"Our Queen at 90" (2016) - ITV Documentary on Queen Elizabeth II

[Countessmeout]

While it is great to see the younger generation (maybe Zara and even Louise could have said something), I wish they had included all of her kids. The focus was on the 'family' and yet neither Anne or Edward were a part of it. William and his generation don't come next. Time enough to focus on Will/Kate when Charles is king. Would have been great to see a bit more focus on the queen's children and mention of her other grandkids, and great grandkids. How about Mia, Savannah and Isla? Only George and Charlotte got mention.

 

[Dman]

It may be that Anne and Edward's schedules didn't allow them to participate. It is time to focus on the younger generation though. They are the ones that's starting help out the (nearly) 90 year old Queen and a (nearly) 95 year old grandfather.

 

[Countessmeout]

It may be that Anne and Edward's schedules didn't allow them to participate. It is time to focus on the younger generation though. They are the ones that's starting help out the (nearly) 90 year old Queen and a (nearly) 95 year old grandfather.

That documentary was filmed over a period of time. Months. Certainly Anne and Edward could have found time. Sophie certainly did.


They are starting to help??? And what are the senior royals doing drinking tea and going on vacation Anne certainly has been 'helping' her parents for decades, with numbers that rival Charles. Edward certainly does as well, not as high as Anne. Considering he is taking over the DOE awards the last how many years. They certainly do a lot more than any of the grandchildren do.

The point was this was not a documentary about the passing of reigns to the next generation. It was about the Queen and her family. And it would be nice to see her entire family.

 

[Queen Camilla]

It may be that Anne and Edward's schedules didn't allow them to participate. It is time to focus on the younger generation though. They are the ones that's starting help out the (nearly) 90 year old Queen and a (nearly) 95 year old grandfather.

The documentary was about the people who knew the Queen the best.

I think her daughter Anne would qualify more than William, Harry, and Catherine combined.

 

[Dman]

Yeah, but I'm sure Anne and Edward knew this doc was being made. So, if they could've participated in reflecting on their mother's birthday, they would've done an interview.

I'm just reflecting on how the younger royals was the big focus of the doc.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Haven't seen the documentary yet but I have high hopes for it. Our Queen from 2013 was terrific, it's one of the royal documentaries I enjoy to revisit from time to time, so if Our Queen at 90 is just half as good as that, I reckon I'll be very pleased.

It may be that Anne and Edward's schedules didn't allow them to participate. It is time to focus on the younger generation though. They are the ones that's starting help out the (nearly) 90 year old Queen and a (nearly) 95 year old grandfather.

It's just funny, though, that the exact opposite is said when e.g. William is criticised for not working enough – that he's "only" the HM's grandchild, not her heir, and that HM and Philip "don't need any more help right now".

 

[miss whirley]

It's just funny, though, that the exact opposite is said when e.g. William is criticised for not working enough – that he's "only" the HM's grandchild, not her heir, and that HM and Philip "don't need any more help right now".

They don't need more help. This was the documentary film maker trying to appeal to younger audiences for commercial advertisement. Notice how it was proudly promoted as the first interview by Catherine since the engagement. That's a marketing ploy by ITV producers. That doesn't mean that Catherine is more important than The Queen, or Philip, or any of The Queen's children. She isn't.

When the tabloids write 90% of their royal articles about the personal lives of William/Harry/Catherine/Beatrice/Eugenie, that doesn't mean those five are the pillars of the BRF. It means the media is shallow, and they get more money selling advertisement to young adults, and thus they make young royals the click bait for their young adult readers. ITV just decided to follow The Daily Mail's blueprint for easy cash, nothing more.

 

[wartenberg7]

Kate - "I've no idea where she gets her energy from ... i need to go and ask a few more questions"

most would agree

One question: Did the Queen as a Princess back there in Malta as a sailor´s wife do more royal engagements than the DoCambridge today?!
If not so, was she ever critizised in the same harsh manner than Catherine?

Could you imagine the storm of outrage William and Kate would face if they would turn their back o England for a couple of years? And, contrary to Princess Elizabeth, William´s not even immediate heir presumptive to the throne!

Well, I know this is off topic. Just addressing your allusion of "most would agree"

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[...]

2: The UK is not in turmoil, and there are not threats from all sides.

[...]

Terrorist threats? Brexit? Immigrants in camps hopelessly trying to reach Britain? Scottish separatism flaring up again? Widening gap between the haves and the have-nots in society? The Chancellor presenting his Budget: an empty red box? The NHS on the verge of a system breakdown?

You sound like King George V. No matter the drama in his country. He would write little else than: "Edinburgh. I wore my blue Field Marshal's uniform and was received by the Lord Marshal. Bed at 11.30".

 

[Osipi]

Terrorist threats? Brexit? Immigrants in camps hopelessly trying to reach Britain? Scottish separatism flaring up again? Widening gap between the haves and the have-nots in society? The Chancellor presenting his Budget: an empty red box? The NHS on the verge of a system breakdown?

You sound like King George V. No matter the drama in his country. He would write little else than: "Edinburgh. I wore my blue Field Marshal's uniform and was received by the Lord Marshal. Bed at 11.30".

Although I've not watched the documentary yet, the general atmosphere I'm getting from those that have seen it is that it is an hour long testimonial to a legendary woman from the people that know her best. Her children and her grandchildren and some of her staff with a mix of national figures thrown in for good measure. To really get an in depth testimonial from all the people that would have something personal to say about The Queen, it would have to be a documentary running 24/7 for the next week. They had to work with fitting what they had into a specific time slot.

It was about the Queen, herself, at 90 and not about the Queen's government of the day and the issues it faces.

 

[PetticoatLane]

Thanks for posting.

I think it was edited to showcase William and Catherine.
I was a bit disappointed. They should have focused more on the Queen.

Princess Anne & Prince Edward were not included. I have a hard time believing that both chose not to participate. I tend to think that their comments were not included in the broadcast.

I enjoyed Beatrice's comments, Camilla's comments and Andrew's.

The television crew did not even bother to allow Charles or Camilla to sit down. That says alot about the type of interview and the amount of time the crew was willing to invest in interviewing Charles or Camilla. One has to wonder how they treated Anne or Edward that they ended up on the cutting room floor.

Why must you insist in seeing in everything slights upon Charles and Camilla (whom I personally admire very much lest you accuse me of being anti-C&C), no doubt at the request of the dastardly duo - William and Kate?

I'm utterly confused as to how you could possibly say this has been "edited to showcase William and Catherine". They didn't seem to get any more time than Beatrice/Eugenie or Harry. In fact, I can remember thinking at one point that William hadn't been in it a whole lot.

Charles and Camilla appeared to be either on their way to or just returned from something else. I don't think Camilla fancied a sit-down interview given she's literally never done one. Had she wanted to give a full interview I'm sure the producers would have tripped over themselves for the exclusive opportunity. Charles was in full dress uniform and didn't seem terribly interested.

This documentary comes just 4 years after Charles was given the opportunity to do an entire documentary by himself about his mother. Anne and Edward have previously spoken many times about their mother. Nothing was lost in their absence.

 

[Skippyboo]

Our Queen at 90

There was definitely more Harry then William in the doc. In the addition to the interview, it showed Harry in SA and the rugby reception at the palace.

Nothing that was said by the family was really ground breaking or too personal. You didn't really learn anything about Elizabeth the person. I thought some of better insight came from regular people interviewed such as the VC medal winner, volunteer lady attending a garden party, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Dman]

Well, we at least got to hear Catherine's feelings about The Queen and got a little insight on their relationship. While folks on Twitter and the media focused too much attention to her pronunciation, I was happy on how open Catherine was in the interview. She come across as very honest.

 

[Juliette2]

Watch it now before youtube/ITV removes it.

Thank you so much! It was fabulous! I agree, I wish there was a bit more from the Queen's children.

Personally, the most moving moment for me was hearing the Queen's radio speech in 1940 during the Children's Hour at 14.

What a great inspiration she is: duty, service, a strong marriage, values, style, love for her country. I wish she really were THE BOSS as Prince Harry says. The world and the UK would be better off in my humble opinion.

Cameron ("I discovered one country which I visited and she didn't") and Obama succeeded in making their contribution about themselves. The latter more than the former (I'm the first US President...Michelle and I...the girls' private tour...Sacha's birthday...what??). Classless.

http://www.theroyalforums.com//www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/

 

[Elly C]

I really enjoyed the variety of this documentary and to hear the contributions of various members of the royal family. I think the emphasis on many of the younger members of the family was done with an eye on popular appeal. Just as Kate/Harry sell magazines so the audience ratings will have benefited from their regular presence in the programme. There must be plenty of unused footage that didn't make it through to the final edit partly because the programme had a story to tell and there is likely to have been a repetitious nature to some of the family comments ( how many times did we hear references to HM's smile for example even with a final edit).
I do agree that to have no comments from two of her children did seem a little odd given that Sophie and Peter did take part, so it leads me to think that the interviews were conducted in a pretty narrow time frame when Edward & Anne were unavailable.
If I could add to a wish list of possible interviewees , I would have loved to hear from Princess Alexandra who is rarely seen and heard these days.

 

[tommy100]

Maybe Anne and Edward didn't want to participate or have/are planning to contribute to something else later on, maybe a BBC documentary or similar, they've given interviews for other documentaries in the past so I can't see them being opposed to doing it now. Given that ITV publicised it as 'the most royals contributing to one documentary' I suspect even if Anne and Edward didn't say anything 'interesting' the producers would have kept them in just to bump up the numbers.

 

[Skippyboo]

It also could be that Anne & Edward weren't available in the couple of days that they were doing the interviews. Kate's interview she said George was 2 1/2. That's late January. So her's wasn't filmed earlier say Sept or Oct. Harry's was probably done the same day as Kate at KP, the same with Charles & Camilla. Anne was in the South Atlantic in January so maybe that's why she wasn't in it. Zara was in Australia then too.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[TLLK]

There was definitely more Harry then William in the doc. In the addition to the interview, it showed Harry in SA and the rugby reception at the palace.

Nothing that was said by the family was really ground breaking or too personal. You didn't really learn anything about Elizabeth the person. I thought some of better insight came from regular people interviewed such as the VC medal winner, volunteer lady attending a garden party, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I agree that Harry was very well represented in the documentary and that it was not a ground breaking one. You've mentioned my favorite moments with the VC recipient and the volunteers who work at so many events. It was IMO a lovely tribute to the Queen.

 

[Juliette2]

I found it a bit odd that the Duchess of Cambridge was referred to as Britain's future Queen but Prince Charles wasn't introduced as Britain's future monarch.

 

[Dman]

I found it a bit odd that the Duchess of Cambridge was referred to as Britain's future Queen but Prince Charles wasn't introduced as Britain's future monarch.

Do he need the introduction

 

[Skippyboo]

Our Queen at 90

In the context of the documentary, it was the older Queen making a new member of the family feel comfortable. Right before it if I remember correctly, was the Diplomatic reception and William. Charles is the most experienced PoW in history. He doesn't need to learn the Royal ropes or get to know the various countries like W&K would.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Terrorist threats? Brexit? Immigrants in camps hopelessly trying to reach Britain? Scottish separatism flaring up again? Widening gap between the haves and the have-nots in society? The Chancellor presenting his Budget: an empty red box? The NHS on the verge of a system breakdown?

You sound like King George V. No matter the drama in his country. He would write little else than: "Edinburgh. I wore my blue Field Marshal's uniform and was received by the Lord Marshal. Bed at 11.30".

Every major country faces terrorist threats - That's not turmoil. And when it comes to isis: They're losing key leaders, they're losing territory, and they're losing resources.

We can and will defeat ISIS.

Immigrants in camps hopelessly trying to reach Britain? This is a challenge that every major country faces.

Brexit and Scottish separatism flaring up again? That's not turmoil.

Widening gap between the haves and the have-nots in society? This is a big challenge that many countries faces, but there are more people/politicians that work for the weak in society than ever before.

The NHS on the verge of a system breakdown? At least the UK have a NHS, but I don't want to discuss this here, and it's have nothing to do with a documentary who is made to celebrate a 90 year old constitutional monarch. And I don't thinks I sound like King George V, and as I said to you after you criticized my signature, you should try to be more polite.

The UK is a great country with a great future and is set to overtake Germany and have the biggest economy in Western Europe within two decades, according to several experts. We have many reasons to be proud of the UK, and I am proud to be half-British.

 

[Nice Nofret]

........
The UK is a great country with a great future and is set to overtake Germany and have the biggest economy in Western Europe within two decades, according to several experts. We have many reasons to be proud of the UK, and I am proud to be half-British.

mhh your glassball must be much better than my one, that you can look that far and clear into our future

 

[Queen Camilla]

Why must you insist in seeing in everything slights upon Charles and Camilla ...

I'm utterly confused as to how you could possibly say this has been "edited to showcase William and Catherine".

All television programs are edited.

Charles and Camilla appeared to be either on their way to or just returned from something else.

Exactly why was there poor planning on the part of the television crew.

The program was billed as the people who know the Queen the best.

I think the order of people who know the Queen the best would be somewhat in this order:
Prince Philip (not featured)
Margaret Rhodes (only briefly)
Princess Alexandra (not featured)
Prince Charles (only briefly)
Princess Anne (not featured) The Queen's only daughter.
The Duke of Kent (not featured)
The Duke of Gloucester (not featured)
Prince Andrew (featured briefly)
Prince Edward (not featured)
The Duchess of Kent (not featured)
The Duchess of Gloucester (not featured)
The Duchess of Cornwall (only briefly)
Peter Philips (only briefly)
Zara Philips (not featured)
William (highly featured)
Harry (featured)
Beatrice (featured who talked about both the Queen & Prince Philip)
Eugenie (featured)
Timothy (not featured)
Sophie (featured)
Catherine (highly featured)

Dman, I think Charles & Camilla's comments were recorded in 2015. I think Camilla's bit was recorded on March 10, 2015.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

mhh your glassball must be much better than my one, that you can look that far and clear into our future

I don't understand you respond to my post. This haven't anything to do with glassballs or me looking that far and clear into our future. If you read my post properly you will see that I wrote ''according to experts'' and the UK has already overtaken France to become the second biggest economy in Europe. I've sent links to you on PM.

This thread is about Our Queen at 90, so this will be the last I will say on this subject.

 

[tommy100]

I think ITV and/or the production company probably thought it would get more publicity if it featured the 'younger' royals. If you look in any newspaper or on any media website you are more likely to find them featuring Catherine, Harry, William, Beatrice, Eugenie rather than Philip, Margaret Rhodes, Anne, Edward, Andrew, Sophie or Princess Alexandra. Whilst I wouldn't disagree with those who say the latter names know HM better they are less likely to attract interest in the documentary from the wider public (except royal watchers like people on here of course).

In all it was a nice documentary to watch over the long Easter weekend but it didn't really show us anything new. It was nice hearing the Queen's family talk about her but this isn't new either (with the exception of Catherine and Camilla).

 

[Dman]

I think Catherine and Camilla's interview were very good. I still think it wouldn't hurt none for both women give another interview focusing on their causes. It would benefit them, their charities, and would be very good PR too.

I really enjoyed Beatrice's interview though. She comes across very sweet and relaxed.

 

[AdmirerUS]

From Twitterland, Mark Cuthburt, Mark Stewart, James Whatling and Tom Rooke all had cameos in Our Queen at 90. How fitting!

https://twitter.com/RegalEyes/status/714560974536060928

 

[Lord_Royal]

It was a very well produced documentary.

Obviously, The Duchess of Cambridge's speaking voice, sounding so overly posh Princess Michael of Kent herself would have blushed, was what people were going to talk about. The Duke of Cambridge's 'been there, done that, bought the t shirt' comment was incredibly informal and I don't think it was quite the right note to hit. If anything, the emphasis on The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in this documentary was done to grab attention rather than what they actually said. The Prince of Wales was incredibly relaxed.

The best interviewees were The Countess of Wessex, The Duke of York and Princess Beatrice - they offered the most affectionate insight. It would have been good to hear from The Princess Royal and The Earl of Wessex with the less visible royals like the Kents and Gloucesters.

 

[Dman]

It was a very well produced documentary.

Obviously, The Duchess of Cambridge's speaking voice, sounding so overly posh Princess Michael of Kent herself would have blushed, was what people were going to talk about. The Duke of Cambridge's 'been there, done that, bought the t shirt' comment was incredibly informal and I don't think it was quite the right note to hit. If anything, the emphasis on The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in this documentary was done to grab attention rather than what they actually said. The Prince of Wales was incredibly relaxed.

The best interviewees were The Countess of Wessex, The Duke of York and Princess Beatrice - they offered the most affectionate insight. It would have been good to hear from The Princess Royal and The Earl of Wessex with the less visible royals like the Kents and Gloucesters.

I don't know what you're talking about; Catherine's interview gave great insight into her relationship with The Queen. Also, if it wasn't for this interview, we probably wouldn't never know some of Catherine's actual thoughts. William is usually the one that speaks most of the time.

It was rather shallow on how people focused on Catherine pronunciation and not on what was really important...her tribute to The Queen.