
When I first shared the trailer for My Lady Jane (2024) on our social media, folks freaked the fuck out because gasp this new series from Amazon suggests what happens if Lady Jane Grey isn’t the doomed nine-day queen of Tudor history. The story is based on the YA historical fiction novel from 2016 by Cynthia Hand, Brodi Ashton, and Jodi Meadows, and it’s part of their series reimagining historical heroines, giving them more agency and adding fantasy elements.
Oh yeah, the trailers for this show don’t really hint at how this story has a huge plot pitting shape-shifters called EÐians against non-shape-shifters called Verities. The Verities are in charge of things, so the EÐians are outlaws in hiding.
Yup, this story isn’t strictly historically accurate! But some of you also love the hell out of A Knight’s Tale (2001), which is stupidly non-historical and I hate, and at least this one has better costumes. We don’t all have to like the same things (and if you want to rant about what you hate, maybe you should get your own blog, m’kay?).

This version of Lady Jane Grey does border on anachronistic feminism — she’s as good, if not better, with a knife than Guildford, for example. But Jane’s real power comes from her intelligence, which is based in historical fact. The actual Jane received an extensive humanist education, and she spoke Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Italian. Much like her cousin Elizabeth (later queen), Jane was considered one of the most educated women of her day. This TV show emphasizes how clever Jane is and how she uses her education to solve problems.
The show is lighthearted fun, with an anachronistic tone (though I find the voiceover a bit much sometimes). There’s a lot of sexual innuendo but less actual sex shown than in Bridgerton — here it’s kisses and then fade to black.
While the hair tragically hangs free most of the time or has weird, sad interpretations of period-esque styles, the costumes have much stronger and more obvious 16th-century styling. The shapes are all there, and it’s not the stripped-down boring look that’s so common in recent productions. Rich fabrics and trimmings are used, including metallics, beading, slashing, piping, and all the good stuff you’d actually find in the era. Granted, I can tell a lot of it is stuff produced today in India, but it’s not obviously sari fabric, it’s the cool materials and trims I’d splash out on if I were making a new court gown :)

My biggest complaint is that the costumes are mixing and matching elements from all over the 16th century, especially the later decades, and jamming them together for what should still be leaning towards the 1540s fashions.

While the gowns in My Lady Jane have this neckline and skirt shape, only a couple make any attempt at that big sleeve, and when they do, it’s just a skimpy bit of fabric.

That style is better than Jane’s wedding dress, which has no sleeves, just a shrug! At least it’s not powder blue like in Elizabeth: The Golden Age…
There are some fabric clunkers too, like this ugly floral. I know y’all enjoy snarking the shitty costumes, plus I was having trouble screencapping to get pix of things I did like, so go ahead and whine!
Taste issues aside, the costumes generally work within the context of the story. Costume designer Stephanie Collie told Nerdist:
“We’ve worked really hard to give everyone an arc in their story. Jane [and her family] start off very poor to begin with and they don’t have much money. But Lady Frances (Jane’s mother) is trying to put on a wealthy front, but her dresses are probably from 10 years ago. Then when she gets to the palace, suddenly she’s got all these riches, all the jewels, and all the fabrics, so we made her clothing elaborate for that … I think of them as clothes, not costumes, and that the characters should try and wear them in a way that is believable.”

When thing get fancy, they get pretty pretty princess fancy a la…
In a Geek Girl Authority interview, show runner Gemma Burgess was excited to point out one bit of costume recycling:
“In Episode 105 where there’s a ball, Jane wears an incredible gown and we were talking to our costume designer and we said, ‘Y’know, we want it to feel like the moment in Shakespeare in Love when Gwyneth Paltrow wears the incredible gold ruff and she came back a couple weeks later and said, ‘I found the ruff.’ We were like, ‘Oh, you got it made?’ She said, ‘No, I found the ACTUAL ruff. In a costume house.’ And so, Jane is literally wearing the Gwyneth Paltrow ruff from Shakespeare in Love.”
Nevermind that ruffs weren’t worn in Lady Jane Grey’s day, especially not big wired ruffs like in the 1590s. It’s pretty ¯_(ツ)_/¯
And because we’re always entertained when actors talk about wearing corsets in frock flicks, compare, first Emily Bader, who plays Jane, telling Variety how challenging the costumes were because it took an hour to get dressed each day, but it did help her get into character:
“You can’t be slouchy [in a corset]. You can’t have bad posture, which for me, was a blessing. Because I can just hear my mom being like, ‘Emily! Shoulders back!’
Veteran Anna Chancellor, who plays her mom, was more complimentary and also funny in this interview:
“It is incredible to have these costumes made for you by some of the top dressmakers. I had a lot of say, I could discuss my costume with the designer. You can bring in paintings, to show what you would like, what you think would be good. I love clothes, history and paintings. It is all great and they even make your own shoes (would you believe that!) and underwear — corsets that fit you. It gives you an insight into what it would have been like for people living then.”
“The difficult bit is being in your corset, your dress and trying to go to the toilet! You’ve got your mike underneath your costume and then you realise you have dropped it in the tiny little porter cabin. There are times when your skirts with their hoops are so wide that you cannot go through the door. You’d have to ask your mate to stand at the door, so you can leave the cubicle door open when using the toilet. The grander you are, the posher your character is, the more stuff you’ve got on.”
Mind you, there’s little evidence for women wearing separate corsets (stays) in this period, not until the very end of the 16th century. Instead, the gowns would have the structure built into them, not with boning but with layers of fabric and careful fitting. That’s too much to ask for a theatrical production (hell, I won’t do it myself to wear at a party!), but I have to mention it before some pedant goes on about it in the comments.
The men’s costumes deserve a nod because, while they don’t stick to the precise fashion timeline either, they do have a solid late 16th-century style. The men’s costumes are used to good effect for the story — there are codpiece jokes:

Guildford’s younger brother Stan is a silly fop in appropriately silly foppish suits:
High and mighty Lord Seymour is always in dark colors, like this insanely gorgeous gold print:
And while Guildford is a cliché bad boy in black (and with his doublet open, ugh), I like the historical touch of those little silver aglets (metal tips) on the ties attaching his sleeves to his doublet.

So if you can possibly stand a comedic fantasy take on Tudor history, kick back with My Lady Jane. Otherwise, just keep rewatching Elizabeth R. I’m happy to live in a world where I can enjoy both!
Find this frock flick at:
I’m relieved to hear there’s not a ton of sex scenes. I’m so tired of them, I was avoiding this thinking I’d get ten minutes into it and then be irritated. Maybe I’ll watch this after all, it sounds kinda nuts in a fun way.
Watched 3/4 episodes and not sure I’ll continue. I think the book sounds better…
Managed episode one and thoroughly enjoyed it. It isn’t taking itself too seriously like Bridgerton and the sarcastic voice overs were actually quite funny. It seemed to embrace it’s own absurdity which is refreshing. I usually find the buggering around of our history frustrating AF but in this case it was quite Blackadderish
I couldn’t tell if Reign did the same thing With Mary Queen of Scots? I would like another season of Becoming Elizabeth with a sympathetic/neutral portrayal of Mary I! I liked that Mary Queen of Scots was portrayed as a strong, but flawed character! Reign also presented us with strong female friendships! I hope to see more portrayals of genuine female friendships onscreen! None of the outdated “I’m Not Like Other Girls!” nonsense!
Oh, okay. Anna Chancellor – that makes me want to watch. She’s always great!
She has that effect on all of us who hear the nickname ‘Duckface’ and scream “That lady is a SWAN!” at poor, unsuspecting television screens.
I just love the print of that first dress, the one at the top of article, gold on blue,but it isn’t Tudor. Not even close. Sari fabric?
I like the ugly floral hangs head in shame
A KNIGHT’S TALE requires no defence for those of us who love it, but as food for thought one would like to point out that while the film in question is gleefully anachronistic in style, in terms of plot the story would have been pretty darned recognisable to Medievals (That plot being ‘Poor knight gets into trouble while making a name for himself, gets away with it because he makes a friend more powerful than his enemies, and all for tbe love of a Fair Lady’).
Meanwhile MY LADY JANE goes straight into DOCTOR WHO territory … honestly, that revelation only makes the latter show more appealing (I might actually have to watch it now).
I am more offended by the double finger gesture than the color of King Edward’s actor.
Jane was a strong willed, opinionated and articulate young woman, and probably hard to live with. She was her father’s favorite child and according to outside observers close to her mother. Frances Grey was a small, pretty woman who tried to be a good wife and mother by contemporary standards. Little is known of Guildford but Jane had no objection to him as a husband. They were not ‘soul mates’ but they seem to have developed a certain affection for each other. Jane was terrified of John Dudley, that was her entire ovjection to her marriage.
Watch the show – there’s a point to it, making it funny in context (& out).