A few weeks ago we rented “The Other Boleyn Girl.” Well I should clarify and say *I* rented “The Other Boleyn Girl.” Tom said he wasn’t into historical romances. How the main chick getting her head chopped off by order of her husband is considered a romance, only a man could understand. And frankly such a man scares me…but I married him, so I digress. :P

So he was doing his computer-y thing and I was watching my movie. It was fantastic and I’m definitely reading the book. This gave a completely new angle to the Henry VIII saga. Mary Boleyn (Anne’s sister) has always had such a small footnoted place in history. She was a lover of Henry VIII, believed to have had up to two of his children, and was sister of Anne Boleyn. And that’s all history tells us? Are they freaking kidding?

There are stories there. And though “The Other Boleyn Girl” is historical fiction, I would not be at all surprised if it’s closer to the actual facts than most “based on a true story” movies we see now. There is a difference in “the exact facts” and “the true story.”

At the end of the day no one really cares the exact words that were exchanged. (Unless we’re in a court of law where such measures of precision are vital.) What we care about is the essence, the basic truth. So this was what confused me about “The Other Boleyn Girl” being considered historical fiction. I kept waiting for the “fiction” part, because as far as I’m concerned the story was true in every way that matters to people.

Sometimes I wonder if we get so caught up in a “just the facts, Ma’am” mentality that we can’t remember why we wanted the facts in the first place. Especially since sometimes “just the facts” obscures the truth, as it seems to have done for centuries in the case of Mary Boleyn and her sister.