Katharine Hepburn: The Lion in Winter ("It's 1183") Monologue

"The Lion in Winter (1968)"
Movie Monologues
IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0063227/

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• katharine
• hepburn
• katherine
• peter
• o'toole
• the
• lion
• in
• winter
• monologue
• scene
• powerful
• acting
• film
• movie
• 1968
• eleanor
• of
• aquitaine
• speech

[nisiriti]

katharine hepburn really deserved the oscar!!!!

[MADasinger]

The play is very historically inaccurate- the playwright himself has admitted to this. There are mentions of Christmas Trees as well- at least in the play. I'm not sure about the film.

However, historic accuracy is not the point of this play. Even this meeting did not take place historically. This is about the feelings and lack thereof of one of history's most ruthless families. Breaking down the thoughts and feelings behind the script and analyzing it for historical accuracy ruins it.

[studebaker62]

Part of the shear joy of the Lion in Winter IS the verbal jousting as a metaphore for the relationships enjoyed (I'm using that in the ironic sense lest anyone complain that these people seemed to enjoy nothing) by these historical figures.

Trust me - in real life, I doubt if they were this entertaining.

[misterdeadly1]

@misterdeadly1 My original post: "I know I'm being hopelessly picky to some of you, but that kind of thing is jarring--it pulls (this) educated viewer out of the moment, lessening the impact of the speech."

So. To you I'm being hopelessly picky in my objection. My original statement takes your view into account. I further qualified my reaction--I did not say "all educated viewers"--rather, I took care to include the qualifier "(this) educated viewer." I suggest you learn to read or STFU.

[hammertapping]

@misterdeadly1 lol.origin of decease is a tangent to original point. and you are still going on that line (typical tactic when main point is lost). even in tangent you rely on one side of a debated argument taken from one book.

you are free to focus on 1 anachronism & miss (imo intentional) many & thus have purely individual reaction according to your mental & emotional capacity. you are not free to to attribute your limited reaction to 'educated viewers' in general as you did originally.

[misterdeadly1]

@hammertapping My reply was no tangent, it addressed your specific point that even if the term 'syphilis' was anachronistic, knowledge of the disease itself would not have been--I disagree. The source for my opinion that syphilis originated in the New World is Jared Diamond's Pulitzer-Prize winning "Guns, Germs, and Steel." I'll concede the widespread anachronisms in the movie--this one bugged me. It didn't bug you. Fine. Neither reaction is 'wrong', they are simply different. Thanks!

[hammertapping]

@misterdeadly1 now you go off in a tangent (typical tactic when an argument is lost) about origin of decease syphilis; where it originated is debated among experts, u no authority to judge which side is 'weak'.

word btw was borrowed from greek myth.

ur original point focusing on 1 'anachronism' 'jarring' 'educated viewer' fails, by not recognizing many (imo intentional) anachronisms there.in addition for a self styled 'nitpicker' like u, use of any modern english word should be anachronistic

[misterdeadly1]

@hammertapping While it is possible syphilis existed in the Old World prior to 1492, the evidence for that is weak--indisputably the incidence of the disease in Europe spiked dramatically shortly after Columbus' return from the New World. My belief is that syphilis is the one major disease that was the reverse of the much more familiar story of Native American populations being devastated by Old World diseases. So my quibble is not simply to the WORD syphilis, but to the disease itself.

[hammertapping]

@misterdeadly1 since you call yourself a nitpicker (silly one imo), even though i agree about anachronism(& think it intentional,see my other comments) i will nitpick ur argument for fun.

syphilis existed long before the word. it was called other things .

these royals didn't think of themselves as english and spoke a dead french dialect for several generations.

one can argue that using 'syphilis' instead of whatever they called it then is no more an anarchism than use of any english in here.

lol

[hammertapping]

@misterdeadly1 lol. i don't think anybody cared enough then or now to set traps for you. ( odd how you prefer to lose your individuality in vague group identities; 'mid-brow nitpitkers' etc )

anyway it seems you did not notice all the other anachronisms (look at this monologue alone and what she says, may be you think anyone in 12th cent. thought and said anything like that?) and near breaking of fourth wall. such obviousness is proof enough i would think of intention.

[misterdeadly1]

@hammertapping Perhaps you are correct--I'm no scholar of the play or the movie, so it is possible I am falling for a trap the writers set for middle-brow nitpickers like me. But perhaps you are giving the writer(s) more credit than they deserve, and they were ignorant about their anachronistic use of the word syphilis? If you have documentation for your theory please provide it--it is somewhat plausible that they knew syphilis was an anachronism but simply liked the way it sounded.

[hammertapping]

@misterdeadly1 anachronisms in the play and movie are intentional ( as is near breaking of fourth wall ). perhaps writer and director, expected what you call 'educated viewer " to get that . :-)