Rowe said:
Speaking of which, when and how did Tussauds get hold of Warwick Castle? I've never known the story.
Ooh I can answer this one!
The Earls of Warwick started to lose quite a bit of their fortune in the 20th Century, until they got to a point where a lot of the armour, arms and archives of the castle were being sold off. The Earls son convinced him to sell it in 1978.
The thing is, Warwick Castle hadn't even been a 'castle' for the last 300/400 years, instead it had been a stately home designed to entertain and amaze the guests of the Greville family, so it was decided by the Earl to sell the site to an 'entertainments company' as opposed to the Trust or English Heritage. Both of these public bodies put in much larger bids than Tussauds, but the Earl let Tussauds purchase the site for £1.5m. When Tussauds took over the site they spent an incredible amount of money renovating the building and grounds, a programme which would have been near impossible under Trust or Heritage budgets. Since then Tussauds/Merlin have vowed to commit at least £250,000 a year to restoration.
--
In terms of visiting the castle, it all depends on what you want from the place, there is a lot of entertainment, yes, but there is also a lot of history - Warwick Castle has more historical tours per day then most Trust houses, and a lot more free tours than places like Chatsworth House. There are also about 30 interior rooms to explore, some as early as 14th Century - and all in fantastic condition.
It really does have an amazing history, and there is easily enough to spend a whole day there - just to do all the shows and tours would take 4 1/2 hours, and that's before the 3 main interiors, the Gaol, the towers, the grounds, the Dungeon and the Dragon Tower!
I would definitely recommend it...but I am a little biased!