"The Queen": a film about Elizabeth II and the death of Diana. - Page 18

pinkie40 · #**341** 09-23-2007, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

You are definitely not the only person on the planet, a great many people, not on these forums, think it is laughably inaccurate and it worries them that royalty 'fans' could mistake it for anything other than a work of fiction.

Looking at it from it being an accurate portrayal of actual events, I suppose it might be close to what happened (with a few small embellishments here and there maybe)...But I simply look at it from how Her Majesty might have felt as a human being...it must have been embarrassing and gut wrenching to have such an event of her reign/life being exploited for profit and public nitpicking.

ysbel · #**342** 09-24-2007, 08:56 AM

If you look at the history of the Royal Family, they have been an integral part of British society for 1000 years and has served as a unifying force to the British people giving them an identify on the world stage.

It is my opinion that the Royal Family cannot unify the nation if one of their members makes a public relations campaign against the rest of the family and succeeds but if you don't think of the institution of the Royal Family as important then I can understand why you think the way you do.

Skydragon · #**343** 09-24-2007, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkie40

Looking at it from it being an accurate portrayal of actual events, I suppose it might be close to what happened (with a few small embellishments here and there maybe.

Ahh and there we most definitely differ!

Polly · #**344** 09-29-2007, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Ahh and there we most definitely differ!

May I ask, quite pacifically you understand, why you think that this is so?

Skydragon · #**345** 09-29-2007, 07:03 AM

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.

Duchess · #**346** 09-29-2007, 12:51 PM

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.

**TheTruth** · #**347** 09-29-2007, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duchess

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 ...

Polly · #**348** 10-01-2007, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

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.

Skydragon · #**349** 10-01-2007, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polly

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.

susan alicia · #**350** 10-01-2007, 07:19 AM

Helen Mirren Sends Her Regrets to Palace - washingtonpost.com

Mirren was sorry that she was unable to attend due to filming obligations

Skydragon · #**351** 10-01-2007, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susan alicia

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.

**Elspeth** · #**352** 10-01-2007, 01:48 PM

Well, yes, but they could have just maintained a stony silence, I suppose, if the Queen had been seriously Not Amused.

Skydragon · #**353** 10-01-2007, 05:12 PM

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.

Skydragon · #**354** 10-02-2007, 05:46 AM

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.

COUNTESS · #**355** 10-02-2007, 04:41 PM

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.

pinkie40 · #**356** 10-02-2007, 05:11 PM

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.

COUNTESS · #**357** 10-02-2007, 05:49 PM

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.