The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Library > The Electronic Domain

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #341  
Old 09-29-2007, 06:03 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
I find it incredibly unlikely that the writers/directors of this film were able to encourage servants/gillies/staff to give them so many alleged 'facts'. They can only be guessing at how any of the family acted on hearing the news or afterwards. Where is the evidence that a shoot, involving any of the family took place, where is the evidence that Charles said this or that, that HM did nothing more than try to explain to Blair that she wanted to keep the boys away from the media at this time. Where is the evidence that Blair said or did anything, especially as AC has since told the world that the peoples princess tag had nothing to do with him.

I do know the proceedures involved in shoots on an estate and what happens in the unlikely event that HM (or anyone), drives or intends to drive into the shoot area.

We do know how some perfect strangers reacted, we know to some extent how the media reacted, but anything that was said or done away from the cameras can only be guesswork and should not be seen as what happened, IMO.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 09-29-2007, 11:51 AM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,648
i'd have to agree with skydragon here. i think a lot of this is speculation when it comes to the thoughts or words of main characters.
__________________

__________________
Duchess
Reply With Quote
  #343  
Old 09-29-2007, 01:12 PM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess View Post
i'd have to agree with skydragon here. i think a lot of this is speculation when it comes to the thoughts or words of main characters.
Like in every film that mentions or involves someone famous. When you create a character, you know exactly where you're going, what personnality he has, what reactions, etc. The problem with writing a movie about real people, is that you don't know them, it only can be an interpretation of what you thought they were. It's absolutely the same thing that happens with your friends, your family, everyone around you. You can't guess who they really are and sometimes they don't even know themselves ...
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 10-01-2007, 01:50 AM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
I find it incredibly unlikely that the writers/directors of this film were able to encourage servants/gillies/staff to give them so many alleged 'facts'. They can only be guessing at how any of the family acted on hearing the news or afterwards. Where is the evidence that a shoot, involving any of the family took place, where is the evidence that Charles said this or that, that HM did nothing more than try to explain to Blair that she wanted to keep the boys away from the media at this time. Where is the evidence that Blair said or did anything, especially as AC has since told the world that the peoples princess tag had nothing to do with him.

I do know the proceedures involved in shoots on an estate and what happens in the unlikely event that HM (or anyone), drives or intends to drive into the shoot area.

We do know how some perfect strangers reacted, we know to some extent how the media reacted, but anything that was said or done away from the cameras can only be guesswork and should not be seen as what happened, IMO.
No doubt, much of what you say is true, Skydragon.

Nonetheless, I recall that HM, personally, invited Dame Helen to dine at the Palace, following the release of the film.

I can only infer that the Queen was not displeased at the film's content, nor Dame Helen's depiction of events and Her Majesty's own reactions.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 10-01-2007, 04:54 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polly View Post
Nonetheless, I recall that HM, personally, invited Dame Helen to dine at the Palace, following the release of the film.
I recall the media reporting that Mirren had been invited and Mirren denying it. I also recall the media reports of Mirren turning down an invitation some time later, also denied.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #346  
Old 10-01-2007, 06:19 AM
susan alicia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: , Netherlands
Posts: 2,528
Helen Mirren Sends Her Regrets to Palace - washingtonpost.com

Mirren was sorry that she was unable to attend due to filming obligations
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 10-01-2007, 07:16 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by susan alicia View Post
Helen Mirren Sends Her Regrets to Palace - washingtonpost.com

Mirren was sorry that she was unable to attend due to filming obligations
Thank you for finding the article!

Unfortunately, The MoS is not renowned for accuracy or truth and the WP article does go on to say that "Representatives of Mirren and the queen could not immediately be reached for comment Monday". So no confirmation that this was anything more than media hype.

They also go on to say - Buckingham Palace said after the awards that it was "looking at a number of options" for a visit by Mirren, director Stephen Frears and writer Peter Morgan - which speaks of the PR department at work, rather than an endorsement by HM, IMO.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 10-01-2007, 12:48 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Well, yes, but they could have just maintained a stony silence, I suppose, if the Queen had been seriously Not Amused.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 10-01-2007, 04:12 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Can you imagine the headline and general story content!

Queen snubs 'The Queen'.

Today HM made clear her feelings on the oscar winning film starring Helen Mirren. In an unprecedented snub, HM refused to extend a welcome to the fabulous Mirren, despite the media trying to force her hand by declaring an invitation had been extended and refused.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #350  
Old 10-02-2007, 04:46 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
How strange..... When I turned on this morning, instead of BBC news I got something called GMTV. Helen Mirren was on saying that she had received an invite from the palace but that she had been working on a film and had to turn it down. So there we are.... from the horses mouth, so to speak.

She also said, which I found strange, that she was a republican.... so why did she accept an honour from HM?

I still maintain the film is more fiction than fact, without statements from the principle players, it should never be seen as anything but.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 10-02-2007, 03:41 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,515
She accepted the honor, because she is not rude. Then the headlines would have been, " The Queen rude to the Queen". Or something like that. As for it being more fiction than fact, we really don't know and in the end result it really doesn't matter.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 10-02-2007, 04:11 PM
pinkie40's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 423
I simply have a problem of a movie made for the profit of others of an elderly, living monarch who has been an excellent friend of the United States and a diplomat supreme showcasing one of the most challenging and upsetting times in her personal life.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 10-02-2007, 04:49 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,515
No different that movies made about the asassination of President Kennedy. For Jackie and the children that was very difficult, too. I am sure more difficult. It is just part of history. All movies are made for profit, that is their business. They make movies about wars, deaths of celebrities and sometimes of just plain nonsense. I doubt that the queen ran to see the film. When you are in the public eye, you are fair game.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 10-02-2007, 05:11 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Helen Mirren didn't exactly say she was a republican. She said she identifies as a 'Queenist', which means that like me she has an extra-ordinary amount of respect for the person of Queen Elizabeth II but I'd rather see the institution replaced with a President that I can vote for. Helen Mirren accepted a Damehood much in the same way as Maggie Smith and Judi Dench did - because it's what we offer. Britain gives Damehoods and with the sad reality that those of who want a Republic are going to wait a rather long time (unless we can muster up something in the next decade) then one has to accept things for what they are. The Damehood is the top honour she could recieve from the state and she certainly deserves it so she took it. I'm sure she would have taken a Dame Commander of the Order of British Excellence if we had it. Remember, she didn't get the Damehood as a result of this film.

As for the film itself being rude, when you're a public figure you expect to be portrayed. That can be an affectionate portrayal like this film was supposed to be or it can be a jokey cruel one like we saw with 'Spitting Image'. Thats public life.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 10-02-2007, 06:00 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
She accepted the honor, because she is not rude. Then the headlines would have been, " The Queen rude to the Queen". Or something like that. As for it being more fiction than fact, we really don't know and in the end result it really doesn't matter.
She could have politely and discreetly have declined the award, many do.
Yes it does matter how this film portrays the private events surrounding the royals with regard to their actions over the death of an ex member of the family.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 10-02-2007, 07:40 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,515
Except for forums such as this, nobody in the real world cares. Too much of importance to focus on, rather than how the RF reacted when Diana died. It is over, long over. They made a movie, people went to see it, next week it is part of the past. Star Wars 52. Mirren's studio spent a fortune on publicity and favors and she won the Oscar. It was hardly that inspiring a part, but that's Hollywood.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 10-02-2007, 07:44 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Helen Mirren has this habit of taking roles outside of her character. She took on the lead role of Detective Sargeant Jane Tennant even though she said she had been a cultural and intellectual snob who had previously thought that police officers were not too bright.

She did mention that she was quite surprised to find herself playing the Queen because she was brought up to think that the royals were totally superfluous and the sentiment around her family when she was growing up was republican.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 10-02-2007, 07:57 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Well, to be fair to Dame Helen, she did a cracking job despite the script she was given and that's all an actress can do. In this profession, you get a script and you take it because not doing it means not eating and even when you've made a fortune like Helen, you don't break the habit of a lifetime as a jobbing actor/actress. Now, I hated the film and thought it was dribble snot but Helen Mirren did the best she could. I'd also take umbridge with you saying it was an uninspiring part - it was a VERY inspiring part because the woman she was playing is inspiring but the script wasn't there to make that inspiring part an inspiring reality on the screen and what we saw, was one of our best actresses trying to make s**t look like sugar. It also isn't just Hollywood, it's everywhere and when was it ever different?

Look at the 1956 movie with Ingrid Bergman and Helen Hayes, 'Anastasia'. Now that movie has stunning costumes, the music is fabulous and the cast is gold. I mean, we're talking the cream of the crop from the well knowns such as Yul Brynner to the ones who should have been well knowns such as Martita Hunt. It won awards but the script was dire. That movie actually makes me flinch with embarrasment not because the actors are bad but because the script is and all too often in this profession, you see fabulous actors really let down by the script writers. But 'Anastasia' wasn't off limits. She'd been dead for quite a while but Anna Anderson wasn't and quite a few Romanovs were milling about - was it right to make the film and make money off of it? Well, that's the role of theatre and cinema - to entertain and to inform. Movies are not like 'Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?' or 'African Queen' where we watch, enjoy but there's no reality in it at all. Movies have to be informative and when we say, "Well, this is off limits and so is that", then we're buying into censorship to spare blushes and I don't agree with that. At the same time, not every biographical film needs to be an axe in the back. 'The Nun's Story' was done exceptionally well, 'Evita' was a musical that was amazing with an equal measure of affection and criticism - these people existed and their stories have to be told.

Now, we don't know how true 'The Queen' was but I hope it inspired people to look into the reaction more than we were doing. I loathed the film but I was pleased that it made people think twice. It made people question the response and it showed the press for what they were. I think the problem is, we tend to think once history is over it's over and it isn't. It has to be constantly reviewed and re-evaluated so that we can pick up on what we've missed and learn from it. I thought the movie was sheep crap but I suppose it did encourage people to think twice and thats what that whole era in British history needed - a review. It was always being painted as the Queen bending to the public whereas in reality, it was the Queen doing what her Prime Minister advised which to me is much more significant when the roles should be reversed in that relationship if that's the system we have. I don't want that but I'm saying, if that's what we've got then it should work properly. Bear in mind that this is one of 3 films that Frears has made/is making about Tony Blair and in which Michael Sheen has played the former PM. I think if anything these films are a much needed look at the Blair premiership of which Di's death was unquestionably a big part.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 10-02-2007, 08:15 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,515
I agree with you almost totally. The movies are there to make money, some times social commentary, such as films like Gentlemen's Agreement, but that really dates me. I cannot see the queen as inspiring, she is just a nice lady doing her job. She is hardly dramatic or a charasmatic speaker. She is not a Ghandi or a John Kennedy. But, right or wrong, and I certainly don't know what was fabricated or what was real, it showed the vagaries of the public and the difficult position the queen can be in, how and why she did what she did will never truly be know. In the end, we know the result, how they got there no longer remains important. I thought the film was dull.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 10-02-2007, 08:22 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
The thing is, would JFK be inspiring or dramatic had he not been shot? After all, he was only reading what his speech writers gave him, the same as the Queen only reads what she's given by her speech writers. I think there's alot to be said for keeping a steady throne over the most volatile period in history when it could have gone down the swannee several times. Remember, it's been during her reign that Britain has changed beyond all recognition and for her to stay as a constant force I think she has to have some inspiring quality. But maybe thats being over sentimental about a woman who's just always been there. It's rather like the Queen Mother. Didn't say anything since 1947 but we all loved her. It's a funny thing popularity. I agree though, the film was dull. Potentially it could have been the great film they're lauding it as.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:35 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]