The Crown plans to depict the 'tampongate' call

Doodledog I think the point I'm trying to make is that the RF are a bit of an exception. They are not criminals or celebrities who are mostly fair game. Portraying fairly recent events which are disturbing and upsetting is not fair on them. Think how any of us would feel if it was our family, I'd be heartbroken.

I'm still amazed this isn't some sort of treason lol

Glorianny

I've watched all The Crown, so I'll probably watch this. As for the "it shouldn't be shown" lobby, well sorry this family have lived a life of luxury for generations I don't see why us peasants shouldn't get to watch them and to imagine what goes on behind closed doors. And the Tampax conversation shows just what idiots they are.
There is a new film out about Harvey Weinstein, anyone want to object to his life being portrayed on the screen?

That’s my take on it too.

I enjoy The Crown as a drama, not an expose, and will watch it as soon as I can on Wednesday. I have never understood people who condemn TV shows and films they haven’t seen - particularly when they jump to conclusions about other people’s motives for watching them. It comes across as closed-minded and rather superior.

VS if you haven’t seen it, start at the beginning-I think it would be a bit odd coming new to it in this series.

There is a new film out about Harvey Weinstein, anyone want to object to his life being portrayed on the screen?
No-one cares what they do with HW but the thought of watching him portrayed on the screen is quite revolting. I won't be watching.

I will wait until I have actually watched this new series before making any comment! I have read a variety of reviews over the last few days. Some - mainly the right wing press - go on at length about how we shouldn’t watch it, whilst detailing in glorious detail, exactly why we shouldn’t! I reckon the Daily Fail has shares in Netflix. The review in the Guardian couldn’t see a problem. I will make my own mind up.

VioletSky

I'm starting to think I need to watch this. I don't watch much TV

Go for it VioletSky it’s good for these dark damp nights.

The early ones I found riveting Princess Margaret, and when Queen Elizabeth II’s father died.

I'm starting to think I need to watch this. I don't watch much TV

I've watched all The Crown, so I'll probably watch this. As for the "it shouldn't be shown" lobby, well sorry this family have lived a life of luxury for generations I don't see why us peasants shouldn't get to watch them and to imagine what goes on behind closed doors. And the Tampax conversation shows just what idiots they are.
There is a new film out about Harvey Weinstein, anyone want to object to his life being portrayed on the screen?

I shall watch it, as many have said it’s a drama loosely set around real events.

I take most of what is on TV with a pinch of salt

I think that dramas about real life murders are sometimes made with the input and approval of the family who want the story told. I'd like to think that was always the case, at least in the last 50 years, but I don't suppose it is. Dramatising people's private lives and deaths only 25 years ago and without their consent is very wrong in my view.

More boring stuff about the Royals.

I read somewhere over the weekend that the actress who plays Diana thought she was making a Documentary!

So many films are made about ‘real life’ events, why should the feelings of the RF be spared?

Children are abducted and killed and it’s all replayed on the screen, I dread to think how awful it must be for the parents to have to relive those terrible events.

IMO they should have a 100yr cut off date like the Census.

I'm interested in how they might dramatise the conversations anyway, because that's exactly what they were, CONVERSATIONS, nothing else. In that case we can't possibly see any facial expressions of Charles and Camilla because those would reveal feelings of lust, desire, love or whatever. So will we get still shots of a telephone and a hand or will the screen go blank?

Well yes I think that what happens to those within the RF is one of the arguments for not having one.

I agree with you Chestnut. I have no interest in watching dramatised versions of other people's lives. All of them distort what really happened and add fictional episodes and too often it is these episodes that stick in people's minds.

If I want to know more about these people, I prefer a good documentary.

As for saying that their our episodes in the lives of the Royal family that they would like to keep hidden, as if this was a sin. Look at your own lives. Aren't their episodes in your own families life that you are relieved that you can keep hidden?

Would you like to live a life where your every action, personal or private are the centre of constant surveillance? Why should anyone not have things they want to keep private?

Even when members of the Royal family say they want out and retreat to a private life, they are still pursued everywhere by reporters.

Maybe the people involved in 9/11 had agreed to it being dramatised, I don't know. What I think is much more respectful is a factual dramatisation where actors portray real people but they don't speak. The story is usually told by a narrator, often using the actual spoken or written words. The actors are there just to create a visual representation of the story and bring it to life.

But if you apply that to the crown you need to apply that to all drama etc, there have already been numerous dramatisations of 9/11 for example. I am not saying it's good or bad either way, but you cant just single out the crown.
I know you were clear you felt it should be a general rule chestnut so am not aiming my comments at you but it does seem that others are singling out the crown in particular.

Never seen The Crown. Cant understand anyone being remotely interested in a hacked phone call

Did you also dislike the movie “the queen”? What about “the young Victoria”? Titanic? Hidden figures? The impossible? Erin Brockovich? Apollo 13?

Well some of those are over 50 years ago and some I don't know what they are. I've always felt it wrong to portray anyone living without their approval, that's just my personal belief. I would hate for my family to be portrayed on TV without our agreement. Otherwise, surely 50 years is a respectful cut-off period without agreement? These events are only 25 years ago.

Well stated Maddyone.

dlizi4

Sort yourselves out Ladies, This is how and why Diana died.
Watch our King , why is Camilla being Crowned while Prince Phillip never did?
Big spoiled man child and will be replaced soon , place your bets!

Camilla is being crowned because a King can have his wife crowned Queen because a queen does not outrank a king. However if Philip had been crowned king he would have then outranked his wife who was the Queen by birthright. Is that too difficult to understand? So a King can have his wife crowned Queen, but a Queen cannot have her husband crowned King so as to not have him outrank her. That’s why.

I’m not sure what any of that has got to do with how or why Diana died. She actually died because she wasn’t wearing a seatbelt whilst she was in a speeding car driven by a man who was drunk.

Sort yourselves out Ladies, This is how and why Diana died.
Watch our King , why is Camilla being Crowned while Prince Phillip never did?
Big spoiled man child and will be replaced soon , place your bets!

All of the royals shush up things they don't want made public.

Hopefully Charles and Camilla will just quietly cringe.

Harry would have rushed off to his lawyers months ago to complain if Netflix weren't his paymasters.

I'm sure devotees of the programme won't object to Harry and Meghan's shortfalls being broadcast.