25 thoughts on “The Great – Recap Episodes 1 & 2

  1. Holy shit, I might actually check this out now that I know the costumes aren’t the pits. Thanks ladies!

  2. There is just so much wrong,yet so much right!Nowhere near the haloed pedestal of virsimilitude, but seems like the designer clearly knew the business.Retain the silhouette,then scrape elements for desired effect.Those frock suits on Peter are gorgeous.Is Charity Wakefield playing Peter’s mistress?
    That golden robe de cour style dress depresses me though.It hurts me to look at it,as it was exactly how to imagined the live action Belle(Beauty and the Beast)would dress for the showstopper ball scene.To rub salt in my wounds it is worn by Elle Fanning,the live action Aurora😥.
    We all love you FF,but please add a warning before the scary stuff.That image of Peter’s mom all decked up in all her decaying glory was a jump scare!I literally dropped my phone.

    1. Yes, it’s Charity Wakefield! Sorry about the corpse, that didn’t bother us as much as the animal stuff (altho’ that’s not really shown, just implied) :(

  3. Weirdly this looks so much fun. Love the teal dress , but it might be overkill for the office.

  4. For me, it was a giant ‘no’. I stuck it out for the first two episodes, and then quit. It wasn’t the anachronisms, I just couldn’t bring myself to watch the animal abuse and ignorance of everyone around Peter. The man is clearly not right in the head, but everyone ignores it because he’s the head of the country and he’s fun.

    1. I feel you on the animal abuse, but the whole point of the show is that Peter IS so over the top awful and his court so poisoned that it makes you completely ok with Catherine plotting to murder him.

      You could argue that what we know of Peter III’s actual character was largely overwritten by the pro-Catherinian propaganda machine who made him out to be nothing short of a monster, but you could also argue that there was likely a kernel of truth to those accusations of mental instability and cruelty.

      1. Oh, no, I really want him dead. I skipped to the last episode to see if he had been removed from the throne (if we went by the actual history), but he was still alive. I might return when I know for sure he’s going to die.

  5. I read an interview where Nicholas Hoult said his major preparation technique was just asking himself “how would Olivia Colman do this,” and it TOTALLY shows.
    My biggest peeve of the show thus far has been wondering whether or not Elle Fanning is wearing chemises under her corsets, especially in her shirt-skirt combinations, because I can’t always tell, and my nipples start sympathy chafing!

  6. I’m thrilled that you ladies are watching this! I’ve been loving it and a big part of that love is seeing how well the costumes fit and the hair is mostly up. Can’t wait to hear more of your thoughts on the show.

  7. Oh Charity Wakefield! I didn’t realize she was in this! Have you ever done a WCW for her? Or has she not done enough frock flicks yet to warrant one?

    1. She’s getting close — just a handful so far & all small roles. I usually wait till someone’s had starring roles or they’ve been in a dozen or more costume dramas. But we were all pleased to see her again in The Great!

  8. I think that I know how to make that cabbage leaf trim. If you already think you’ve thought of this, and passed, I apologize in advance.

    Make a tube of materiel, then feed it over a string (rope). Ruche up the tube to desired rucheiness, and sew the edge (to the tape, in the picture). So, they made two tubes, and sewed them to the the center tape.

    It occurs to me as I write, that a really nice way of doing this would be to make the tube seam on the outside, and stitch the seam to the tape, which would avoid any compression to the ruching.

    I can think of a few other variations, but I’ll leave that to you.

    I decided not to watch this precisely because I read there was animal torture– off-screen or not, I just can’t anymore. So thank you for all the screenshots.

  9. You have to check your colour profile settings because it was not this dark on our screen.

  10. Yesss. I’m loving this show. There are some issues with the costuming, but weirdly I’m ok with most of it, since this is clearly not really meant to be a historically accurate rendition of these events. I have noticed that they seem to be going more for the 1770s in dress styles and hair than the actual period. Although the actual period is a little smudgy anyways (Catherine married Peter in 1745, but he didn’t become Emperor until 1762 and that’s when the coup happened), so really it’s hard to pin anything down enough to make a judgement anyways. But the gowns are so well made and pretty it’s hard to care if they’re not right for any particular year or whatever. And I actually loved that peasant blouse/skirt combo Catherine wore. When I saw it I screamed at the tv, “This looks like something someone would wear in 1861!” but then I just loved it. I want to wear it.

  11. I’m really excited about this! Also, I love Gwilym Lee (Grigor), he’s hilarious, and looking amazing in a wig.

  12. I really wanted to love this show. I really did. I find the idea of making historical shows with modern language and humor great (sic) and hilarious. But while it’s funny when the 18th century folks use f*cks, it’s not funny when they can’t get the basic facts right (like, Peter the Great WAS NOT Peter III’s dad! Women in the Russian court could read!). Idk, it may be a trigger thing for me, but as a Pole, I don’t like English / American shows about central and eastern Europe being made in the vein of “Ooh, look at them, so barbarous and backward!” Argh. Kinda… colonial? Idk, but I sense a huge superiority complex there. Can’t they just make a show like that about Queen Victoria? :D

    1. I feel that the lack of awareness about foreign history is more about the general perception of the public than specific productions(they produce what the common folks consume),and Philippa Gregory is single handedly destroying every single English queen she can lay her hands on.Queen Victoria’s personal life was perhaps too simple though for such a depiction.Maybe Elizabeth I or Mary Tudor?
      But some productions like Reign are so messed up,they leave you wondering if they are treating history as comedy or outright satirizing historical dramas in general.

      1. That’s true. Because of those shitty movies, I am constantly questioning whether something is inaccurate on purpose or by accident. That being said, if getting the dates / historical figures wrong is supposed to be funny, then I don’t get this joke. :P

  13. I don’t mind the fictional animal violence so much (yes, it is unpleasant to watch, but at least it’s fake)
    I’m more concerned whether the furs they wear on occasion are fake or whether they murdered real animals to make costumes for a TV show (I really really hope it’s fake)

    Anybody know how current historical dramas handle the fur issue in general?

    1. Particularly concerned about the (rather ugly to booth) full fox stoles/sashes/whatever a couple of the ladies are wearing in a later episode.

  14. When you’re an archaeologist you get used to the human corpses.

    Squicked me out when I was a fresh-faced first year undergrad though. Now I just try and treat it like any other archaeological artefact/object, with a dose of extra gentle handling and respect.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: