Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Kodie Bird True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

herbqedi Costume epics are not my favorite genre. From the days of my youth and thrice re-watched, young Bess remains one of the significant exceptions to this rule. Jean Simmons gives one of her best-ever screen performances and that says quite a bit. The costumes, music, editing and supporting cast are all topnotch. The resiliency of spirit of the orphan-of-the-throne as-it-were is shown brilliantly as told through the eyes of Kay Walsh as Mrs. Ashley and Cecil Kellaway as Mr. Parry. Leo G. Carroll is also memorable as the stodgy Mr. Mums. If I were young Bess, Stewart Granger as the swashbuckling Thomas Seymour would have swept me off my feet as well. I doubt, however, that I would have been able to find the backbone that Ms. Simmons had to cut her ties to him. Then, the way the actress portrays the distanced heir's determination to be a good step-sister but always self-aware, was truly magnificent. Although the events are told in "and then" episodic fashion, the movie is edited smartly enough and moves well enough that it avoids feeling episodic. To this day, Young Bess remains one of my favorite costume dramas of all time.

blue-7 It has been a long time arriving but "Young Bess" is finally available on the DVD format as of August 2010 through the Warner Bros. Archive program. These are made on demand discs that usually come from the best current material on the title. In other words the film has not been digitally restored as is often the case for new DVD pressings. In the case of "Young Bess" it comes from the material that would be used for screenings on Turner's Classic Movies and in this case it is a very satisfactory presentation. "Young Bess" boasts Technicolor cinematography by two time Oscar winner Charles Rosher (Oscars for Murnau's "Sunrise" and "The Yearling"). The color on the disc does justice to the original film. "Young Bess" is that rare film in which direction, screenplay, cast, costumes, musical score, sets all come together to provide a superior film experience. Jean Simmon's performance as the young Elizabeth is one of her two or three best roles. If you love this film as I do then you'll want to order it at wbshop.com and you may also find other titles to add to your collection

theowinthrop How many films have been made about Alfred the Great, the only English monarch with the nickname "the Great". Only one, made in the 1960s I believe. There is, to my knowledge no film about William the Conqueror and the Battle of Hastings, although there are at least six versions of Shakespeare's MACBETH (who was William's contemporary monarch in Scotland!).There is one film about the Normans of William's time - THE WARLORD (1965) with Charleton Heston and Richard Boone. It's a very good film, but it never shows William. No films about St. Edward the Confessor, Ethelred the Unready, William Rufus, or Hardecanute (remember the Danish Viking ruler of England who whipped the disobedient waves of the Channel). The first major English monarch who is made the subject of a big film is Henry II, the role played (both times) by Peter O'Toole in BECKET and THE LION IN WINTER. Significantly his two roles stem from two major plays of the 1950s and 1960s. His son Richard I ("the Lion-Hearted") appears in THE LION IN WINTER, but earlier films included THE CRUSADES, ROBIN HOOD, IVANHOE, KING RICHARD AND THE CRUSADERS, and ROBIN AND MARION. Richard is really the first English monarch to appear in more than just a couple of films - but notice, even though he is a central figure the films tend to deal with the Third Crusade he helped to lead, or the machinations of his brother "Prince John", or the possibly fictional figure of Robin, Earl of Locksley (known as "Robin Hood"). While THE CRUSADES and KING RICHARD AND THE CRUSADERS deal with him and Berengaria (his wife), and try to build a romantic and chivalric triangle between them and Saladin, the actual sexual interests of Richard seem to be closer to the performance of Anthony Hopkins in THE LION IN WINTER. Oddly there is no film about King John and his failure to control his nobles (not even a film version of Shakespeare's historic play, although a television movie version was made starring Leonard Rossiter as John in the 1980s - but the BBC were filming the entire series of the plays). Nor of the fights led by Simon De Montford against Henry III that led to the creation of the House of Commons. Occasional films pick up on a few monarchs - BRAVEHEART giving a look at Edward I and his witless son; Christopher Marlowe's EDWARD II showing what happened to the witless son; CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT being Orson Welles's take on Henry IV and Prince Hal (but concentrating on Sir John Falstaff); and both Olivier and Branagh dealing with HENRY V in two startling great and different interpretations. Then there is another biggie: Old Crookback - RICHARD III in Olivier's production set in the 1470s and 1480s, or the version by Sir Ian McKellan set in the 1930s, or TOWER OF London with Rathbone (a distinctive Richard) abetted by Karloff, and then a version with Vincent Price (who was Clarence in TOWER OF London).This brings us to the champs of British Royals in film - the Tudors. Henry VII always pops up in the Richard films (he has to - he wins at Bosworth Field). Yet no film specifically about Henry VII has been made. Not so Henry VIII, Edward VI, Jane Gray, and Elizabeth (not much for "Bloody Mary") though. THE PRIVATE LIFE OF HENRY VIII, THE SIX WIVES OF HENRY VIII, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, ANNE OF A THOUSAND DAYS, THE PRINCE AND THE PAUPER (at least 3 versions, including one called CROSSED SWORDS), YOUNG BESS, SIX DAY QUEEN, ELIZABETH, MARY OF Scotland (Mary, Queen of Scots, was Henry VIII's niece), MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS, THE VIRGIN QUEEN, THE SEA HAWK, FIRE OVER ENGLAND, THE PRIVATE LIVES OF ELIZABETH AND ESSEX / ELIZABETH THE QUEEN, Shakespeare IN LOVE. No other British Royal Family has been as chronicled in films as the Tudors. Think of it. Charles I was the center of so much turmoil that he eventually was executed after a trial following a series of Civil Wars he lost to Oliver Cromwell. Only one film about him was made - and a bad one - CROMWELL (emphasizing the victor of those wars). But the Tudors generate more interest - there is more skulduggery and treason in their reigns than most, and England becomes a great nation (and a cultural fountainhead) at the end of it all. YOUNG BESS is a small joy - it deals with the forgotten career of Admiral Thomas Seymour, uncle of King Edward VI, and would-be romantic wooer of Princess Elizabeth. He also was the last of Katherine Parr's three husbands (Henry VIII being the second). It is the second time that Laughton plays the great monarch, and the terrible fury of the man is shown in two shots showing his hand caressing the neck of Elizabeth's doomed mother Anne Boleyn, and later caressing the neck of the doomed Catherine Howard in the same way. Most interesting is the casting of Jean Simmons and Steward Granger as Princess Elizabeth and Admiral Tom Seymour. They were married at the time, so their scenes together have an extra-something to them (like the Burtons some ten years later). YOUNG BESS is not accurate history, but it is good film making. You will view this film with satisfaction.

Hans C. Frederick There really isn't much more that I can add that hasn't been said in previous reviews.Yes,it's historically quite inaccurate with regard to :a.)Tom Seymour's character.b.)The fact that Elizabeth wasn't at all interested in him,romantically.c.)The way Tom Seymour was sent to execution,not at the instigation of his brother,but as a result of his own (failed)machinations.What I found most interesting,however,was the device of having a real-life husband and wife performing the roles of an erotically charged romantic situation.It adds an extra depth,and degree of verisimilitude to what is going on on-screen. Regarding the production,see my comments on "Diane."They apply here equally.