"The Crown" (2016-Present) - Netflix Drama Series on Queen Elizabeth II

[MARG]

Sadly, no I wouldn't. This series was a brilliant move for the Republican movement which at present isn't that loud. But they are creating a whole new membership with this series, especially with those born since Diana's death.

They had already set the stage by the depiction of various senior members of the royal family. Now they are cold, callous and just plain vicious.

I really think a note should be made that its fiction.

 

[Denville]

Sadly, no I wouldn't. This series was a brilliant move for the Republican movement which at present isn't that loud. But they are creating a whole new membership with this series, especially with those born since Diana's death.

They had already set the stage by the depiction of various senior members of the royal family. Now they are cold, callous and just plain vicious.

I really think a note should be made that its fiction.

Its fiction but it is based on real life events.

 

[Fem]

Its fiction but it is based on real life events.

Seriously?

Yes, the major, historical events are real. But every conversation, every thought, disagreement or fight is completely made up. And this is what the people are talking about and thinking it was real, not the historical events.

 

[Denville]

Seriously?

Yes, the major, historical events are real. But every conversation, every thought, disagreement or fight is completely made up. And this is what the people are talking about and thinking it was real, not the historical events.

yes seriously. It is not fiction in the sense that Pride and Prejudice is fiction. Its based on historical events, and is about real people. Its not very accurate I gather but I cant' think of a historical series in recent years that IS accurate..

 

[Mbruno]

Seriously?

Yes, the major, historical events are real. But every conversation, every thought, disagreement or fight is completely made up. And this is what the people are talking about and thinking it was real, not the historical events.

Private conversations when shown in historical dramas will always be fictional since, as the name says, they are private so nobody who was not part of those conversations is possibly capable of knowing what was said.



Having said that, many dialogues shown in the Netflix series are not really private, but rather are actually based on accounts of such dialogues found in books that are public. Those accounts were generally written by third parties, sometimes in unauthorized (or at least unofficial) biographies, so there is a legitimate question about their accuracy, but, to the extent that the Netflix series relied in part on those (and possibly other) sources, we cannot say that all dialogues are completely made up by the series writers.


Some commentators in the UK (to be fair, mostly left-leaning and/or republican) have been making these points in response to the conservative/royalist backlash against The Crown. Trying to be impartial, I tend to think that both sides have valid arguments.

 

[Pranter]

The couple articles I read with the writer/producer said it was fictionalized ..I mean ppl need to do their own research too. Of course a lot of the Diana parts are based on her own accounts/interviews so not fiction. I would imagine some of Charles’s parts are based at least a little on his interviews/book(s) so not fiction.


LaRae

 

[Betsypaige]

Conversations will always have to be invented in these types of shows as only the principals will ever know what was really said. However, these conversations should illuminate the facts, not further agendas, as Morgan is trying to do.

Denville:

yes seriously. It is not fiction in the sense that Pride and Prejudice is fiction. Its based on historical events, and is about real people. Its not very accurate I gather but I cant' think of a historical series in recent years that IS accurate..

That’s no excuse. I generally don’t watch any of these types of shows (except the White Princess) because I much prefer documentaries and cold, hard facts to fiction for entertainment’s sake), but I understand the dramatic value of creative license. However, especially when we’re dealing with such recent history that people who lived through events are alive, there should be a sense of responsibility to accurately portray events. As I said above, “Invented”. conversations should illuminate the facts, not further agendas, as Morgan is trying to do.

 

[QueenMathilde]

I don't know. I watched a few episodes at the very beginning but I didn't know the queen when she was young so it was easier to buy as a fact based show. Now we're up to characters where I remember the actual people it seems fake. I think they should have ended it before Charles and Diana.

 

[Denville]

I don't know. I watched a few episodes at the very beginning but I didn't know the queen when she was young so it was easier to buy as a fact based show. Now we're up to characters where I remember the actual people it seems fake. I think they should have ended it before Charles and Diana.

I doubt if they were going to do that. Far more people were interested in the Charles and Diana drama and in Diana than in the Queen when she was a young woman in the 50s. So they're going to attract a lot more viewers. From waht I've read, the earlier years were not particularly accurate either..

 

[Mirabel]

So she wasn't a 19 year old girl, paired up with a nearly thirty year old and let's make a life out of it? The disparity in life experience is huge and she was set up to lose from the very beginning. If that isn't cruel, what is? They're both products of the environment they were raised in and I feel sympathy for Charles, but he did what he did and so did she. Both didn't come out looking flawless.

I don't think the age difference was necessarily a deal-breaker.
After all, Diana's sister Jane married Robert Fellowes, and they had a similar gap. Apparently their marriage was successful, and so why would Diana think hers would be any different?

It was more of a disparity in tastes that caused dissension. And Charles was led to believe Diana shared many of the same tastes. "Country girl at heart"??

 

[Pranter]

She was a country girl. The issues with the country as an adult had to do with WHO she was in the country with, and the atmosphere there.


LaRae

 

[Mbruno]

I don't think the age difference was necessarily a deal-breaker.
After all, Diana's sister Jane married Robert Fellowes, and they had a similar gap. Apparently their marriage was successful, and so why would Diana think hers would be any different?

It was more of a disparity in tastes that caused dissension. And Charles was led to believe Diana shared many of the same tastes. "Country girl at heart"??

To be honest, I have always been puzzled by the fact that Diana, having been born into the landed aristocracy, was nothing like a "country girl" and more of a "city person" actually. What I mean is that I would expect the daughter of an English earl with a large rural estate to be someone like Lady Mary or Lady Sybil from Downton Abbey and never someone like Diana who didn't hunt or ride for example.



I am not very familiar with Diana's upbringing though, so I am probably missing the facts. Could anyone possibly care to elaborate on this matter?

 

[Denville]

To be honest, I have always been puzzled by the fact that Diana, having been born into the landed aristocracy, was nothing like a "country girl" and more of a "city person" actually. What I mean is that I would expect the daughter of an English earl with a large rural estate to be someone like Lady Mary or Lady Sybil from Downton Abbey and never someone like Diana who didn't hunt or ride for example.



I am not very familiar with Diana's upbringing though, so I am probably missing the facts. Could anyone possibly care to elaborate on this matter?

There's no rule that says that an earls daughter with a country estate has to be fond of the country or into hunting shootin' and fishing. Diana's mother didn't care much for country life in her young years and was keen to be able to spend more time in London.. while Lord Spencer was happy with his estate and being a farmer. Diana like most girls was keen to get away from home and to taste life in a big city, as a young girl.. and as she grew up, she seems to have enjoyed city life a lot more than the country and to prefer sunny holidays in exotic places to weeks in Scotland. She had been brought up in the country and she probably was OK with that, and accepted it.. but she fell of a horse as a kid and lost her nerve and any taste for ponies. She preferred city life and city diversions to country ones -its just a matter of taste and that was her taste...

 

[Fem]

Private conversations when shown in historical dramas will always be fictional since, as the name says, they are private so nobody who was not part of those conversations is possibly capable of knowing what was said.



Having said that, many dialogues shown in the Netflix series are not really private, but rather are actually based on accounts of such dialogues found in books that are public. Those accounts were generally written by third parties, sometimes in unauthorized (or at least unofficial) biographies, so there is a legitimate question about their accuracy, but, to the extent that the Netflix series relied in part on those (and possibly other) sources, we cannot say that all dialogues are completely made up by the series writers.


Some commentators in the UK (to be fair, mostly left-leaning and/or republican) have been making these points in response to the conservative/royalist backlash against The Crown. Trying to be impartial, I tend to think that both sides have valid arguments.

The problem here is, (some) people watch The Crown and think that it was like that 100%. That these were the words said in a private conversation between HMQ and her sister. Or between Charles and Anne. And these people decide then, with a little help from internet trolls, to hate on real people based on a fictional show.

 

[Pranter]

There's no rule that says that an earls daughter with a country estate has to be fond of the country or into hunting shootin' and fishing. Diana's mother didn't care much for country life in her young years and was keen to be able to spend more time in London.. while Lord Spencer was happy with his estate and being a farmer. Diana like most girls was keen to get away from home and to taste life in a big city, as a young girl.. and as she grew up, she seems to have enjoyed city life a lot more than the country and to prefer sunny holidays in exotic places to weeks in Scotland. She had been brought up in the country and she probably was OK with that, and accepted it.. but she fell of a horse as a kid and lost her nerve and any taste for ponies. She preferred city life and city diversions to country ones -its just a matter of taste and that was her taste...

She loved animals including ponies, she was afraid to ride after breaking her arm falling off as a youngster. She did ride later in life (Ive seen pics of her riding with the Queen etc). But certainly she had no interest in foxhunting etc.

For someone who supposedly preferred the city she spent quite a bit of time in the country which is why I say the issue was not the location..it was the company/situation.


LaRae

 

[Nico]

The couple articles I read with the writer/producer said it was fictionalized ..I mean ppl need to do their own research too. Of course a lot of the Diana parts are based on her own accounts/interviews so not fiction.

Precisely "her own accounts". And we all pretty know that her accounts were sometimes a bit fictional too.

 

[Pranter]

Precisely "her own accounts". And we all pretty know that her accounts were sometimes a bit fictional too.

Most professional counselors will tell you regardless if you agree it is their own viewpoint, how they received situations.. and thats your starting point. So to say it was fictional would be inaccurate.


LaRae

 

[Nico]

Most professional counselors will tell you regardless if you agree it is their own viewpoint, how they received situations.. and thats your starting point. So to say it was fictional would be inaccurate.


LaRae

Could "embellished" if not "twisted" be more of your taste your Highness ?

 

[Denville]

She loved animals including ponies, she was afraid to ride after breaking her arm falling off as a youngster. She did ride later in life (Ive seen pics of her riding with the Queen etc). But certainly she had no interest in foxhunting etc.

For someone who supposedly preferred the city she spent quite a bit of time in the country which is why I say the issue was not the location..it was the company/situation.


LaRae

When did she spend a lot of time in the country? She had to go to HIghgrove for weekends, when married to Charles and the same applied to visits to Balmoral etc... She went riding a bit at one stage probably to try and please the queen.. but I dont think she enjoyed it much.. and where she had a choice, she went on sunny or skiing holidays....She didn't like blood sports, she got to hate Balmoral.. and after her separation from Charles she spent little or no time in the country again.

 

[Marengo]

This thread has been re-opened.

Feel free to discuss the Netflix-series in this thread.

Posts that are not about this series but about Diana and Charles themselves should be posted in the Diana-subforum in the British corner. You can find that subforum here.


https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/

 

[Denville]

having seena few clips of it on Youtube it IS dire. Bad script, completely caricatured picture of Charles, not parituclarly good acting over all.. Its rubbish but it seems like a lot of people watching it take it seriously and beleive it...

 

[An Ard Ri]

I still haven't watched it but plan to start season 4 on Christmas Eve.

 

[Prinsara]

So while this thread was closed, the UK government asked Netflix for a disclaimer and was refused. Apparently they feel their responsibility stops at warning of bodily self-harm and nothing else.

 

[Denville]

So while this thread was closed, the UK government asked Netflix for a disclaimer and was refused. Apparently they feel their responsibility stops at warning of bodily self-harm and nothing else.

why should htey put a disclaimer? They're not the police or teachers.. They are a company that makes movies and sells them. If people want to beleive that this series is 100% accurate they will do so..

 

[Osipi]

That's it in a nutshell, Denville. Although I do really enjoy historical fiction dramas on Netflix (Reign, The Last Kingdom, The Borgias etc), I *know* it's fictionalized and if i want the *real* history, there are a gazillion histories compiled by experts that give the real information should i choose to look for it. (which i do). That's the beauty of being a bookaholic. The historical fictional dramas whet the appetite.

 

[Betsypaige]

I disagree, I believe Netflix should have added a warning before each episode, given how thoroughly irresponsible the Crown is

 

[Queen Claude]

Just because some people are history buffs and can discern the factual parts from the fictitous parts, that does not mean that all viewers are in that boat. I am fine with some poetic license but if significant portions of what is broadcast is made up then I think there should be a disclaimer.

I am wondering if there was a disclaimer for The Queen, but regardless if there was or wasn't, I think there should be a disclaimer in this situation, especially since it was requested and there is no disputing that a significant portion is fictionalized.

 

[Durham]

Most historical dramas deal with the dead not the living. I don't see the point of opening old wounds. But the peddlers of this (beautifully produced) latest fantasy are making lots of money so they're not going to give a damn.

 

[Osipi]

This is an excellent point. "The Crown" *is* dealing with people that are still making history and are still alive. The quality of the production of this series has drastically gone downhill since they delved into the Diana years and reopened all the controversy surrounding the 'War of the Wales".

It's surprising, in a way, that there hasn't been lawsuits filed yet.

 

[Denville]

This is an excellent point. "The Crown" *is* dealing with people that are still making history and are still alive. The quality of the production of this series has drastically gone downhill since they delved into the Diana years and reopened all the controversy surrounding the 'War of the Wales".

It's surprising, in a way, that there hasn't been lawsuits filed yet.

From the clips I've seen, honestly, it seemed a pretty rubibsh series.. with the queen being portrayed as this aggressive woman.. when generally she's held to be someone who avoids confrontation. Either Olivia Colman is a dire actress or the script is very bad.. bit of both..
and what suits could be filed?