"King Charles III" (2017) - BBC Two Future History Film on Reign of Prince Charles

[Empress Merel]

"King Charles III" (2017) - BBC Two Future History Film on Reign of Prince Charles

So the BBC is filming a new tv series. The inventive drama sees the new king refuse to sign a controversial bill causing political chaos, rioting on the streets and a tank in front of Buckingham Palace.
The 90-minute one-off programme is based on the Laurence Olivier award-winning 2014 play of the same name.


Charlotte Riley is the spitting image of Kate Middleton filming King Charles III | Daily Mail Online

 

[Curryong]

I hope it's shown here in Australia eventually. Although it's quite a controversial piece I read a few reviews of the play this will be based on and it seems to have been enjoyable as well as thought-provoking.

 

[royal rob]

I hope so too Curryong it looks to be very interesting


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[eya]

Charlotte Riley transforms into Duchess of Cambridge for King Charles III | Daily Mail Online

Oliver Chris is Prince William's double during King Charles III shoot | Daily Mail Online

Actors playing Prince George and Princess Charlotte spotted on set of King Charles III | Daily Mail Online

King Charles III first look: Charlotte Riley stars as Kate Middleton in new royal drama

Kate Middleton to be played by Charlotte Riley on BBC 2 | Daily Mail Online

BBC Two’s one-off drama King Charles III will premiere on Wednesday May 10th at 9pm, it has been announced.

BBC Two Sets Premiere Date For 'King Charles III' - TVWise

Actors 'refused roles in King Charles III over fears for their knighthoods'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4464198/Actors-scared-losing-honours-royal-drama.html

"Actors refused roles in King Charles III over fears for their knighthoods"


"Featuring the Queen’s death, the ghost of Diana, Princess of Wales, and a full-blown constitutional crisis, a new drama from the normally deferential BBC is not for the faint-hearted. Nor, it seems, for actors harbouring a quiet ambition of one day appearing on the Queen’s honours lists."


https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/may/02/bbc-king-charles-iii-anger-drama


https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/t...show-drama-queen-funeral-prince-william-harry

The Queen's godson's lead role in royal TV shocker | Daily Mail Online

"The Earl of Harewood might be in trouble with his cousin, the Queen.
He has let his magnificent Yorkshire stately home, Harewood House, stand in for Buckingham Palace in the controversial new BBC drama, King Charles III."

​

"Charlotte Riley explains how she prepared to portray Kate Middleton in the Royal Drama King Charles III"

Charlotte Riley: 'There's a touch of Lady Macbeth in my version of Kate Middleton!'

 

[Curryong]

Whoever this actress is transforming herself into, it isn't Kate. She looks nothing like her.

 

[Empress Merel]

Charlotte Riley in costume as Princess Catherine on set of King Charles III in London

They really did cast an unattractive Harry. Should have given us Sam Heughan tbh.

 

[Marty91charmed]

Neither the acress who plays Kate is so similar imo. Very far-away from the real one. Where are the green eyes? Uhm.

 

[Mbruno]

So the BBC is filming a new tv series. The inventive drama sees the new king refuse to sign a controversial bill causing political chaos, rioting on the streets and a tank in front of Buckingham Palace.
The 90-minute one-off programme is based on the Laurence Olivier award-winning 2014 play of the same name.


Charlotte Riley is the spitting image of Kate Middleton filming King Charles III | Daily Mail Online

The original play by Sir Laurence Olivier has several constitutional inaccuracies. For example, Charles III couldn't dissolve parliament as he did in the play because the monarch was stripped of that power in 2011 when the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act went into force.

It is not out of the realm of possibility though to imagine a scenario as envisaged in the play where a political King Charles III clashes with the government and an ambitious Kate Middleton plots to fast-track William to the throne.

 

[miss whirley]

The original play by Sir Laurence Olivier has several constitutional inaccuracies. For example, Charles III couldn't dissolve parliament as he did in the play because the monarch was stripped of that power in 2011 when the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act went into force.

It is not out of the realm of possibility though to imagine a scenario as envisaged in the play where a political King Charles III clashes with the government and an ambitious Kate Middleton plots to fast-track William to the throne.

But if she's gone back to using her maiden name, why would she care if her ex-husband is fast tracked? Under that scenario wouldn't cunning Catherine want George on the throne?

 

[Curryong]

It sounds very Shakespearean. What about Camilla? Wouldn't she be equally cunning in making sure Charles keeps his throne?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I am tired of all these series. Victoria. Elizabeth. The Crown. And now Charles III. The first three named did not convince me. The Crown had superior couleur locale and fabulous scenery but lot of the casting were mistcasts, the storylines were weak and I had to fight against my sleep.

 

[Skippyboo]

I am tired of all these series. Victoria. Elizabeth. The Crown. And now Charles III. The first three named did not convince me. The Crown had superior couleur locale and fabulous scenery but lot of the casting were mistcasts, the storylines were weak and I had to fight against my sleep.

The first three at least had some historical facts they had to stick to. This one is pure fiction using the names of real people as characters.

 

[cepe]

The original play by Sir Laurence Olivier has several constitutional inaccuracies. For example, Charles III couldn't dissolve parliament as he did in the play because the monarch was stripped of that power in 2011 when the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act went into force.

It is not out of the realm of possibility though to imagine a scenario as envisaged in the play where a political King Charles III clashes with the government and an ambitious Kate Middleton plots to fast-track William to the throne.

The play isn't by Sir Laurence Oliver - it is written by Mike Bartlett.

It won the Laurence Olivier Award.

 

[Rudolph]

The BBC was last night accused of inflicting ‘deliberate pain’ on Prince Harry by dredging up an unfounded slur that he is not Prince Charles’s son.

The outrageous and discredited insinuation that Princess Diana’s lover James Hewitt is his father is repeated in the controversial BBC2 drama King Charles III, to be screened this week.

The timing is especially cruel so close to the 20th anniversary of Diana’s death, and those close to the Royal Family say the hurtful claims should never have been included in a BBC programme.

Diana’s closest confidante, Rosa Monckton, said: ‘The BBC is deliberately causing pain to a real living person in a salacious fashion. Prince Harry was 12 when his mother died and she is no longer around to reassure him. I don’t think this is why millions pay their licence fee.’

Read more: BBC slammed for paternity slur against Prince Harry | Daily Mail Online

 

[Osipi]

I don't know how it is for everyone else but one only has to *look* at Harry to *know* he is Charles' son. There is no denying it in my eyes.

I agree that the BBC should be called to task and possibly even remove the program from airing if it is to contain wild and unfounded speculation about Harry's parentage. What good does it to to dredge up unsubstantiated rumor to an audience that perhaps have never even *heard* that accusation?

I'm really disappointed in the BBC and the producers and directors and sponsors of this program. I, for one, would not watch it if it was available in the US.

(jumps off her soapbox, falls and skins her knee and hobbles away with a scowl on her face)

 

[Rudolph]

It's just the DM's way of getting to repeat the rumour while having a go at the BBC at the same time.

 

[cepe]

I don't know how it is for everyone else but one only has to *look* at Harry to *know* he is Charles' son. There is no denying it in my eyes.

I agree that the BBC should be called to task and possibly even remove the program from airing if it is to contain wild and unfounded speculation about Harry's parentage. What good does it to to dredge up unsubstantiated rumor to an audience that perhaps have never even *heard* that accusation?

I'm really disappointed in the BBC and the producers and directors and sponsors of this program. I, for one, would not watch it if it was available in the US.

(jumps off her soapbox, falls and skins her knee and hobbles away with a scowl on her face)

For goodness sake, this is a play - a drama, made up, not real!!, and has been around for over5 yrs. its won awards in London and Broadway. Its well known. and theHarry element has never been raised.

And now because a slimy, despicable newspaper use it to promote a hideous lie they have been peddling for yrs, the BBC are blamed instead of the DM.

This forum 's contributors are over reliant on the DM - and it is not a balanced view.

 

[Pranter]

Harry resembles the DoE quite a bit. If you look at pics of David (his great great uncle..think that's the right amount of greats) when he was young there's a definate resemblence there too.


LaRae

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Stop giving traction to this Harry crap! You guys need to drop it and move on and talk about this moronic drama.

 

[RoyalProtocol]

Well the Funeral Scene was a complete nonsense. The King would leave behind the coffin rather than going into the cloisters for a wee family get together.

 

[Dman]

Also, the men would be in uniforms. This is a fake drama though. What kills me that every time there's a drama or documentary about the royals, the actors portray the royals as some kind of Shakespearean characters.

 

[RoyalProtocol]

Also, the men would be in uniforms. This is a fake drama though. What kills me that every time there's a drama or documentary about the royals, the actors portray the royals as some kind of Shakespearean characters.

Absolutley. And I imagine ladies will wear their Royal Family Orders.

I think they forget the Royal Family are real people. It's definitely Shakespearean in tone and format.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Read more: BBC slammed for paternity slur against Prince Harry | Daily Mail Online

Enough of this already! Prince Harry looks more and more like his GrandPop Prince Philip with every passing day facially, aside from Harry's ginger coloring. And Harry gets his ginger coloring from his mother's side of the family, NOT from freakin' Hewitt! Prince Charles has always known that William and Harry are HIS sons!

What do BRF have to do to shut up the Daily Fail and irresponsible journalists at BBC already about this ridiculous claptrap! Sue them?! This malicious non-story was over ages ago.

Check out the tweet from royal photographer Chris Jackson that AdmirerUS originally posted in the Family Resemblance thread on TRF last October! Isn't this enough for these idiots already to shut up with the faux Harry 'paternity' nonsense?!

https://twitter.com/ChrisJack_Getty/status/791742004053114880

Open your eyes! I didn't even need a young picture of Prince Philip to see the resemblance. It's quite clear, especially when you see pictures of Harry standing next to his GrandPop laughing and talking together.

Plus, this Windsor family resemblance isn't even needed for all directly concerned to have already known the truth from the beginning. Prince Harry is the second son of Charles and Diana. The malicious rumors about James Hewitt being Harry's father never flew because the chronology was never right for there to ever be any question. It's just NOT true.

The fact it was ever brought up in the first place is because of Hewitt having ginger hair and Harry having ginger hair. So what!? They do not have any real facial resemblance. Once again, the ginger hair Harry has is from Diana's side of the family. Harry looks a lot like his Uncle Charles Spencer's son re coloring, as well as his Uncle Charles too!

Harry resembles the DoE quite a bit. If you look at pics of David (his great great uncle..think that's the right amount of greats) when he was young there's a definate resemblence there too...

Exactly, as the Chris Jackson tweeted photo proves. But I already saw the resemblance prior to seeing the young photo of Prince Philip sporting a beard, like Prince Harry does nowadays.

 

[Dman]

Absolutley. And I imagine ladies will wear their Royal Family Orders.

I think they forget the Royal Family are real people. It's definitely Shakespearean in tone and format.

Very Shakespearean, stiff, starchy and formal. People who come up with these dramas do often forget that the royals are human and aren't this snobbish in real life. The storyline is playing up to the medias idea of William skipping over Charles for the throne. A modern day Game of Thrones made me turn it off in the start of the second hour.

The story of Harry's paternity was very dumb and the ghost of Diana disappointed me. They also made the Cambridge's an awkward power hungry couple.

 

[cepe]

It wasn't supposed to be real.

 

[RoyalProtocol]

BBC's ''King Charles III''

It wasn't supposed to be real.

No I get that, but it lacked any sense of realism.

I found the funeral scene uncomfortable to watch, we don't really like to imagine the death of someone before it actually happens.

I also thought that as a piece of drama it wasn't very good or enjoyable to watch.

 

[cepe]

ITs getting very good reviews. And I like the dilemma it poses - "Charles III", in reality vilified and mocked by the press, sets this all in motion because he is against lose of press freedom. Jacobean morality play.

 

[Dman]

It wasn't supposed to be real.

Right, but the old Shakespearean feel and tone is a turn off, imo. You even need a dictionary to understand what Charles III is talking about. The characters are way too stiff and there's no life in their eyes. The interactions between William and Catherine was way too awkward, and they are very distant with the kids.

Also, the relationship between "Harry" and his girlfriend is a little too obvious. I bet this was a quick put together since it became known Harry and Meghan are dating.

 

[cepe]

Right, but the old Shakespearean feel and tone is a turn off, imo. You even need a dictionary to understand what Charles III is talking about. The characters are way too stiff and there's no life in their eyes. The interactions between William and Catherine was way too awkward, and they are very distant with the kids.

Also, the relationship between "Harry" and his girlfriend is a little too obvious. I bet this was a quick put together since it became known Harry and Meghan are dating.

This is a work of fiction - the characters are drawn in a way to support the premis that this new king will not sign the Bill. Not to replicate the real thing because how would the writer know? And this was made some time ago way before Meghan became known.

We have had black Hamlet (Prince of Denmark), females playing Henry V and Macbeth. That is theatre for you!

But obviously not made for ardent Royal fans

 

[Osipi]

Not to mention too that back in Shakespeare's time, it was unheard of a female acting on stage. All female roles were played by males.