Reign : Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own ending?

Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own ending?

I know it would be a challenge. History buffs would disagree. I just don't think it's absolutely necessary for this to end in Mary's death.

Re: Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own endin

Well considering how many years it took for her to actually be executed, I'm not sure the show will last that long. Mary's adult son succeeds Elizabeth on the English throne after all so she'll be around for several decades yet. I have to wonder though given the similarities between Mary's historical death and the reasons given for her execution, and the way they wrote Lola out with her execution… if they were compensating for the fact that there was simply too much time that needed to pass to snuff Mary, so Lola got the axe… in a similar way with similar accusations (involvement in a plot to kill Elizabeth) literally and figuratively!

Re: Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own endin

I think REIGN should go on even without Mary because they could focus on stories at French Court and English Court. Elizabeth's many years were exciting and so was Catherine de Medici's and her frail sons. I have heard they want to kill off Bash, which I think is a huge mistake because he could have many stories such as going back to French Court to avenge his mother's death at Catherine's hand, etc. There is longevity possibilities in this series and they could even have Mary seen in flashbacks etc.

Re: Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own endin

Well, other than the fact that the entire premise of the show since the start has been based on Mary Queen of Scots. I stand by Mary not being executed in the lifespan of this show simply because she doesn't die until she's been married two more times and had a son who is an adult. There are a lot of stories that could come out of two more husbands and a son without killing off the one person the show is based on.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own ending?

With Bash now having magical seer powers and the show already having had a prophet in Nostradamus…hasn't everyone already realized that this is an alternate take on history ?

It was following the basic skeletal structure of history for a while (weaving in and out with its own take on the real life versions of these characters and cheating how and WHEN things played out here and there), but that shipwreck and Lola's death seemed to be a real turning point in the show's narrative (or at least, the show was showing more of its hand finally).

Mary's being built up as the ultimate hero of this story. She MAY still get beheaded in her early 40s even on this show – maybe they'll write it as her fate being inescapable even WITH psychics on her side – but it seems like she'll have more of an overall victory than just her son sitting on the English throne when all's said and done. She MIGHT live to old age and avoid execution, she might even dethrone Elizabeth and take England ! Anything can happen in this series and that's become part of the fun of it. It's a divegent timeline.












Re: Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own endin

"Anything can happen" is not true. The show has made it very clear that while it is overall not accurate, they are sticking to the big details. That's why Francis still died, though his exact death changed. Its why Mary will have her 3 husbands. Its why she will be executed in the series finale, or a little postnote will be on screen telling us that that happened.

Re: Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own endin

I absolutely 100% agree with what you have said about "anything can happen" not being true. The show runner even said that they would not be digressing from the big details, explaining why they were killing Francis off. Yet you could not for anything pound that into the heads of people who insisted the show wasn't historically accurate anyway so they could do anything they wanted and why kill Francis off. Well the show runner fricken just TOLD you why!

It's like Titanic. It was basically fiction. The major players were "based" on real people. The major events like the decisions leading to the collision with the iceberg, and the accident itself, etc, were there, and the boat still sank. But the stories and events particular to the movie largely were fiction and even involved fictionalized characters. There was an unbelievable amount of fangirl attention paid to a "J. Dawson" grave in the Titanic cemetery in Halifax when the movie came out.

Re: Why not allow the show to diverge from history and have is own endin

I don't think it's an alternate timeline so much as a broad strokes version of history.It's hard to see how they'll end it, maybe they'll try and end on an upbeat note with Mary's marriage to Darnell and ignore the fact that she gets rejected by her own people and spends the last nearly 20 years of her life as Elizabeth's prisoner because it's better than what the Scots would have done to her, that her son won't even know her and won't even be particularly bothered that she's executed, mainly because it leaves him next in line for the English throne.Mary probably deserves a kinder fate, just as Catherine probably deserves a bigger comeuppance than living a long life only to die a failure with all her sons failing to produce heirs, the last wrecking her schemes for the future of the throne and provoking his own murder, and France falling into the hands of her bitter enemies.But sometimes history just sucks.
Top