The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #841  
Old 11-20-2020, 08:35 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,371
I finally finished viewing the whole thing.
It was wholly slanted to present Diana as a victim.

Also, i can't imagine Thatcher dissolving in tears over losing her position; it seemed so out of character. (Though it surprisingly made me feel sympathy for her).
(But then, I thought it was horrible the way some people celebrated her death.)
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #842  
Old 11-20-2020, 08:54 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
Urgh I'm sorry but the actress who plays Diana drives me nuts. She looks nothing like Diana they just slapped a blonde wig on some random actress. And she seems to be under the delusion she looks like Diana. I don't believe people "fainted" when they saw her mother because she looked so much like Diana. I want to see a picture of the woman.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...a-toddler.html
True I've seen a few Dianas.. None were very good, in terms of acting and most didn't look a bit like her.. but this one is the MOST unlike
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #843  
Old 11-20-2020, 09:26 AM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,797
You have to admit the innuendos in the Diana/Philip confrontation in the last episode are bordeline conspiracy theory ...
Reply With Quote
  #844  
Old 11-21-2020, 02:38 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,440
The inaccuracies in portraying the treatment of Nerissa Bowes-Lyon and Katherine Bowes-Lyon kind of reminds me the inaccuracies in The Lost Prince produced by the BBC in 2003, where the Royal Family were exaggerated to be more cruel and cold-hearted than reality. I'm not saying that the Royal Family handled the situation perfectly. I'm just pointing out the inaccuracies that may have been used for the sake of the production director's agenda or audience viewership.

The Lost Prince made the audience think that Prince John (youngest child of George V and Queen Mary), Lala Bill (Prince John's nanny) and the staff were forced to live in Wood Farm due to the trauma or austere conditions of WWI. Whilst that could be one of the many possibilities, the main reason was the increased severity and frequency of his epileptic seizures. The film also shown Prince John lived in complete isolation with Lala Bill and royal staff. In reality, Queen Mary actually broke royal practice to allow local children to visit and play with Prince John.

This documentary below has more revelation on Prince John and pointed out more "fake scenes" in The Lost Prince.


I could go on further, but we could probably discuss on fiction vs. fact in this BBC film on The Lost Prince thread and Prince John in his own thread under British Royal History.
Reply With Quote
  #845  
Old 11-21-2020, 08:02 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,868
I have not watched it so I find myself confused. QEQM was the second to youngest child of 9 or so. That being the case, how is it that all the shame and blame of her cousins situation was the BRF fault and not the parents or even the head of the family?
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #846  
Old 11-21-2020, 10:06 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,533
Because "the Queen's slightly distant family did the best they could at the time with illness that was little understood" is less exciting than "Queen's mother has family locked away"
Reply With Quote
  #847  
Old 11-22-2020, 04:15 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
The attacks Iíve seen have been in Twitter, and for me it has nor been limited to H and M stans, but those who adored Diana. There are a lot of people out there who think Charles, Camilla and the BRF are vile creatures. Of course, the on-line community is a drop in the bucket compared to the general public - I donít think people on social media necessarily represent the public as a whole. I think angry people are the ones who reaction tweet most often, the same way itís angry people who most often call in to radio talk shows. People who hate Charles/Camilla will want to express their feelings, especially in reaction to positive tweets. Those who already love them or feel positive about them wonít necessarily feel that same urge to express themselves. Hence reaction on social media is going to be unbalanced - in favor of the haters
Which is why I made the distinction of "most" and not "all"
Reply With Quote
  #848  
Old 11-22-2020, 05:09 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,440
The Mail on Sunday has launched a campaign to demand Netflix to have a disclaimer that some truths have been twisted. Those backing the call for a disclaim include
  • Lady Glenconner (Princess Margaret's lady-in-waiting who is also depicted in The Crown)
  • Julian Fellowes (Creator of Downton Abbey, Conservative Peer in the House of Lords)
  • Karen Bradley (Former Culture Secretary and Conservative MP of Staffordshire Moorlands)
  • General Sir Richard Dannatt (Former head of the British Army)

The Crown should come with a disclaimer that it is fiction NOT fact: Politicians, experts and friends of royals back calls for Netflix to warn viewers that show twists the truth
Politicians, royal experts & friend of Prince Charles calling for Netflix disclaimer
Believe streaming outlet should warn viewers The Crown scenes are fictional
Comes Princess Dianaís brother said he felt uneasy watching Diana's depiction

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...isclaimer.html
Reply With Quote
  #849  
Old 11-22-2020, 11:59 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by AC21091968 View Post
The Mail on Sunday has launched a campaign to demand Netflix to have a disclaimer that some truths have been twisted. Those backing the call for a disclaim include
  • Lady Glenconner (Princess Margaret's lady-in-waiting who is also depicted in The Crown)
  • Julian Fellowes (Creator of Downton Abbey, Conservative Peer in the House of Lords)
  • Karen Bradley (Former Culture Secretary and Conservative MP of Staffordshire Moorlands)
  • General Sir Richard Dannatt (Former head of the British Army)

The Crown should come with a disclaimer that it is fiction NOT fact: Politicians, experts and friends of royals back calls for Netflix to warn viewers that show twists the truth
Politicians, royal experts & friend of Prince Charles calling for Netflix disclaimer
Believe streaming outlet should warn viewers The Crown scenes are fictional
Comes Princess Dianaís brother said he felt uneasy watching Diana's depiction

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...isclaimer.html
This is a fantastic article - Iím so glad that people arenít letting this go given that the BRF canít defend themselves. I could have posted many excerpts, but I chose this one because of Morganís shocking, outrageous comment and subsequent hiring of a flunky historian.


Quote:
Some of The Crown's 'mistakes' are trivial, some are born of ignorance or careless research. But to me, many feel vindictive.

In this fourth series, Morgan's animus is directed against Prince Charles.

'Strip the bark off him,' he told one historian whom he was interviewing as a possible consultant on the series.

She declined the position and he sought assistants more amenable to his view about the Monarchy.

I'm not the only person to be dismayed by the poison running through the series. Penny Junor, a distinguished Royal biographer, most recently of the Duchess of Cornwall, wrote in this newspaper last weekend that the Royals in The Crown 'are wild, cruel distortions'. I agree.

Sally Bedell Smith, the leading American Royal biographer, believes the new series includes 'extreme and egregious misrepresentation'.

Hugo Vickers, pre-eminent Royal historian, concludes that the latest series 'is yet more subtly divisive than earlier seasons'.
Reply With Quote
  #850  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:08 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Peterborough, Canada
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
My neighbor was horrified by the Nerissa and Katherine Bowes Lyon episode. Her grandfather's brother was similarly placed in a government care facility on the advice of the then health service - before NHS. It was what was done. They were told that it was better for them and they could get 24 hrs care and treatment. Of course 1940's care and treatment doesn't look good now - but they really thought that they were doing what was best. But they did visit and take gifts over.
She was really applaud by the purity of the bloodline thing, especially as they muddled it with Margaret's and Diana's mental issues.

The cousins were institutionalized, but the bloodline discussion was fictionalized.


The series creator and writers seem to have major dislike for the BRF and the monarchy. The lack of characterizing any member of the family as having any redeeming features is beginning to really annoy me. Good writing should show complexity and tension in characters; in this series the characters are mostly one-dimensional.



It is not history, it is drama. Many who don't know any better will take it as fact.
Reply With Quote
  #851  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:10 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 659
I have read many Junor books and she is heavily biased towards Charles and Camilla. No surprises she would complain. She and Charles and Camilla are personal friends and she vacationed with Camilla. Bedell Smith also is not a Diana fan. So there are different points of view perhaps.

I saw few complaints about two egregious scenes in the Crown: John Kennedy being a wife abuser of his wife Jackie; and how Mountbatten and the Queen Mother conspired against Camilla (in truth, they were wary of each other). There were others as well.
Reply With Quote
  #852  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:22 PM
ashelen's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: maidstone, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,203
Last night I finished to watch all the season, it is entertaining but it is so many things and characters left behind, no Fergie, no the kids from Margrethe, and so many things we do not know if it is true or fiction. Can't imagine who will play Meghan in the future , will be herself? they look such a dysfunctional family.
__________________
Ashelen
Reply With Quote
  #853  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:24 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 659
Fergie was also a friend of Diana's (at first) and it's a shame they had no scenes together (perhaps in the next season though).
Reply With Quote
  #854  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:27 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Peterborough, Canada
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandy345 View Post
I have read many Junor books and she is heavily biased towards Charles and Camilla. No surprises she would complain. She and Charles and Camilla are personal friends and she vacationed with Camilla. Bedell Smith also is not a Diana fan. So there are different points of view perhaps..

Very true. She is incredibly biased. In this, however, I agree with her (and I have great sympathy for the struggles of the real-life Diana). I can hardly bear to watch the character of Charles being portrayed as an immature, self-centered, tortured man. The real-life Charles may have these traits, but it is unlikely that this is the full measure of the man, as is depicted in the series.
Reply With Quote
  #855  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:32 PM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandy345 View Post
I have read many Junor books and she is heavily biased towards Charles and Camilla. No surprises she would complain. She and Charles and Camilla are personal friends and she vacationed with Camilla. Bedell Smith also is not a Diana fan. So there are different points of view perhaps.
Because you think Diana's portrayal in "the Crown" is particularly favourable ?
Between puking in the toilets and a catasrophic hairdo, there's not so much left. It's a caricature, very much like the others ...
Reply With Quote
  #856  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:45 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
Because you think Diana's portrayal in "the Crown" is particularly favourable ?
Between puking in the toilets and a catasrophic hairdo, there's not so much left. It's a caricature, very much like the others ...
From what I've read, it's sure as heck far more sympathetic than how they portrayed Charles or anyone else.....

This is not directed to you, but in general:

I don't give a darn if Sally Bedell Smith is biased towards Charles and Camilla- heaven knows we've had to deal with plenty of writers who were biased against them (and towards Diana). Also, I don't see how it matters. Take her out of the equation and you're still left with a laundry list of people who believe Charles is being treated unfairly, frankly maliciously. What, are all of those people all of a sudden biased towards he and Camilla also?
Reply With Quote
  #857  
Old 11-22-2020, 12:45 PM
kathia_sophia's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South, Portugal
Posts: 3,001
I just watched 3 episodes of season 4, and what a big disappointment.


Prince Charles as a hunchback, insensitive and cold man.
Diana as someone very vulnerable without an opinion (despite her depression, I always thought of Diana as someone strong, who fought for her ideas).
Camilla being a nasty, ville woman.
Princess Margaret as the usual cold, arrogant woman.
Margaret Thatcher with serious mouth movement problems and terrible voice imitation (she looks like she has a mouth disease).
And I hated the scenes with the adult male deer.


The only good surprise was the portrayal of The Queen. Such an improvement from last season. Now she seems more human and down to earth.


BUT, this season feels like a totally different series from the first seasons. Season 1 and 2 showed some behind the scenes in The Queen's life, yes, but it showed her responsabilities as Queen, her duty, and the Prime Ministers and her. It gave justice to the title of this series. But season 4 completely forgets about that aspect, by making the Queen a secondary character. Duty and engagements are no longer the priority. It seems this season went for the scandas, romantic relationships and the triviality of the Royal Family (which apparently, most things are not factual). What a pity! They truly destroyed this show.
__________________
♫A man is not old until regrets take the place of dreams.♥
Reply With Quote
  #858  
Old 11-22-2020, 01:21 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
Because you think Diana's portrayal in "the Crown" is particularly favourable ?
Between puking in the toilets and a catasrophic hairdo, there's not so much left. It's a caricature, very much like the others ...
This is not the first time such scenes were shown. Some years back (before DIana died) there was the miniseries Diana Her True Story which showed rather graphic scenes of Diana binging and purging. I don't know or recall if "warnings" were added for the graphic scenes back then.

I also did not like the Philip taking Diana to stalk a deer scene. Made up story.

Or Margaret being made a sort of caricature.
Reply With Quote
  #859  
Old 11-22-2020, 02:17 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashelen View Post
Last night I finished to watch all the season, it is entertaining but it is so many things and characters left behind, no Fergie, no the kids from Margrethe, and so many things we do not know if it is true or fiction. Can't imagine who will play Meghan in the future , will be herself? they look such a dysfunctional family.

I've read that the series will end in the early 2000s era.
Reply With Quote
  #860  
Old 11-22-2020, 02:30 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by caethi View Post
The cousins were institutionalized, but the bloodline discussion was fictionalized.


The series creator and writers seem to have major dislike for the BRF and the monarchy. The lack of characterizing any member of the family as having any redeeming features is beginning to really annoy me. Good writing should show complexity and tension in characters; in this series the characters are mostly one-dimensional.



It is not history, it is drama. Many who don't know any better will take it as fact.

Peter Morgan is a republican, and if someone told me that he actually created this series to intentionally undermine them under the guise of making a show about the Queen's life and duty, I wouldn't be surprised.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, duke of edinburgh, queen elisabeth, the crown


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 4 (0 members and 4 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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Victoria" (2016-Present) - ITV Drama Series on Queen Victoria An Ard Ri The Electronic Domain 174 11-21-2019 04:58 PM
"The Taking of Prince Harry" (2010) - Channel 4 Drama Film wbenson The Electronic Domain 17 10-26-2010 10:16 AM




Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian baby names birth britain britannia british royal family camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation customs daisy duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style gemstones george vi gradenigo hello! henry viii highgrove hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan jewellery kensington palace książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical monarchist movements monarchists mongolia mountbatten nara period pless politics portugal prince harry princess eugenie queen elizabeth ii queen louise royal ancestry royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family suthida taiwan thai royal family tradition united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:52 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×