Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Kirandeep Yoder The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Lela The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Bekky_Boo I have got this film on DVD and have watched it so many times that I know most of the words. The continuously gorgeous Rufus Sewell plays the king himself. He plays the part to perfection. He shows the audience the trauma of decision making for a king can be, trying to please all people and all religions, while trying to please his own family and court/ministers plus dealing with huge problems like money and religion.Helen Mcrory (Barbra Villiers) plays her character VERY VERY well. She is cunning and conniving towards the queen, it shows that she (and other women) can easily make the king fold through being a woman, which of course is not expected in Kings.The film does tend to focus on his mistresses and sex life, however this is the entire idea of the story, if you want a film about what life in general was like around this time then research it. The whole idea of this story was to try to understand his emotions, seeing what made him tick, trying to view Charles as a person rather than a king.It does skip a couple of scenes but obviously what the directors have skipped is not important, you have to just guess that time has moved on and so have people around Charles. Or the imagination is up to you I suppose. Its definitely worth watching this film and a good choice to buy this film.

George Parker "The Last King" is a 3 hour, two part miniseries from the BBC which traces the life of King Charles II who ruled from 1649 until his death in 1685. The upside of this film includes its sumptuous appointments and excellent cast. Well directed and crafted, the film is engaging, passionate, and delivers a strong sense of Charles II, his Monarchy, and the period. On the downside, however, the film is very difficult to follow given the absence of any prologue or didactics, the mixing of sir names and titles, and the presumption of some knowledge of the history of the time. The film squanders time on the sexual intrigues and personal relationships of the womanizing King while largely ignoring the more historical and profound matters of state. The Dutch Wars, for example, are barley mentioned while much time is spent on the machinations of one of his mistresses, Barbara Villiers making the film a bit more of a soap opera than a historical chronicle. Nonetheless, this elegant film is a must see for anyone interested in King Charles II and a should see for those into stories of the history of England's monarchy. No one does English period films better than the Brits and this one has production value equal to any similar films from Hollywood. (Note - the DVD I watched has no CC's or Subtitles with much dialogue spoken in whispers or thick English, French, of Portuguese accents). B

-628 You cannot help but be impressed by the production values of this potentially great BBC series. However, the scenes jump quickly, characters come and go quickly and overall the story is hard to follow unless you read up on the history of the reign of Charles II. Either the editing has been so severe that the continuity has been damaged or the producers have assumed that viewers are fully aware of the history. Either way, a narrative would have helped to fill in the considerable gaps.That said, the sets are impressive and the acting is first-class. With better continuity, this could have been an impressive tele-movie. In the form that it was presented on TV, it just misses the mark unless you already know your history.

kevinsspam2002 First, those of you who watched this as a three-hour movie with 30 commercial breaks must have seen a royally butchered cut as the R2 DVD is four hour-long episodes.Second, those who claim that the BBC are not as good as they used to be are, perhaps, not quite fair, but not totally wrong either. I imagine they are comparing Charles II to Elizabeth R; I, Claudius; or The Six Wives of Henry VIII, and yes, it's not as good as they were. But then, neither were the other series the BBC were making at that time.But if such comparisons are not entirely fair, they are also inevitable. Elizabeth, Six Wives and Claudius were televised plays. They worked due to the interaction of great scripts and great acting. The costumes were icing on the cake; the direction and camera work were capable but never drew attention to themselves. These teleplays continued a dramatic tradition traceable back to Shakespeare. They were *plays*.Charles II, on the other hand, as well as other historical dramas done by the BBC these days, has abandoned its dramatic lineage for cinematic aspirations, especially as technology becomes more affordable. I don't consider this a bad thing, though I do think it failed, just as many teleplays of the golden era failed in their attempts. There's nothing wrong with bringing direction, camerawork, production design, etc. to the fore. Unfortunately, the scripts suffer, at least in this case. The viewer is innundated with flashy techniques like handheld cameras which achieve nothing other than making the show look modern, or a seven-minute long single take near the end of the final episode which contained about three minutes of dialogue that actually advanced the plot or developed the character in meaningful ways.Is it worth watching? Yes. But don't compare it the greatest costume dramas ever made. Take it for what is, and it's a fine drama.