Talk:The Lion in Winter

RE: Anthony Hopkins

This article says that this is Anthony Hopkins:

"in his film debut"

What about "The White Bus" (1967)? Was 'Lion' filmed first? If not maybe it should say:

"in his major movie debut"

WikiDon 21:39, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Anthony?

Also, re Anthony Hopkins, he wasn't knighted at the time this film was shot or released, so is it correct to say "Sir Anthony" in this context? Perhaps "Anthony Hopkins (later Sir Anthony)" if it's necessary at all? Rapscallion 19:21, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Longevity of Cast?

"One unusual note of trivia regarding the movie was the longevity of its cast. The film was made in 1968, yet no major cast member died until Katharine Hepburn in 2003, thirty five years later."

What's so unusual? With the exception of Hepburn, every other major cast member was well under 40 years of age when the film was made.

Chinon

Firstly, Chinon is not in Normandy, France. And secondly, saying "current day France" is idiomatically incorrect. It should either be Chinon, France, or Chinon, Loire Valley (present-day France). In my opinion it shouldn't say present-day France at all, because back in the time when the movie was set, the place was still called France. Before editing an article, you should do a little research. Chinon is absolutely not in Normandy, look at a map of France or Wikipedia's Chinon page, and the place was known as France at the time the movie was set. Jontveit

Gee, didn't realize the King of England made his home in France(!) (that it was a French fief a technicality). In fact Chinon was in Anjou, a part of the Angevin Empire, and Anjou (and Normandy) did not become a permanent part of France until after the Battle of Bouvines (1214) -- movie is set in 1183. I guess we could all do a little research. -- Stbalbach 16:39, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was merely over-simplfying, because the region of France in the many years before and during the Hundred Years War was a very confusing place, with England owning regions of land here and there. My point was mainly that Chinon is not now, and never was, a part of Normandy. Jontveit

Identity of actor who played King Philip of France?

Which actor played the King of France? The imdb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0063227/) states that it was Timothy Dalton, while this article states that it was Christopher Walken. Can anyone check this?

It was Timothy Dalton in the film. The article states that Christopher Walken played Philip on Broadway.--Trystan (talk) 16:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Character Descriptions

The character descriptions, as they stand, are oversimplified enough to the point that they aren't much use, and the description of John is, at least according to the O'Toole/Hepburn film, inaccurate. 17:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)Marguerite de Navarre

Richard Character Bio

The following text has been again removed from Richard's character biography:

Richard and Philip Capet have been sexually involved prior to the action of the play; however, Philip declares that he participated in the affair purely for political purposes, whereas Richard indicates he had genuine affection for Philip. There are also references to Richard's close relationship with Eleanor in his childhood that has led to his current love/hate relationship with her.

I'm not sure why it keeps getting removed with the edit summary undocumented OR; it's a plain description of the action of the play. It's no more OR than any other part of the synopsis or character descriptions - in fact, it's much more clearly a basic plot summary than many of them. The scene where Richard, Philip and Henry discuss the affair is not at all cryptic. Nor is the extended discussion between Richard and Eleanor about their relationship when he was younger and their current troubled relationship.--Trystan (talk) 04:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to source this, to put it back in, per WP:OR, WP:VERIFY, WP:RS etc.--Galassi (talk) 11:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The work itself as a primary source is accepted for plot summaries in other pages I have seen (and for the majority of this page as well.) Regardless, I have found a secondary source which verifies first part of this text with respect to both play and film, and readded it. I will keep looking for one summarizing Richard and Eleanor's interaction.--Trystan (talk) 14:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The source provided is not reliable/scholarly. Keep looking.--Galassi (talk) 23:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please elaborate on your concerns, both with the material itself and with the source provided? I'm afraid I really don't understand why this simple description of one aspect of the plot of the play would be in any way contentious. I have provided a citation to an academic text which explicitly backs the material I reintroduced; a rather high bar for a simple plot summary. (Though I should have included in the citation that the author of this particular chapter, "Queering the Lionheart: Richard I in The Lion in Winter on stage and screen," was R. Barton Palmer. Drs. Coyne Kelly and Pugh are the book's editors.)--Trystan (talk) 02:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Historicity wording

I'm not sure what to make of this line from the historical authenticity section: "it is implied that Henry imprisoned Eleanor for attempting to overthrow him, but, in fact, she was imprisoned for backing their son Henry in the Revolt of 1173–1174."

Wouldn't backing a revolution be the definition of "attempting to overthrow" the head of state, even if not an active participant? The entry for the Revolt of 1173-1174 states plainly that the event pit Henry II against his wife, who supported his son (Henry the Young King) for the throne.

I think this line should be taken out. Although, I haven't seen the actual play so maybe I'm missing something here. 174.255.32.246 (talk) 12:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Anonymous[reply]

I agree, the meaning of it isn't at all clear. I've removed the claim and reorganized that paragraph a bit.--Trystan (talk) 14:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

End

I watched a staging of the play ending with Henry killing his wife, mistress, and sons. The article on the 1968 film, on the other hand, states that the film ends with Henry planning to kill his sons, but eventually releasing them. Does this also apply to the original play? --Hannesde Correct me! 10:02, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]