Talk:Lady Jane (1986 film)

Untitled[edit]

A scholar?! She was sixteen!

So?!

Grey was tutored alongside her cousin Edward, the heir apparent and king, and was presumedly as well-educated as he was. MK2 12:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Jane was extremely well educated. She was schooled alongside Prince Edward who had the same tutors as Elizabeth. Danny (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Historical inaccuracy needs correcting[edit]

I don't see why this section is even necessary. i have not seen it on any other historical film. Is there such a section in "Braveheart"? No. Its a film. its understandable they take liberties. Besides, i doubt strongly that Mary would have good relations with any Protestant. if she did, then her actions make no real sense. If you like someone, you don't execute them. One of the historical inaccuracies you list is that Lady Jane didn't like Guildford Dudley. This isn't true. Jane indeed deeply loved Guilford and wept upon seeing him taken to the scaffold at the Tower of London she cried "Oh Guildford, Guildford! Oh, the bitterness of death!"

Danny (talk) 21:27, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Watching the early part of the film again on Youtube, it does describe her as fifteen, so maybe this whole section about her age should be deleted. PatGallacher (talk) 00:14, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At the beginning of the film, her father says she is "in her sixteenth year" so she is 15 at this point (someone who is 16 would be in their 17th year) 173.87.157.124 (talk) 22:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure but someone put that the film depicts Elizabeth as being younger then Edward and Jane. In the films credits Elizabeth is never mentioned. The girl that is seen first in the background of the Suffolk family party to host King Edward and then on the shores of the river bank was indeed ment to portray Jane's younger sister Katherine Grey... Just a thought... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.156.138.12 (talk) 11:47, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Danny, writing in 2009, is correct. These things should only be discussed in a 'reception' section if third-party reliable sources has made an issue of them. Otherwise it violates WP:NOR. The JPS ^{talk to me} 10:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rebuttal by JAJ:

One of the historical inaccuracies you list is that Lady Jane didn't like Guildford Dudley. This isn't true. Jane indeed deeply loved Guilford and wept upon seeing him taken to the scaffold at the Tower of London she cried "Oh Guildford, Guildford! Oh, the bitterness of death!"

This is not accurate...

Jane may have very well stated, "Oh Guildford, Guildford! Oh, the bitterness of death!" However, she most likely said this because yet another innocent was being sent to the chopping block, and not out of love. The fact of the matter is, Jane was forced into the marriage with Guilford.

Despite what the movies and fictional books seem to suggest, most historians agree that Jane was not in love with Guilford and at best merely tolerated him. Far from being chivalrous and romantic, the real Guilford seems to have been a petulant, whiney, mama's boy, who didn't appreciate that Jane declared that she would not make him King, unless Parliament agreed. (Information taken from http://www.bitterwisdom.com/ladyjanegrey/Life/1e.html) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.124.84 (talk) 02:51, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another source...

By the time Jane was fifteen, her parents had abandoned their dream of marrying her to King Edward. Jane now believed that she was betrothed to the Duke of Somerset's son, Lord Hertford. But Somerset was imprisioned and his place taken by John Dudley, Earl of Warwick, afterwards Duke of Northumberland. She was stunned when her parents informed her that she was instead to marry Guildford Dudley, the youngest son of the Duke of Northumberland. Guildford was a handsome young man, one year Jane's senior, but it seems Jane didn't like him very much. She refused to marry him, and went on refusing until her mother literally beat her into submission. The Dorsets were now "friends" of Northumberland, and the Marquess was elevated to the Dukedom of Suffolk, the title of his father in law.

Jane married Guildford Dudley in May of 1553. The marriage was consummated the following month at Northumberland's command, but the couple continued to live apart. Jane's new mother-in-law visited her on Jul 3 and told her, "His Majesty hath made you heir to his realm." Jane said later that this unexpected news "greatly disturbed" her. (Information taken from http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/aboutJaneGrey.htm) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.124.84 (talk) 04:01, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the film "Lady Jane" was highly fabricated (especially the romance) and is not to be taken seriously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.134.180.167 (talk) 13:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More inaccuracies[edit]

The summary, presumably following the movie presentation, says she was betrayed by the council "because of her designs for reforming the country." I don't know any history book that interprets it this way. The council betrayed her because Mary Tudor was winning and they wanted to be on the winning side before they compromised themselves too much. Making Jane a "reformer" seems to be a movie addition to make her sympathetic to modern audiences. Basically she was a pawn in the vicious religious wars of the period. 2001:558:6011:1:7CEE:93EE:AA2B:D816 (talk) 03:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but this a plot summary of the film. Maybe we should re-instate a historical accuracy section? PatGallacher (talk) 16:21, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]