British Royal Household vs Netflix Series "The Crown"

[Estro Felino]

Royal Family news: Should Britons boycott The Crown after royal backlash? POLL | Royal | News – Celebrity Land International

It seems the Windsor did not appreciate this TV show. Which many historians have found (despite some small flaws here and there) pretty accurate.
What do you guys think?
The 5th season will be the most important. Since it will deal with Diana's and Charles' divorce. And with Diana's death.

I do believe it is a show that unlike others focuses on the deepest recesses of the charactets' psyche.
It is really useful.

 

[Augustus]

It seems the Windsor did not appreciate this TV show. Which many historians have found (despite some small flaws here and there) pretty accurate.
What do you guys think?
The 5th season will be the most important. Since it will deal with Diana's and Charles' divorce. And with Diana's death.

I do believe it is a show that unlike others focuses on the deepest recesses of the charactets' psyche.
It is really useful.

I've never seen it so can't comment on this specifically, but as a general point.

The problem with any series/movie that is 'based on on a true story' but is really a work of fiction based around real events is that it blurs these lines.

Either a program tries to be entirely factually accurate and tell a true story (within reason), or it should promote itself clearly as a work of fiction. The closer a story sticks to facts while still adding in sensationalist fictions, the more this causes people to mistake fiction for fact. When these fictions paint people or groups in a negative light, this is akin to 'fake news'.

The Crown, based on the little I have heard, tries to blur these lines as it benefits from being seen as 'a true story' but also benefits from the added fictional aspects. Each episode should start with a disclaimer that notes that even though it features real people and events, it is a work of fiction and should be treated as such.

Failure to do so is unethical.

 

[Estro Felino]

I've never seen it so can't comment on this specifically, but as a general point.

The problem with any series/movie that is 'based on on a true story' but is really a work of fiction based around real events is that it blurs these lines.

Either a program tries to be entirely factually accurate and tell a true story (within reason), or it should promote itself clearly as a work of fiction. The closer a story sticks to facts while still adding in sensationalist fictions, the more this causes people to mistake fiction for fact. When these fictions paint people or groups in a negative light, this is akin to 'fake news'.

The Crown, based on the little I have heard, tries to blur these lines as it benefits from being seen as 'a true story' but also benefits from the added fictional aspects. Each episode should start with a disclaimer that notes that even though it features real people and events, it is a work of fiction and should be treated as such.

Failure to do so is unethical.

I perfectly agree with the disclaimer at the beginning of each episode.
Nevertheless the historical accuracy has been confirmed by many. It does describe historical facts faithfully without exaggerating.
It is considered controversial by the British Royal Household because, in my humble opinion, they feel psychologically analyzed by the screenwriters.

 

[Altfish]

Royal Family news: Should Britons boycott The Crown after royal backlash? POLL | Royal | News – Celebrity Land International

It seems the Windsor did not appreciate this TV show. Which many historians have found (despite some small flaws here and there) pretty accurate.
What do you guys think?
The 5th season will be the most important. Since it will deal with Diana's and Charles' divorce. And with Diana's death.

I do believe it is a show that unlike others focuses on the deepest recesses of the charactets' psyche.
It is really useful.

The elite Royal Family are allowed an opinion, but if they say they don't like it, I'm more likely to watch it.

 

[pearl]

I have not watched 'The Crown' mostly because its a series. There are a couple of movies about Britain's queens that I loved. I think there is some accurate history blended with poetic license?
One is 'The Queen' concerned the death of Princess Diana and the following drama. I found empathy for the queen, disgust for Prince Charles, there seemed to be a fair character portrayal of Prince Phillip in his devotion to the queen but didn't like his attitude toward Diana.

Another favorite 'Victoria and Abdul'
Near the end of her reign, Queen Victoria developed a friendship with an Indian servant, elevating him to trusted advisor and infuriating her court

Victoria & Abdul: Is It a True Story? Was Abdul Karim Real? | Heavy.com

The Queen queen-2006

"The Queen" is told almost entirely in small scenes of personal conflict. It creates an uncanny sense that it knows what goes on backstage in the monarchy; in the movie, Queen Elizabeth, Prince Philip and the Queen Mother have settled into a sterile domesticity cocooned by servants and civil servants.

The Queen movie review & film summary (2006) | Roger Ebert

 

[Estro Felino]

I have not watched 'The Crown' mostly because its a series. There are a couple of movies about Britain's queens that I loved. I think there is some accurate history blended with poetic license?
One is 'The Queen' concerned the death of Princess Diana and the following drama. I found empathy for the queen, disgust for Prince Charles, there seemed to be a fair character portrayal of Prince Phillip in his devotion to the queen but didn't like his attitude toward Diana.

Another favorite 'Victoria and Abdul'
Near the end of her reign, Queen Victoria developed a friendship with an Indian servant, elevating him to trusted advisor and infuriating her court

Victoria & Abdul: Is It a True Story? Was Abdul Karim Real? | Heavy.com

The Queen queen-2006

"The Queen" is told almost entirely in small scenes of personal conflict. It creates an uncanny sense that it knows what goes on backstage in the monarchy; in the movie, Queen Elizabeth, Prince Philip and the Queen Mother have settled into a sterile domesticity cocooned by servants and civil servants.

The Queen movie review & film summary (2006) | Roger Ebert

The Queen (2006) is a movie that focuses on politics rather than the royal household. The relations between the Prime Minister and the Head of the State (the monarch).
This political balance between two figures. The Government (executive power) and the monarchy during the tragic event of September 1997.

The Crown is exclusively about the psyche of the members of the royal household and things like politics (or historical events) are merely mentioned

 

[Estro Felino]

The elite Royal Family are allowed an opinion, but if they say they don't like it, I'm more likely to watch it.

It also deals with the fact that some historians deny the evidence.
Hugo Vickers said that it is false that Pricess Diana said "They see me as a threat".
As it was portrayed in the fourth season of this series.
Which is not false. Since she said it herself.
This is denying the evidence.

 

[pearl]

Diana also stated 'there are three of us in this marriage'. I think she was used in order to guarantee Charles would have heirs to the crown, his girlfriend was too old.

 

[Altfish]

It also deals with the fact that some historians deny the evidence.
Hugo Vickers said that it is false that Pricess Diana said "They see me as a threat".
As it was portrayed in the fourth season of this series.
Which is not false. Since she said it herself.
This is denying the evidence.

It's a story, fiction, made up for dramatic effect.
It never said it was totally true.

 

[Estro Felino]

Diana also stated 'there are three of us in this marriage'. I think she was used in order to guarantee Charles would have heirs to the crown, his girlfriend was too old.

Indeed. In the fourth season she finds out. Hence her breakdown.

 

[Estro Felino]

I am somehow relieved that Queen Elizabeth II passed away before the broadcasting of the Fifth series of The Crown.
It would have been too devastating for her, to watch it. Or to know people watch it.
Because this series analyzes the psychology of characters deeply.
Lady Diana's tragedy is still something people haven't coped with.
There hasn't been what in psychology they call closure.

People have learnt to sympathize with King Charles III, watching the series.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Never watched it, nor will I.
I dislike this type of intrusive fiction, based on real people, many of whom are still living.

Of course Diana had lovers and her life obviously makes colourful soap like fiction. But I never understood her popularity as a person.
To me she was just another square peg in a round hole.
Now Charles is King. Our oldest new king in history.

 

[pearl]

I remember Elizabeth's II visit to Boston in the '70's. It had it humorous moments. Before her arrival the protocol is presented, one of which was to never, ever touch the Queen. Then Governor Michael Dukakis, aware of the protocol, waited at the bottom of a ramp or something to greet her when she slipped. Fortunately, she caught herself and retained her balance.

 

[Estro Felino]

Never watched it, nor will I.
I dislike this type of intrusive fiction, based on real people, many of whom are still living.

Of course Diana had lovers and her life obviously makes colourful soap like fiction. But I never understood her popularity as a person.
To me she was just another square peg in a round hole.
Now Charles is King. Our oldest new king in history.

Because she used to do things differently.
Because she used to do things with no rule book.
Because she used to lead from the heart, and not the head.
Albeit that's got her into trouble, I understand that.
But someone had to go out there and love people. And show it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It's called entertainment. I found the series to be more entertaining than most.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Royal Family news: Should Britons boycott The Crown after royal backlash? POLL | Royal | News – Celebrity Land International

It seems the Windsor did not appreciate this TV show. Which many historians have found (despite some small flaws here and there) pretty accurate.
What do you guys think?
The 5th season will be the most important. Since it will deal with Diana's and Charles' divorce. And with Diana's death.

I do believe it is a show that unlike others focuses on the deepest recesses of the charactets' psyche.
It is really useful.

It's probably best to hold off temporarily out of respect for the queens passing, and then afterwards go all out on it.

 

[Estro Felino]

It's probably best to hold off temporarily out of respect for the queens passing, and then afterwards go all out on it.

The fifth series will probably be ready in one year, at least.
So...not before.

 

[Estro Felino]

I remember Elizabeth's II visit to Boston in the '70's. It had it humorous moments. Before her arrival the protocol is presented, one of which was to never, ever touch the Queen. Then Governor Michael Dukakis, aware of the protocol, waited at the bottom of a ramp or something to greet her when she slipped. Fortunately, she caught herself and retained her balance.

The TV series is really balanced.

The figure of Charles, now King Charles III, has been somehow respected. So many people have empathized with the very difficult and demanding task of Prince of Wales.
And people have empathized with Camilla, his wife. Who is a very nice person. She has travelled throughout Europe with her husband and showed to be noble and humble at the same time.

 

[pearl]

And people have empathized with Camilla, his wife.

I understand that and is the proper thing to do, but for me empathy belongs to Diana.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The TV series is really balanced.

The figure of Charles, now King Charles III, has been somehow respected. So many people have empathized with the very difficult and demanding task of Prince of Wales.

I'm curious: just what makes the task of Prince of Wales so very difficult and demanding as opposed to, for example, steel worker or nurse or school teacher or mother?