Anybody expecting a history lesson on Henry VIII are better off reading a book about the Tudors instead. However, it is not about the historical accuracy/inaccuracy that I am going to judge The Private Life of Henry VIII. In all honesty, having studied the Tudors and read countless books and seen various documentaries on the subject I was not expecting a history lesson in the first place, just an entertaining, sumptuous and well acted film, and that is exactly what The Private Life of Henry VIII is. If there was anything that I would've preferred to have been done better was for the first part of the film to be less rushed through. Other than that it was great, while occasionally creaky the production values do look splendid with sumptuous costumes and gorgeous-looking decor. Kurt Schroder's lush score and the witty script are also things to like, as well as how compelling the comedy of the Anne of Cleves' scenes and the moving tragedy of Catherine Howard's were. Alexander Korda directs solidly, never allowing the pace to lag and making effort to make the characters interesting. And interesting they are, helped enormously by the performances. I completely agree with those who praise Charles Laughton's performance, alongside Quasimodo and Captain Bligh his funny, subtle and very clever turn as this complex monarch is one of the best performances of his career, underneath the flamboyancy there is a tinge of poignancy too which enables us to sympathise for him. He has a fine supporting cast, most notably the hilariously good Anne of Cleves of Elsa Lanchester and the dashing Culpepper of Robert Donat. All in all, great. 9/10 Bethany Cox

In watching The Private Life of Henry VIII it's good to remember that we are talking about his private life. The reasons of state and the impact all the marriages had on Tudor foreign and domestic politics is not dealt with her at all. For a balanced treatment of that I would highly recommend watching the BBC mini-series with Keith Michell.

In fact it was all politics and religion and the mix of the two that was involved in Henry VIII's first marriage and the divorce. That was what led to the English break away from the Roman Catholic Church and the founding of the Anglican church. In this film Catherine of Aragon, wife number one, is dismissed as "a good woman."

The film begins with the execution of Number 2, Anne Boleyn, who failed in her duty to provide a male royal heir. Number 3, Jane Seymour did so at the cost of her own life when she died in childbirth. Both Merle Oberon and Wendy Barrie who played both of these women respectively make brief, but lasting impressions.

Wife Number 4 is Anne of Cleves and were not sure exactly why Henry VIII found her so unappealing. Reportedly the portrait sent to the English court of her before the marriage was brokered was shall we say, exaggerated advertisement. This vacuum of knowledge gives Elsa Lanchester a great opportunity for some scatterbrained comedy that she so excelled at. It comes as a comic interlude in an otherwise grim film. The things Henry does for England.

Wife Number 5 is Catherine Howard, reputedly a young girl with some nymphomaniac tendencies. Binnie Barnes as Catherine Howard is a good deal more virtuous, but just as ambitious as the real Catherine. In truth Thomas Culpepper played by Robert Donat was only one of a series of lovers with whom she cheated with. And doing that to the King had only one remedy.

Charles Laughton one an Oscar for this performance and set a standard for playing Henry VIII. Some of the others that followed and all of them doing it well are Montagu Love, Richard Burton, Robert Shaw, James Robertson Justice and Keith Michell. Yet Laughton's is the performance all others are measured by.

Robert Donat got his first real notice playing Thomas Culpepper and of course went on to a great, but limited career because of his chronic asthma. Some of the cerebral qualities that went into all of his lead roles are definitely found in Culpepper.

But despite Donat and the wives the film is Laughton's. Laughton was only 34 when this film was made about a decade at least younger than the real Henry VIII. And folks did age faster in Henry's time than in Laughton's. I've always thought that the key to Henry VIII was the fact he wanted to stay young forever. He wouldn't accept growing old as a fact of life that even monarchs aren't immune from.

We should remember the film is about his private life and it is Laughton's portrayal of the private Henry that has made this film a classic.

You should probably know that I was a world history teacher, so I tend to look at historical films differently from the average person. I love a good historical film but I am also very unforgiving of a sloppy film or one that gets its facts wrong. Keep this in mind when you read this review.

Compared to the average 1930s historical film, this one is pretty good and pretty accurate. Aside from a few mistakes here and there (such as showing Anne Boleyn being publicly executed),the spirit of the film is pretty accurate to Henry in his later years. However, it shows an odd view of his life--completely bypassing his marriage to Catherine of Aragon (it said she was a good woman so her life was omitted--but she also was married to Henry the longest--and this would take up at least two movies to discuss well) as well as only giving the briefest glimpse of Boleyn just as she was being executed--but nothing more. So it skips a lot--and only shows a small glimpse of Henry's life (about a six year period). BUT, and this is important, there is STILL way too much material for this film. You see, during this time, Henry had five different marriages--and each is treated almost like a Cliff Notes version of the marriage.

So, despite its limitations, is it entertaining? Well, perhaps. If you like historical period pieces and don't mind the sketchy nature of the film, it's fine viewing. The acting is very good--and Charles Laughton was in fine form. And the film looks beautiful. As for the script, it's pretty good--with some nice sparkling dialog.