The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Electronic Domain (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f220/)
-   -   "A Year With The Queen" documentary 2007 (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f220/a-year-with-the-queen-documentary-2007-a-13254.html)

Saphire 07-12-2007 06:41 AM

"A Year With The Queen" documentary 2007
 
was she right in walking out?

Yahoo: Queen argues over crown with US celebrity photographer - Yahoo! News

CNN: Queen rebukes Leibovitz over crown - CNN.com

MSNBC: Angry queen stormed out of shoot - Britain's Royal Family - MSNBC.com

I don't think it was an unreasonable request.

banda_windsor 07-12-2007 06:56 AM

I know. I'm shocked when i read the news. That Leibovitz is just too much!!! Who the heck do you think she is!

debzone 07-12-2007 07:37 AM

For what it is worth--over at theroyalist.com they have a Breaking News item with a statement from the BBC. Apparently the trailer was "misleading"..

"The producers of the BBC One series, A Year With The Queen, would like to clarify that the clips shown in a promotional trailer yesterday were not intended to provide a full picture of what actually happened, or of what will be shown in the final programme."
"This was an important photoshoot prior to the Queen’s visit to the United States. In the trailer, there is a sequence that implies that the Queen left that sitting prematurely. That was not the case and the actual sequence of events was therefore misrepresented."

"The BBC would like to apologise to both the Queen and to Annie Liebowitz for any upset that this may have caused."


Empress 07-12-2007 08:33 AM

CNN has the same Broadcaster sorry for queen claim - CNN.com

And BBC BBC NEWS | Entertainment | BBC apologises over Queen clips

HRH Kerry 07-12-2007 08:51 AM

I think this was to ensure good telly ratings for the program. The usual stir up some controversy and sell tactic.

Saphire 07-12-2007 09:25 AM

I think its the ethical thing to do, to come out and say that the advertising was misleading. I would hate to think of the Queen having hissy fits, she is just so regal all of the time that it doesn't fit with my image of her.

fee 07-12-2007 09:32 AM

On the other hand I doubt it would trouble the queens reputation one bit, to see her in a bit of a fit, after all she is human, now is she?
And it still is a great PR thing for the movie, documentary, sine at least I will certainly hunt up the clip on youtube as soon as something is available there...;)

TheTruth 07-12-2007 09:49 AM

The Queen's reputation is at the top. This can't disturbe a bit her position in people's opinion. Leibovitz is just a photographer whereas Elizabeth is THE Queen.

Skydragon 07-12-2007 09:51 AM

Apparently they reversed the clips to make it seem as if HM was storming out, they should be ashamed!

"But in fact, this clip was filmed before the photographs were taken" - The BBC said the clips for the trailer were "not intended to provide a full picture of what actually happened or of what will be shown in the final programme".

Duke of Marmalade 07-12-2007 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTruth (Post 639890)
The Queen's reputation is at the top. This can't disturbe a bit her position in people's opinion. Leibovitz is just a photographer whereas Elizabeth is THE Queen.

No it can't. Her Majesty is larger than life and Leibovitz can't even tell a crown from a tiara :shock:

TheTruth 07-12-2007 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade (Post 639895)
No it can't. Her Majesty is larger than life and Leibovitz can't even tell a crown from a tiara :shock:

Totally true. She knew she was going to photograph the most famous queen and she didn't take a little of her time to get informed on the basic stuff. Even someone who has no interest in royalty could tell the difference IMO.

ysbel 07-12-2007 10:01 AM

Annie Leibowitz is a good photographer; she's looking at the picture from the artistic angle. Her Majesty is looking at the picture from a historical and representational angle as well she should. This kind of conflict is healthy and makes for good pictures and I think the photo by Leibowitz was a good photo.

I have to love Her Majesty's comment "Dressy? What do you think this is?" Totally priceless.

Skydragon 07-12-2007 10:07 AM

The BBC is at fault for allowing anyone to believe that she stormed out of this session.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel (Post 639901)
I have to love Her Majesty's comment "Dressy? What do you think this is?" Totally priceless.

Priceless indeed! :rofl:

Duke of Marmalade 07-12-2007 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon (Post 639902)
The BBC is at fault for allowing anyone to believe that she stormed out of this session.

Another big blunder after the phone-in scandal for the BBC.

MARG 07-13-2007 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon (Post 639902)
The BBC is at fault for allowing anyone to believe that she stormed out of this session.

Someone once told me that "Perception is everything", and Nobody is going to convince me that the way this trailer was edited was a "mistake".
It's all in the delivery.....eg. Woman, without her man, is nothing! or Woman, without her, man is nothing!

That shot of the Queen walking to the sitting or from the sitting says two totally different things about the Queen.

The BBC blew it and maybe she will become the next member of the BRF to shun the BBC for all official statements or interviews, especially after she allowed them into her private life and they "took advantage" of her, in much the same way as Sophie, Charles et al have suffered mis-representation.

No doubt it will be deemed to be the misguided spin of some barely grown wunderkid from PR. As they say in NZ.....yeah, right!

Duke of Windsor 07-13-2007 09:23 AM

The trailer was edited in a way that showed the Queen "storming out". I saw it on the news here in Australia and even before they said it was a mistake I knew the Queen would never do something like storm out of a photo shoot, she has far too much class for that! Futhermore I'm sure Her Majesty really wouldn't give that big of a fuss about removing her crown, honestly!

Duke of Marmalade 07-13-2007 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke of Windsor (Post 640327)
I'm sure Her Majesty really wouldn't give that big of a fuss about removing her crown, honestly!

I think HM was annoyed because firstly (I found) Leibovitz's remark was a bit offensive, because if you get the honor to work with the Queen you should name the things correctly, here: tiara, and secondly I think it takes a lot of time until the Queen is dressed in the full robe etc and it's not that simple to just remove the tiara because then the hairdresser has to come and fix the hair and so on. It's a timeconsuming and exhausting procedure, who wouldn't be annoyed by such a remark? Leibovitz did not get that it's not about what looks better but about HM wearing that specific robe and everything that goes with it. HM is not a model or wants to look as good as possible as all the other vain people Leibovitz mainly works with, such as actors. She's a monarch after all and it's about her position in history, not about looks.

I like the result though, the pics are great.

Nichola 07-13-2007 10:26 AM

Well, they've got what they probably wanted...publicity!:rolleyes:

Duke of Windsor 07-13-2007 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade (Post 640340)
I think HM was annoyed because firstly (I found) Leibovitz's remark was a bit offensive, because if you get the honor to work with the Queen you should name the things correctly, here: tiara, and secondly I think it takes a lot of time until the Queen is dressed in the full robe etc and it's not that simple to just remove the tiara because then the hairdresser has to come and fix the hair and so on. It's a timeconsuming and exhausting procedure, who wouldn't be annoyed by such a remark? Leibovitz did not get that it's not about what looks better but about HM wearing that specific robe and everything that goes with it. HM is not a model or wants to look as good as possible as all the other vain people Leibovitz mainly works with, such as actors. She's a monarch after all and it's about her position in history, not about looks.

I like the result though, the pics are great.

That's a good point, it would take ages to get all of Her Majesty's hair correct etc after her tiara was removed and it would be a very annoying process indeed. I dont know anything about Leibovitz or who she works with, etc and I haven't yet seen the finished product of her work with Her Majesty - does anyone know if it was a success? I understand that Her Majesty appearing as she did for that portrait was for an historical aspect more than anything, but I just think it was all blown out of proportion, don't you think?
Patrick.

Duke of Marmalade 07-13-2007 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke of Windsor (Post 640373)
That's a good point, it would take ages to get all of Her Majesty's hair correct etc after her tiara was removed and it would be a very annoying process indeed. I dont know anything about Leibovitz or who she works with, etc and I haven't yet seen the finished product of her work with Her Majesty - does anyone know if it was a success? I understand that Her Majesty appearing as she did for that portrait was for an historical aspect more than anything, but I just think it was all blown out of proportion, don't you think?
Patrick.

Very true. If the BBC had acted more carefully all this fuss would have not happened. Leibovitz is a star photographer, she does maily AAA VIPS of all kinds. I recall there are four pics from this session and they have been posted somewhere on the forum. Does anyone know where? :flowers:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises