‘The Other Boleyn Girl’ transforms Tudor history into a garish soap opera

In theaters

THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL directed by Justin Chadwick, written by Peter Morgan, based on Philippa Gregory’s novel, 115 minutes, rated PG-13.

The new Justin Chadwick movie, “The Other Boleyn Girl,” follows sisters Mary and Anne Boleyn in a film that easily could have been called “The Other Woman,” with all that implies.

The film is a full-on Tudor soap opera – and a reasonably entertaining one at that, particularly if you prefer historical trash over historical truth, the latter of which the movie barely attempts to offer. Peter Morgan (“The Queen”) based his script on Philippa Gregory’s 2002 novel, which itself only used fact to bolster its wild run into the velvet walls of potboiler fiction.

Like the book, the movie version tarts up history to a feverish level, amplifying its more salacious elements in an effort to wedge sex, lust and sibling rivalry within the frequent machinations, court upheavals, betrayals and beheadings that came during the rule of the infamous King Henry VIII (Eric Bana) in 16th-century England.

At the start, we see the Boleyn girls, along with their brother George, as young children playing in a meadow. They couldn’t be a happier, tighter group. Butterflies should be this light and buoyant.

Of course, butterflies sometimes get pinned.

Their parents, Lady Elizabeth (Kristin Scott Thomas) and Sir Thomas Boleyn (Mark Rylance), watch the children play while Sir Thomas notes aloud how special Anne is. What he sees in her is opportunity, one that will lift the Boleyns to a new level of status and power. This comes years later when Anne, as a saucy young adult (Natalie Portman), is put forth by her father and uncle (David Morrissey) to offer the king what his wife, Catherine of Aragon (Ana Torrent), hasn’t been able to give him – a male heir.

It all goes disastrously, with Anne failing to work her magic and quickly being sent away to France to learn how to be a woman. And so along comes Mary – sweet, good-natured, very married Mary (Scarlett Johansson) – who becomes the king’s mistress and bears him a son. Trouble is, when Anne returns, she’s a new woman, one who now is so fetching to the king that he decides he must get her into bed, even if it means kicking befuddled Mary to the curb, beheading bitter Catherine and casting England into religious turmoil in the process.

As cheap as the movie’s aspirations are, it certainly doesn’t look cheap – the costumes and sets are top-notch, as is the talent. While Johansson is stuck with the less-showy role, she does reveal her mettle in key scenes, such as when she marches through a crowd of condemning onlookers to grab Anne’s newborn child, Elizabeth, who one day would prove that the king didn’t need a male heir.

Bana is fine as Henry, though portraits reveal that the original Henry hardly had Bana’s pin-up potential. And as for Portman, well, she’s so good at balancing the quest for the power and position that corrupted her relationship with her sister and ultimately led to her own undoing by the sword, that she turns out to be the best reason to see the movie.

Grade: B-

On DVD

LIONS FOR LAMBS directed by Robert Redford, written by Matthew Michael Carnahan, 90 minutes, rated R.

Robert Redford’s chit-chatty war movie, “Lions for Lambs,” is frustrated by a lot of things – not the least of which is our national complacency on troubling domestic and foreign issues – and it’s not going to take it anymore, certainly not lying down. In fact, it’s going to sit down in comfortable leather chairs and have good discussions about it.

That’ll show ’em.

Actually, it might have, particularly if the movie had wrapped its compelling arguments and observations about the sorry state of the world around a movie that equally was as compelling.

Redford directs from Matthew Michael Carnahan’s script, and what he mines is a film that cuts between three connected story lines.

The first involves Meryl Streep’s Janine Roth, a cable television news reporter who has been invited into the office of Republican Sen. Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise) to discuss a new military operative in Afghanistan that he designed. What Irving offers Roth is an exclusive on the story with full access to him as details emerge. Of course, should she write the story, which is laced with moral and ethical dilemmas, what she might be giving him is a greased pole into the White House.

Meanwhile, in a dull subplot, Redford himself plays the concerned professor Malley, who is trying to reach out to a bright student (Andrew Garfield) who has the potential to change the world if only he would tap into that potential. In the third subplot are Malley’s former students, Ernest (Michael Pena) and Arian (Derek Luke), two soldiers sandbagged in the mountains of Afghanistan thanks to Irving’s new operative, which leaves each in a grave situation, to say the least.

Working hard to bring all of these elements together, Redford grinds away. Carnahan’s labored script hampers him, but he does manage to generate interest in the scenes between Streep and Cruise, which are the movie at its most interesting – and not necessarily because of anything they’re saying. Since the script has the refrigerated, academic air of rhetoric, it puts us on the outside of the movie, where we watch the real show unfolding here – who is upstaging whom? Streep or Cruise?

Since that’s the only surprise the movie offers, we’ll leave it for you.

Grade: C

WeekinRewind.com is the site for Bangor Daily News film critic Christopher Smith’s blog, video podcasts, iTunes portal and archive of hundreds of movie reviews. Smith’s reviews appear Mondays, Fridays and weekends in Lifestyle, as well as on bangordailynews.com. He may be reached at Christopher@weekinrewind.com.