Series 6 of ‘The Crown’. 👑 A turkey for Christmas?

Like this

eazybee

I have never watched a minute of it and never will.

I'm the same never watched and after all the inaccuracies that were pointed out in the Times which I half-read, it's a load of made-up stories. As for Olivia Coleman to me, she plays all her parts whether film or TV if she is the raving Miss Haversham.

Doodledog I haven’t watched it since the first two seasons, so perhaps mawkish is the wrong word, and perhaps I shouldn’t judge. But I’ve seen trailers and read about it and it seems to be complete fiction (of course). The problem is, particularly around Diana, that people believe it is factual, no matter how many disclaimers are put out by Netflix.

I just find it so distasteful to continue to pick over, and even sensationalise, those events that we can all remember. I stand by my earlier belief that this is cruel to the living, particularly her sons, who had such a momentous loss at such a vulnerable age and who cannot and will not comment on this portrayal. I feel that they have enough difficulties in their relationship, and that with their father, without an entertainment channel putting out material that can only be painful for them.

I understand that point of view, but mine is that they don't have to watch it, and it's nothing that they haven't seen or read before. It goes with the territory, and the Royals use the media as much as are used by them.

You may just as well say that all the Royal threads on GN and elsewhere will be distressing to the living Royals, but people still post on those judging on what they believe they know the workings of the minds of people they've never met, and it's often the more prolific posters who object to programmes like The Crown, whether they've watched them or not. I'm not having a go at anyone on her by saying that, as I don't read the Royal threads unless by accident (eg if a title on Active Topics doesn't make it obvious that that's what it is about). I've wandered in before now and rushed out again because of the sheer venom, and as far as I can see The Crown pales into insignificance next to that when it comes to what must be distressing for those concerned.

Sorry - should have proofread the above before posting. There are typos all over, but I hope the gist is clear.

I agree Doodledog. It is fine if people don't want to watch it, but I see no point in commenting to criticise something you haven't watched or a book you haven't read.

Royal threads on GransNet compared to Netflix, wow

Anniebach

Royal threads on GransNet compared to Netflix, wow

It's hard to answer that, Annie, as you haven't said what you are arguing against.

If people feel that a dramatisation of events is too upsetting for the Royals to see, when they don't need to watch it, why do they think that it's ok to rake over reported events and judge individuals about things they know nothing about? The same people often complain that nobody should comment about other celebrities' lives as they are innocent until prove guilty. I can't see the difference, personally.

Witzend

Quote from a piece by A N Wilson in today’s Times:

“Clearly the most pathetic and tragic story in recent royal history is the unhappy marriage and gruesome death of Diana. All those close to her - her brother and sisters, her sons, her ex husband - are still alive. All are manifestly traumatised by it to this hour. If some cruel writer felt it necessary to cash in on their sorrow, they surely owed it to these people not to invent hurtful lies. In this tasteless sixth series, we even have Diana appearing as a ghost to the Queen.

Drama, however bad, gets into your head and you sort of believe it. Thousands around the world probably will actually believe this trash. But the pointless cruelty is what really offends.”

Nuff sed, I think.

Well said ANW.

We watched a few episodes of the early series but gave up because it seemed removed from reality.

We cancelled Netflix (not because of that) so couldn't watch more anyway

biglouis

Im part through watching at the moment. Agree the earlier episodes were much better but I will propably see it through til the end. I dont take it any more seriously than I did the Tudors!

The difference is that the Tudor dynasty are all dead whereas the MountbattenWindsors and Spencers are still alive.

I think it is quite cruel - they may be Royals and aristocrats but they are still people with feelings.

I'm descended from Anne Boleyn on one side (according to Ancestry!!, yes I know 😁) and Edward IV on the other side of the family so please be kind.
👸

Wow Callistemon21 York and Tudor! That's a bit of a mix. I'm imagining bits of your DNA busy fighting each other

Oh yes!
😁
However, I'd have to be really gullible to believe the Tudor bit which some American had put on Ancestry!! Where they find this rubbish, goodness knows.
Anne Boleyn didn't have any descendants.

Her sister did. Could you be one of those? Josh Widdicombe found that he was descended from the Careys, amongst other important people. He might be a relation too

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202311/medium-892888-screenshot-20231118-065151-chrome.jpg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202311/medium-146171-kate-middleton-earrings-060523-gettyimages-496147390.jpg

Aveline

Just started to watch this but absolutely stunned that for all it's cost £225,000 per episode the costume dept has got the Queen's pearls wrong again. Don't they ever look at pictures of her? Always, always three strands of pearls and not tightly round her neck either.

I haven't seen this series but think Queen Elizabeth did occasionally wear shorter pearls? And maybe not always the 3 strands we know and seemed to wear most of the time.

And there is also the many stranded "choker" style too...

Her late Majesty was well known to wear two sets of pearls : one two strand and one a single strand. Chokers are very different from just plain short strings of pearls.

I watched the first 3 series and enjoyed them ,but I stopped watching just after Princess Diana was introduced into the programme. This was because , in my opinion, the story line developed into a fantasy, but many people, mostly Americans, would think it was true.

One thing that the Crown did do perhaps, was to explain to Americans the differences between the countries of the U.K.
My cousin and I were on holiday in the US in February, 2019, and were speaking Welsh to each other in a quite upmarket shop. The shop assistant heard us and asked if we were Scottish. We explained that we were from Wales and were speaking our native language. She went on to say that she had watched the Aberfan episode of the Crown and was very moved. She did not know that such a thing had happened. We said that is was something that had happened in the mid sixties, when we were in our twenties, and was very poignant feeling that had remained with us since then.
I went on to tell her about the male school teacher who was found with his arms wrapped around 5 of his young pupils. That always makes me cry, in fact I'm crying now as I type this.
I was so glad that through the Crown the wider world had learnt of such a terrible happening that day.

There is a P.S. to this story. Last year, after all these years, my daughter, along with my young grand-daughters, took me to Aberfan to pay my respects. A beautiful summer's day, so peaceful, I treasure the memory.
Sorry if you think I've hi-jacked the thread, I just feel the story had to be told.

The Crown did not portray a true account of the Queen at
Aberfan, the Queen pretending to cry was so wrong , plus she came back 5 times.

Earlier series had so many innacuracies and situations that are hard to believe. The episode where Diana was treated rudely by the RF because she didn't know who to curtsey to was ridiculous; Diana was a Spencer, an aristocrat, and her family have accompanied royalty for generations. To suggest she didn't know the correct protocol was unbelievable. Also unkind to caricature living people who can't answer back. Not my preferred viewing!

I have watched and I will watch this series.
Surely most people realise that it is ‘based on ‘ and not a documentary. Lots of artistic licence.

I think many people believe it to be a documentary ginny - people from other countries especially - and those who are young maybe?

Doodledog

Her sister did. Could you be one of those? Josh Widdicombe found that he was descended from the Careys, amongst other important people. He might be a relation too

I saw that. Now, being related to Josh Widdicombe might be interesting! 😁

No, it was a complete fantasy family tree descended from Anne Boleyn, which included my Grandmother.
Fiction, rather like much of the Crown.

Josh W came over as a good egg, even though the knowledge that Elizabeth 1 died childless seemed to have escaped him . I think you should add him to your fictional family tree.

Yes, I'd quite like to have Josh as a seventh cousin twice removed 😁

Ps DH could instruct him on history.

It's not history. It's fictional drama based on real events and people. And it's an interesting exploration of what people might have thought, felt and done in those circumstances. No-one has to watch it. I think it's better than some critics' evaluations but it has flaws like almost every other production.