Anne of the Thousand Days (1969) - Rotten Tomatoes

Anne of the Thousand Days1969

Anne of the Thousand Days (1969)



Critic Consensus: No consensus yet.

Anne of the Thousand Days Photos

Movie Info

This film adaptation of Maxwell Anderson's stage play concentrates on the romance between Britain's King Henry VIII and his ill-fated second wife Anne Boleyn. Anne marries Henry after he sheds himself of Katherine of Aragon. Anne's inability to produce a male heir leads Henry to look for more suitable mates.

Watch it now


Richard Burton
as King Henry VIII
Geneviève Bujold
as Anne Boleyn
Irene Papas
as Queen Katherine
John Colicos
as Cromwell
Michael Hordern
as Thomas Boleyn
Katherine Blake
as Elizabeth
William Squire
as Thomas More
Valerie Gearon
as Mary Boleyn
Valeiie Gearon
as Mary Boleyn
Gary Bond
as Smeaton
Terence Wilton
as Lord Percy
Esmond Knight
as Kingston
Michael Johnson
as George Boleyn
Marne Maitland
as Campeggio
Nora Swinburne
as Lady Kingston
Cyril Luckham
as Prior Houghton
Lesley Paterson
as Jane Seymour
Kynaston Reeves
as Willoughby
Amanda Jane Smythe
as Baby Elizabeth
Nicola Pagett
as Princess Mary
Kate Burton
as Serving Maid
Liza Todd Burton
as Beggar Maid
View All

News & Interviews for Anne of the Thousand Days

Critic Reviews for Anne of the Thousand Days

All Critics (13) | Top Critics (6)

It is a story fit for the second Elizabeth, though it has perhaps one minor fault: the first two hours.

March 23, 2011 | Full Review…
Top Critic

Some plucky performance don't manage to embue this historical drama with the regal spectacle the source material deserves.

March 23, 2011 | Rating: 3/5 | Full Review…

Anne of the Thousand Days is a stunning-acted, sumptuous, grand-scale widescreen drama of the royal bed chamber and political intrigues that created the Church of England.

March 26, 2009 | Full Review…

Interminable plod through the story of Henry the Eighth and Anne Boleyn.

June 24, 2006
Top Critic

One of those almost unbearably classy movies, like A Man for All Seasons and Becket, that have a way of elevating the reputations of moviemakers without doing much for the art.

May 9, 2005 | Rating: 2.5/5

It's about what you'd expect -- slow, dry, fleetingly intelligent.

January 1, 2000 | Full Review…

Audience Reviews for Anne of the Thousand Days

Henry VIII falls for Anne Boleyn, and ... well, you know. Of all the dramatizations of the Henry VIII story that I've seen (and that's almost in the double digits), Richard Burton is the most human Henry of them all. Sure, he gets Henry's antics, and there are enough scenes where Burton can strut and fret and be manly, but Burton shines the most when he's quietly imploring, full of human weakness and pleadingly hopeful that his illusions are his reality. The rest of the film is a dull effort, giving us no new insights into the story, and Genevieve Bujold is not worth sacrificing a kingdom for. Overall, it's Burton that keeps this film from being just another entry into the Henry VIII library.

Jim Hunter
Jim Hunter

Super Reviewer


I kind of wish that there was actually a mention of the title in the lyric to the song "Land of a Thousand Dances" so that I could replace it with this film's title, largely because the title "Land of a Thousand Dances" is pretty cool for a song whose lyric could have seriously used a cool line. I can't believe that there was a time when Cannibal & the Headhunters wasn't the name of some kind of an extreme metal band, but there was, and it was a heck of a ways back, before even this film. Yes, people, before boys were playing with Hugo: Man of a Thousand Faces, they were playing to Anne of a Thousand Days. No, Geneviève Bujold was cute, so that was an offensive, if slightly confusing joke about a young man's special time, but hey, at least it wasn't as creepy as Hugo: Man of a Thousand Faces. Haunting and happy boyhood memories aside, first it was "A More for All Seasons", and then this film, so for a while there, if the Golden Globes weren't giving Best Drama to a film about Henry II, then it was giving it to a film about the Henry VIII-Anne Boleyn affair. Ah, the latter '60s was quite the time for saucy, scandalous royal affairs and sophisticated writing, which is a formula that, well, wasn't going to work for too much longer. Now, this film works just fine, but it works for only so long, especially when it is very much more of the same. One of the biggest issues with the film is its being not nearly as unique as it could have been, having a few refreshing spots, but conforming a little too much to the then-popular formula of dialogue-driven royal melodramas, while hitting trope after trope with the dialogue and characterization of most any film of this nature, until even those who are willing to forget their history will be hard-pressed to not see where exactly things are going. It doesn't help that the conflicts feel manufactured, because many of the romantic dramatic aspects of this true story which can be embraced as factual are hard to buy into, what with all of the contrived elements of storytelling which ambitiously work to flesh out the depths of a story of only so much consequence. As if the story concepts of "A Man for All Seasons", "Becket" and "The Lion in Winter" weren't minimalist enough in their overt intimacy, this film is really light in scale, and even in consequence, with plenty of sauce and potential, but only so much dynamicity to its tightly focusing on characters who aren't endearing enough on paper to completely carry this drama. Well-portrayed enough to be intriguing, the characters have a good bit of inspiration behind them to sell their questionable traits, which cannot be consistently ignored, at least within the leads, with Henry VIII being a humanized, but somewhat sleazy and proud king who would challenge his faith to get what wants, while even Anne Boleyn feels corruptible, and more stubborn than self-respecting, with bickerings that don't seem to work in enough sense of motivation to sell her changes of heart, and therefore get to be monotonous. Well, the conflicts between Henry and Boleyn are monotonous until the film jarringly shifts it focus to Henry's conflicts with the church, then to Henry's and Boleyn's conflicts as a married couple, for this is an uneven film that would be more consistent if it was tighter, and not so bloated with - nay - defined by one draggy dialogue piece after another, and filler, and inconsistencies, until it begins to wear you down. The film has a lot of respectable aspects, enough so to engross right away, but after a while of repetitious conventions, melodramatics and chatter from questionable characters, the investment is loosened. The final product ultimately falls as a generally underwhelming, but it never loses so much of your investment that it fails to adequately engage, being mighty improvable, but tasteful, even in its aesthetic value. Well, the aesthetic value of the film is a little limited, in that it is restrained in its kick, and formulaic, but it is there, to one extent or another, whether it be found within Georges Delerue's underused, but solid score, or within Arthur Ibbetson's tightly framed and well-lit, if colorfully underwhelming cinematography. More than anything, Lionel Couch's art direction is aesthetically sound, with Maurice Carter's production designs and Margaret Furse's costume designs being lavish, as well as complimentary to the immersion value of this distinctly intimate period drama. While minimalist in its intimacy with problematic characters, and therefore as rich with natural shortcomings as it is with conventions, this film's subject matter is intriguing, with some potential established through historically and dramatically valuable themes on the political and personal conflicts surrounding Henry VIII's affairs, particularly with Anne Boleyn. There is some intrigue to salvage, and if no one else manages to draw upon it, then it is Charles Jarrott, whose steady direction worsens slow spots, though not nearly as much as it could have, as he establishes some subtle resonance through a fine orchestration of light style, sharp writing highlights, and strong performances. Perhaps the material is too limited for truly strong performances to be delivered, but plenty players carry his or her own weight, with the lovely Geneviève Bujold being convincing, if occasionally melodramatic as the simultaneously strong-willed and vulnerable Anne Boleyn, while leading man Richard Burton truly becomes Henry VIII, with a royal charisma, as well as an intensity which captures the vulnerability of a proud, but flawed man of power. The characters are too questionable to embrace by their own right, but they're portrayed so well that it's hard to not be endeared, although it helps that this talented cast is handed decent, if somewhat lacking material, for although Bridget Boland's, John Hale's and Richard Sokolove's script is conventional, contrived and uneven in pacing and focus, it has its tightly extensive elements, and when it doesn't the dialogue is sharp enough to hold your attention between the heights in tasteful dramatic storytelling. Even the script has its strong elements, thus, this film has the makings to rewarding, just as it also has the makings of a relative misfire, and although the final product left me a little cold, there is enough to hold your investment with decency, even if it could have delivered on more. When the thousand days are done, conventions, melodramatics and problematic characters back a thin story, told unevenly and aimlessly, until enough momentum is lost for the final product to fall as underwhelming, in spite of the decent scoring and cinematography, strong art direction, thoughtful direction, memorable performances by Geneviève Bujold and Richard Burton, and highlights in clever writing which make Charles Jarrott's "Anne of the Thousand Days" a reasonably intriguing, if challenging account on the affairs of King Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. 2.5/5 - Fair

Cameron Johnson
Cameron Johnson

Super Reviewer

I just caught this the other night on Turner's month of Oscar-related films marathon. If you know me, you know that I'm not Ricard Burton's biggest fan. I know I'm in something of a minority, but seeing him play such a jerk as Henry VIII does nothing to help his cause with me. I mean he was nominated -- although not by me -- as best actor for this role in 1969, but like Hoffman and Voight in Midnight Cowboy, Burton was also up against The Duke as Rooster Cogburn, so you just knew that John Wayne had to be the odds-on favorite -- as in the proverbial handwriting was on the wall.

I tell you, when Geneviève Bujold's head comes off at the end, there is nothing I want more than to see Henry's head come off instead. Especially with that disgusting final line about heading off to Mistress Seymour's home once he knows Boleyn is dead. I love the way the movie closes with Bujold's voice-over predicting that little Elizabeth, her daughter, will be greater than any English monarch before her. And arguably, that pronouncement became prophetically true.

Bujold herself was nominated for Best Actress, but for once I agree 100% with the Academy: Maggie Smith stands as the hands-down winner for her job in The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie.

I'm not really sure why Anthony Quayle was nominated for Best Supporting Actor. I think Jack NIcholson had a better chance for Easy Rider, and I'll 95% agree that Gig Young did deserve it for a great job in They Shoot Horses, Don't They?

Lanning : )
Lanning : )

Super Reviewer

Anne of the Thousand Days Quotes

News & Features