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

[BeatrixFan]

It's on ITV1 tomorrow apparantly. I'll give it a second watching and might watch it all the way through.

[Thomas Parkman]

Dear Beatrix Fan,

You will forgive me, but since I happen to be a Fan of BeatrixFan, and have watched with enormous enjoyment and delight "The Queen" three times, and am well aware that you have all kinds of reservations about it I would be most intrested in hearing, after you endure seeing the whole thing and getting through the ordeal just exacatly what you think then.

Not that I will agree with you. I think the portrayal of the Queen Mother was, for example, total idiocy. And is Philip really the total pompous ass he comes across as??? The scene with Charles calling Blair, or rather his man doing the dirty work, is just an embarrasment. I would have hoped he would have had more pride and self respect than to do such a thing.

That said the movie is wonderful. Of course the British people, or at least some of them behaved worse than spoiled children. I still say they decided to have a collective nervous breakdown. And I am not so sure that much of the reaction of the royal family was not fully justified. After all Diana never was the saint that many thought her to be. As was quite accurately noted, I forget by whom-Charles or Philip?-the public saw one side of her and the RF saw quite another.

So there you are. And I have gone and opened by big mouth-this disease of loggorrhea that I have-and stirred the pot again. Cheers.

[pinkie40]

I think I am the only person on the planet to have NOT liked the movie. I thought it was intrusive, disrespectful and bothersome. It was not necessary to make a motion picture for profit off the discomfort and private family angst and anguish of Her Majesty.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by pinkie40

I think I am the only person on the planet to have NOT liked the movie. I thought it was intrusive, disrespectful and bothersome. It was not necessary to make a motion picture for profit off the discomfort and private family angst and anguish of Her Majesty.

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.

[COUNTESS]

We will really never know. I am sure that they made some effort to find out and there always seems to be a willing insider who spills the beans, to their great discomfort. I don't beleive in mass "nervous breakdowns". It was a reaction to a beautiful, very young, popular woman's death. Whether that ruffles the feathers of the stiff upper lip set, too bad. It happened. The 10th Anniversary Memorial was broadcast throughtout the world. If nobody was interested and I mean a great many were, obviously, they wouldn't have done it. These stations are commercial enterprizes. They had to have had a big audience. The film also garnered it share of viewers. Long after the "hysteria". Perhaps, they really didn't care. They did, of course, care about their grandson, that goes without saying, but they wanted this torn out of their side. Interesting, now they have joined the parade.

[Elspeth]

I need to watch that movie. I finally watched Notes on a Scandal last night, and I'm surprised that any performance last year could have beaten out Judi Dench for the Oscar. Helen Mirren must have given the best performance ever, or else the Oscar was based on something other than acting ability.

[COUNTESS]

Well, Elspeth, I didn't see the Judi Dench performance, but I did see the other. Mirren did a very nice job, but Oscar quality???

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

..... there always seems to be a willing insider who spills the beans, to their great discomfort.

Experience has proved to me, that they are safe in saying an unnamed source/friend/servant etc because they are rarely challenged. They also cover themselves by telling everyone it is based on real events, in reality 99.99% of the time, it is based on the imagination of the writer, with one or two 'facts'.

[COUNTESS]

And how do you know this? Based on what secret info that you have.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

It was a reaction to a beautiful, very young, popular woman's death. Whether that ruffles the feathers of the stiff upper lip set, too bad. It happened.

If it causes the downfall of the 1000 year old British monarchy then that would be a grave loss not easily replaceable.

[COUNTESS]

I cannot imagine that the whole monarchy will fall, because a 36 year old woman, died in a terrible accident and the world mourned. Life goes on. If the monarchy is built on such weak and shifting sands it won't be much of a loss. If it has value and is strong and the people of England wish them to be there it will stay. Diana's death and popularity will not change that. There seems to be this idea that, by some supernatural power, the Princess will destroy the monarchy. Ridiculous. She is gone. They are here. As I am not a British citizen, how I feel about the retention of the monarchy has little value. If the majority of the good citizens of Great Britain want to continue this style of government, it is for them to decide. Why would anyone think Diana's ghost will destory them?

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

And how do you know this? Based on what secret info that you have.

It is hardly 'secret information' and it is not only personal knowledge or experience of the press or 'writers' using only a part of the 'story', based on an unnamed source.

Look at this film with a little logic - HM is supposedly up in the hills, her vehicle has broken down, she wades up a bank and then sits crying until she notices a 14 pointer, which she shoo's away. How romantic... how humane.... then apply logic. If she was alone, what insider could know what happened and if HM had broken down on the estate anywhere remotely close to the guns, the first thing anyone would have done, was to notify the Gillies out with the shooting party, to ensure that no accidents could happen!

Look at the scenes of Charles telling his 'man' to ring Blair, the phone calls that were supposed to have happened, who said what, where and when. Logic says that IF any of that happened, everyone concerned would have ensured they could not be overheard.

In Campbells book and on all the interviews he has done to promote it, he has stated unequivocally, that it was not (as portrayed in the film and many press reports) he who coined the pp phrase.

Read any statements that have been put out by celebrities, to refute stories coming from unnamed/close friends/sources.

[COUNTESS]

You never know when you have the truth or it is embelished. Yes, I am sure there is license here, but there are also several books dealing with the death of Diana, they cannot all contain totally false statements, otherwise there would have been libel suits. Ghillies may talk, too. The faceless servants seem to talk. I have seen that for the right buck almost anyone will talk.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

It is hardly 'secret information' and it is not only personal knowledge or experience of the press or 'writers' using only a part of the 'story', based on an unnamed source.

Look at this film with a little logic - HM is supposedly up in the hills, her vehicle has broken down, she wades up a bank and then sits crying until she notices a 14 pointer, which she shoo's away. How romantic... how humane.... then apply logic. If she was alone, what insider could know what happened and if HM had broken down on the estate anywhere remotely close to the guns, the first thing anyone would have done, was to notify the Gillies out with the shooting party, to ensure that no accidents could happen!

Look at the scenes of Charles telling his 'man' to ring Blair, the phone calls that were supposed to have happened, who said what, where and when. Logic says that IF any of that happened, everyone concerned would have ensured they could not be overheard.

In Campbells book and on all the interviews he has done to promote it, he has stated unequivocally, that it was not (as portrayed in the film and many press reports) he who coined the pp phrase.

Read any statements that have been put out by celebrities, to refute stories coming from unnamed/close friends/sources.

Well of course we can't prove it and I don't believe everything in that film like the details you mentionned, but I believe in the feelings and emotions Stephen Frears wanted to put in this movie. The thing with the car breaking down is just to symbolize that the Queen doesn't cry in front of everybody, she needs to be alone. And it also shows the humanity in her.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

You never know when you have the truth or it is embelished. Yes, I am sure there is license here, but there are also several books dealing with the death of Diana, they cannot all contain totally false statements, otherwise there would have been libel suits. Ghillies may talk, too. The faceless servants seem to talk. I have seen that for the right buck almost anyone will talk.

We all know, I believe that no book written about the death of Diana could be 100% accurate. IF Charles or a member of his family wrote a book, themselves, detailing exactly what they did and how they felt, that would be one thing. There is not such a book so all you have is the authors view of what might or might not have happened or been said. The trouble with the Diana books is they all seem to rely on one another for their 'facts', although I would be the first to admit I have not read them all. Friends who have read a variety all seem to think such and such a 'story' was written in someone elses book before the book they are reading it in.
As you know, it is as rare as rocking horse sh*t for members of the RF to sue for libel. Just as well or they would forever be in the courts.

With reference to the shooting incident, there were Gillies (taken from the Scottish Gaelic word Gille, Ghillies are a type of Brogue) out with the shooting party (if one even took place), they would have been contacted to ensure that shooting within that area stopped, however, the film clearly showed that HM was on her own and that shooting continued, so there were not any Gillies to 'talk' and the scene was not only invented but inaccurate.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

I cannot imagine that the whole monarchy will fall, because a 36 year old woman, died in a terrible accident and the world mourned.

I did not say that Diana would destroy the monarchy but reactions such as the one to her death could well cause the downfall of the monarchy because it involved a lot of hatred and anger towards the Royal Family. Mass anger and hatred towards the royal family always pose a danger to the institution especially if it causes a longterm downfall in the reputation of the persons that are the target of this fury - the queen first as the present monarch but secondly Charles as the future monarch.

[COUNTESS]

Well, Ysbel, if that is what will take to take down the monarchy, it still has to be what a majority of people in Gr