (and it's very well known what DOES happen). The leads are fine and there's a good supporting cast. Irene Papas is Katherine, Henry's current wife. There's plenty of palace intrigue involving Anthony Quayle (very good as Cardinal Wolsey) and John Colicos (as Cromwell). There's even a Cliff's Notes version of the plight of Thomas More.

More
jc-osms
1969/12/23

Overlong historical dramas were all the rage in the late 60's and early 70's, both on TV and film and so here we have the great Richard Burton's take on Henry VIII and the headstrong Tudor King's infatuation for the young and pretty Anne Boleyn. In truth, he's miscast, being too handsome and not fat enough for the part, but he certainly brings, yes, a kind of magisterial bearing to his character, although there was never a time in the film when I believed I was watching the real king, it always just looked like Richard Burton in a beard and ermine.It's, not unnaturally, given its subject matter and theatrical origins a very wordy piece, with plenty of speechifying by all the major characters, but the acting is of such quality that I was absorbed more than bored. Anthony Quayle as the grasping, hypocritical Cardinal Wolsey, John Corlico as the designing Thomas Cromwell and especially Michael Hordern as the shameless, self-serving father of the Boleyns all shine, while Genevieve Bujold, is very good as young girl on the make, Anne, who uses sex as a weapon to entrap Henry but who in the end dies by the same sword.Beautifully shot, with much pomp and pageantry, it occasionally drags and is spoiled by some apocryphal speeches by characters anticipating future events not yet enacted, for instance Anne's closing assertion that her daughter Elizabeth will be Queen someday and a great one - at the time, even the most ardent of mothers couldn't have foreseen this.Well-known as the story is, I still enjoyed this spiced-up historical scandal and study of power a good deal.

More
sddavis63
1969/12/24

The Tudors have spawned a lot of movies over the years. Perhaps surprisingly, most of them (at least the ones I've seen, and I've seen a few) have been pretty good ones. "Anne Of The Thousand Days" is no exception to that rule. With a great cast and lavish sets, this manages to tell the story of the relationship between King Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn - apparently destined against her will to be the King's mistress, but then, at her demand, and given no choice in the matter, the instigator of both political and religious turmoil as she demands to be not the King's mistress, but the King's wife - and Queen of England - a goal stymied by the fact of the King's marriage to Catherine of Aragon.As Henry and Anne, Richard Burton and Genevieve Bujold put on excellent performances, and the supporting cast was also quite strong. Neither Henry nor Anne were truly vilified; neither were they made heroes. Henry was portrayed as a King overcome repeatedly by lust (the cycle emphasized near the end of the movie with the appearance of Jane Seymour at court while Anne watched at a dinner very reminiscent of the dinner at which Anne appeared at court while Catherine watched.) Henry will manipulate and threaten and do whatever it takes to satisfy his lust. Yet, one gets the impression that - while consumed by lust - Henry does have a sincere concern about the need for a male heir and a belief that England won't allow itself to be ruled by a Queen. He's also clearly portrayed as concerned by his split with the Church, although at the same time one sees that he believes his prerogatives as King take priority over the concerns of the Church or even of God, summed up by his comment that "when the King prays, God answers." Anne on the other hand is a figure of some sympathy. In this movie at least she didn't ask to get mixed up in royal politics; she was the unwilling attention of Henry's lust. Yet, once her destiny was sealed, she also is clearly manipulative, grasping after what she wants, determined to get as much as she can from the King. The politics of the court are well portrayed, and most of what we see is accurate to the historical record, although the movie chooses to end on an obviously anachronistic note, with looks ahead to the glorious coming reign of Anne's daughter, who would defy her father's belief that a Queen couldn't rule England by becoming the magnificent figure of Queen Elizabeth I. This is a worthy piece of the Tudor movie collection. (7/10)

More
1969/12/25

WOW! Now I can understand Shakespeare perfectly. It wasn't so much that he was a genius, just look at the fodder he had all around him, all he needed do was to simply put pen to paper and the stories just oozed out, LOL, on their own. I wonder just how true these stories are to fact? This story had me shaking my head in disbelief; the deception, the treachery, the pomposity, the buggery, those horny monarchs, lol. It is beyond incredible that for mere want of a male heir, or even worse, to simply fulfill some base carnal desire, much like an animal, a "King" would stoop to such skulduggery. It seems that every film I've yet to see of this genre, all suffer similar outcomes, so I guess I've answered my own question, there must be some basis of truth to all these stories. Boy, that must have been some scary times to be alive, or worse yet to be born into nobility and have to deal with all those idiots and all the backstabbing just for the sake of paying homage to the "boss", LOL...I guess the film left an impression...

More