Nikolaj Coster-Waldau has defended the BBC’s historical drama about William the Conqueror after viewers branded it ‘utterly unrealistic’.
The Game of Thrones star, who is best known for playing Jaime Lannister in HBO’s fantasy epic, has dipped his toes into the Medieval period again as he plays the Duke of Normandy in King & Conqueror.
Starring alongside him, James Norton plays Harold of Wessex who comes face to face with William after the country crowns Edward the Confessor (Eddie Marsan) as King.
Following its debut on Sunday night TV fans declared the 11th century tale depicting the lead up to the Battle of Hastings in 1066 as a ‘load of nonsense’ that was as historically accurate as ‘Carry On Henry’.
Speaking to Metro prior to the show’s release, Nikolaj set the record straight on the show’s ‘artistic license’.
‘This is a work of fiction. It’s fiction based on reality in a true story,’ the 55-year-old said.
‘It’s a fictionalised account of what could have happened. It’s like the most famous example, Titanic. We don’t know how that ended, and that’s what the whole fun is, the journey.’
The Danish actor, who directed episode five of the eight-part drama, went on to claim that the show is still relevant for audiences today, however.
‘Unfortunately, the similarities are so obvious… the main conflicts here are no different than every conflict you open the paper and see. It’s power fighting over power for our control of land.
What did Metro think of King & Conqueror?
Our TV reporter Milo Pope shares his thoughts on the show’s ‘artistic license’…
When it comes to period pieces like King & Conqueror, the issue of historical accuracy can become a very slippery slope.
The eight-part series clearly depicts real-life people and battles, and so with that there comes a certain level of responsibility in being true to that period of time.
Following the show’s release on Sunday, it was certainly no surprise to me that that viewers were frustrated with the dialogue choices and fictional additions to the story, especially with the deaths of major historical figures.
And while I do sympathise with the show’s creators – this was nearly 1,000 years ago, nobody can produce something that is 100% true – the artistic license King & Conqueror takes frustratingly pulls you out of the story completely at times.
The creators have maintained that they wanted to make this for a modern audience, but comparing it to something like Game of Thrones that features dragons and the walking dead, The HBO series bizarrely feels like it captures the Medieval time period more successfully.
There are some standout moments in this BBC series, and I personally loved seeing a story about Medieval British history on the big screen, but I believe fans are right in saying that this is a ‘big missed opportunity’.
‘It’s using whatever means that you can, whether it means lying, using religion. Whatever. That way we haven’t really evolved that much. We seem to be repeating.
‘I’ve been asked a lot about how do you think people walked and talked back then? I think they pretty much walked the way we do now. We’re not not that different from that I think that explains why we keep repeating past mistakes.’
Discussing King & Conqueror’s similarities with Game of Thrones, he added: ‘Clearly George Martin was inspired by this time. He was inspired by the visuals, like William of Normandy.
‘I wasn’t aware of that, to be honest, the first time I saw it, but when I saw my armour I thought that’s going to get people talking.’
Also speaking to Metro, the show’s executive producer Kitty Kaletsky, who founded production company Rabbit Track Pictures alongside James Norton, said they didn’t want to ‘alienate audiences’.
‘The beauty of this period being quite so long ago, almost 1,000 years, is that there is on the one hand a wealth of literature that we could rely on… but there’s also a huge number of gaps.
‘For James and me, what we want to do is make really entertaining, really compelling drama and those gaps allowed us to take artistic license.
‘Our job is to tell the period story, but also to entertain. And if we had been entirely accurate, then every different camp would have been speaking a different language.
‘So we want to celebrate the story rather than alienate our audiences by by prioritising things that we didn’t feel were as important.’
Writing on X on the night of the show’s release, @CharlesWalsh315 said: ‘Why did the BBC screw up so badly with King and Conqueror? The TRUE story is one of the most captivating and dramatic episodes in all medieval history, there’s no need to inject loads of nonsense.
‘Carry On Henry’ was more historically accurate and immersive than this #bbc’
@historynvintage added: ‘Started watching King & Conqueror. Got 20 mins in & couldn’t watch anymore – dreadful script, so wooden, and let’s not get started with the inaccuracies. Plus the volume when people were talking was sooo quiet. Shame as great potential.’
Meanwhile, @brawndothebrave also said: ‘Vikings was a great example of how to create a realistic and engaging historical action drama. King & Conquerer is typical BBC nonsense and utterly unrealistic. Why do they always do this 🤦♂️’
King and Conqueror is available to stream on BBC iPlayer and continues on BBC One.
Got a story?
If you’ve got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@metro.co.uk, calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we’d love to hear from you.
