|
|
Post by romilly on May 8, 2022 17:16:40 GMT
Exactly what I immediately thought!
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on May 9, 2022 17:14:08 GMT
I wonder if whether or not it is clear about Kate messing with his buddies (being recommended as 'discreet' is something that is not a description I would want attached to me) or how Kate blew career/charity opportunities. I know the Crown is fiction, but I do believe this will be kind of a test on how respected the production actually is. I wonder how it will explain the drunken partying and portraying her as a young woman of substance will be difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 10, 2022 1:31:52 GMT
I wonder if whether or not it is clear about Kate messing with his buddies (being recommended as 'discreet' is something that is not a description I would want attached to me) or how Kate blew career/charity opportunities. I know the Crown is fiction, but I do believe this will be kind of a test on how respected the production actually is. I wonder how it will explain the drunken partying and portraying her as a young woman of substance will be difficult.
I liked the early "Crowns" - very interesting, but passed on the later versions. I really don't want to see the ones with Will, Kate and Harry. Even if I didn't believe I have (us all, really) "seen it all" with these characters, they just wouldn't be an portrayals that would hold my attention and interest me. Blah. They aren't engaging or glamourous figures that have interesting lives or stories that need to be told. Snore. Seriously, just nothing there for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 10, 2022 1:35:28 GMT
   The UK version of Climbers Gone Wild? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 10, 2022 1:39:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on May 10, 2022 2:13:28 GMT
There is no way they can successfully romanticize WK's romps. I mean, most Hallmark films stop at the proposal, but how can The Crown possibly end up making WK's nonstop parties, vacations, and idleness romantic? There is no sure way that either William or Kate will be able to be respectably portrayed. At least even Camilla could pass of as a kind of jokey type that did get kind of bum rushed into marrying Andrew and yet this, there is no way that a producer can romanticize or glass over ten years of idleness or the years of flashing or bar hopping. There is no way that there is any possibility that Kate can be portrayed as anything other than what she was, the UK equivalent of Kevin Federline.
|
|
|
|
Post by india on May 10, 2022 10:53:58 GMT
Whew! That's good KF: the UK equivalent of Kevin Federline. Nothing is lower than he.
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on May 11, 2022 3:56:33 GMT
Whew! That's good KF: the UK equivalent of Kevin Federline. Nothing is lower than he.
Thing is, that once Kevin got the ring, he was spending on trashy sneakers and partying with people as low as him and he was never there for Britney when she needed him. He was a user of the first order and she was ruined by him. When Kate got the ring, her entire family started partying nonstop and for a while treated William like a smorgasbord and it is clear that Kate tossed aside her former dedication and engaged in dereliction of wifely duty when she was shopping in London and he was ringing in in his birthday with frozen meals and loneliness. I also think that she is only going to be portrayed positively, but it will be fascinating to see if this series even TRIES to stick with the narrative or the realities that Kate was leeching from the minute she got in. Kate is trying to establish herself as an icon the same way Ferderline did, but it hasn't stuck since there is no substance to groupies who get lucky.
|
|
|
|
Post by nyetochka40 on Oct 24, 2022 8:46:20 GMT
Would someone explain why are people so upset that Netflix will present us with deterioration of Wales marriage and Diana's death?
It's part of history. How is that different from depicting other significant cultural and political episodes from the 20th century?
Why are people suddenly so protective of the Royal family?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 24, 2022 12:37:34 GMT
Would someone explain why are people so upset that Netflix will present us with deterioration of Wales marriage and Diana's death? It's part of history. How is that different from depicting other significant cultural and political episodes from the 20th century? Why are people suddenly so protective of the Royal family? I'm thinking people want their piece of the Diana Victimhood pie? Some people watching, of course, will remember those times, but others either weren't born or conscious of it in other ways. Diana, as far as royal princesses/brides go, had it VERY, VERY easy. She was extremely privileged yet at the end of her life couldn't quite escape even herself and her poor choices. The public, for the most part, buy into the victimhood narrative and how the big, bad BRF (Charles, mostly) made poor Diana Spencer's life an utter wreck. They don't see nuance or how things weren't strictly black and white. They have never followed along or cared that much. Younger folk just buy into whatever the Cambs or Sussexes are feeding them - poor boys just like us and trying to break free and be happy, dontcha know? On the surface, that's at least how I see things. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Oct 24, 2022 14:49:03 GMT
Would someone explain why are people so upset that Netflix will present us with deterioration of Wales marriage and Diana's death? It's part of history. How is that different from depicting other significant cultural and political episodes from the 20th century? Why are people suddenly so protective of the Royal family? I'm thinking people want their piece of the Diana Victimhood pie? Some people watching, of course, will remember those times, but others either weren't born or conscious of it in other ways. Diana, as far as royal princesses/brides go, had it VERY, VERY easy. She was extremely privileged yet at the end of her life couldn't quite escape even herself and her poor choices. The public, for the most part, buy into the victimhood narrative and how the big, bad BRF (Charles, mostly) made poor Diana Spencer's life an utter wreck. They don't see nuance or how things weren't strictly black and white. They have never followed along or cared that much. Younger folk just buy into whatever the Cambs or Sussexes are feeding them - poor boys just like us and trying to break free and be happy, dontcha know? On the surface, that's at least how I see things. I think a lot of people refuse to accept that Diana was not a victim because that would mean that her fans are not victims as well. Diana's biggest fans and supporters were/are women who watch Oprah too much and who mistakenly think that Diana knew their sufferings. She knew about them, but she never suffered poverty, anonymity, and she never at all suffered struggles to look after her ability to get food, utilities paid for, and she never really did see a bill that she would struggle to pay. Diana never knew a lot of things and her fans are largely the same.
Thing is, that a lot of people mistakenly believe that Diana, without Charles, would have still gone places and I think it is very hard for her fans to accept that had Diana not married Charles, she would not have cared about AIDS, or the homeless all that much, and she would not have expanded beyond her privileged horizons. Much of her post-divorce life was spent building some kind of new existence that would never exist. Past the first flush of her post-divorce positive coverage, heads of state would have started to cut her out, her husband would have moved on, and she would have likely continued to make bad personal choices and humiliate her sons and would have disliked her sons developing a more independent life. She would have struggled to discover that with the advent of the internet the public wouldn't be reliant on her and she would not have been able to manipulate everything so easily.
As for all the hysterics surrounding the new season of "The Crown," this is how idiotic the BRF is showing themselves to be. They should be more worried about the economy, geopolitical tensions, etc. When the first season came out, the second season came out, the cast and crew were getting accolades and awards and yet the third season set them off and I am disgusted at how the BRF/establishment has flipped so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 24, 2022 15:52:44 GMT
I'm thinking people want their piece of the Diana Victimhood pie? Some people watching, of course, will remember those times, but others either weren't born or conscious of it in other ways. Diana, as far as royal princesses/brides go, had it VERY, VERY easy. She was extremely privileged yet at the end of her life couldn't quite escape even herself and her poor choices. The public, for the most part, buy into the victimhood narrative and how the big, bad BRF (Charles, mostly) made poor Diana Spencer's life an utter wreck. They don't see nuance or how things weren't strictly black and white. They have never followed along or cared that much. Younger folk just buy into whatever the Cambs or Sussexes are feeding them - poor boys just like us and trying to break free and be happy, dontcha know? On the surface, that's at least how I see things. I think a lot of people refuse to accept that Diana was not a victim because that would mean that her fans are not victims as well. Diana's biggest fans and supporters were/are women who watch Oprah too much and who mistakenly think that Diana knew their sufferings. She knew about them, but she never suffered poverty, anonymity, and she never at all suffered struggles to look after her ability to get food, utilities paid for, and she never really did see a bill that she would struggle to pay. Diana never knew a lot of things and her fans are largely the same.
Thing is, that a lot of people mistakenly believe that Diana, without Charles, would have still gone places and I think it is very hard for her fans to accept that had Diana not married Charles, she would not have cared about AIDS, or the homeless all that much, and she would not have expanded beyond her privileged horizons. Much of her post-divorce life was spent building some kind of new existence that would never exist. Past the first flush of her post-divorce positive coverage, heads of state would have started to cut her out, her husband would have moved on, and she would have likely continued to make bad personal choices and humiliate her sons and would have disliked her sons developing a more independent life. She would have struggled to discover that with the advent of the internet the public wouldn't be reliant on her and she would not have been able to manipulate everything so easily.
As for all the hysterics surrounding the new season of "The Crown," this is how idiotic the BRF is showing themselves to be. They should be more worried about the economy, geopolitical tensions, etc. When the first season came out, the second season came out, the cast and crew were getting accolades and awards and yet the third season set them off and I am disgusted at how the BRF/establishment has flipped so much.
The first 2 seasons were decently done and didnt stray far from the known narrative of the earlier royals. I have these seasons but didnt watch or view anything past this; just had other things to do. (Plus, no Alex Jennings? Love that man) Diana was a celebrity figure and yes, turned the BRF upside down, and remember how she was the most talked about figure out there, but she was not the tragic victim that people wanted her to be. Not by a long shot, and those of us who bring up these points should not get any flak for saying so. Of course it's terrible how her life was cut short, and our criticisms about some of her choices doesnt mean we are cold-hearted and mean. We are just being realistic. Oprah ruined too many - long story there. I just cannot understand why Diana's sons are supposed to be immune from all the challenges mostly everybody else have to overcome and deal with daily. How are they so special? Neither is particularly noble or giving or gifted and their almost daily bellyaching and whining is beyond hard to take. What? They are supposed to be happy and content to the exclusion of everything and anything else? I don't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Oct 24, 2022 18:30:08 GMT
I think a lot of people refuse to accept that Diana was not a victim because that would mean that her fans are not victims as well. Diana's biggest fans and supporters were/are women who watch Oprah too much and who mistakenly think that Diana knew their sufferings. She knew about them, but she never suffered poverty, anonymity, and she never at all suffered struggles to look after her ability to get food, utilities paid for, and she never really did see a bill that she would struggle to pay. Diana never knew a lot of things and her fans are largely the same.
Thing is, that a lot of people mistakenly believe that Diana, without Charles, would have still gone places and I think it is very hard for her fans to accept that had Diana not married Charles, she would not have cared about AIDS, or the homeless all that much, and she would not have expanded beyond her privileged horizons. Much of her post-divorce life was spent building some kind of new existence that would never exist. Past the first flush of her post-divorce positive coverage, heads of state would have started to cut her out, her husband would have moved on, and she would have likely continued to make bad personal choices and humiliate her sons and would have disliked her sons developing a more independent life. She would have struggled to discover that with the advent of the internet the public wouldn't be reliant on her and she would not have been able to manipulate everything so easily.
As for all the hysterics surrounding the new season of "The Crown," this is how idiotic the BRF is showing themselves to be. They should be more worried about the economy, geopolitical tensions, etc. When the first season came out, the second season came out, the cast and crew were getting accolades and awards and yet the third season set them off and I am disgusted at how the BRF/establishment has flipped so much.
The first 2 seasons were decently done and didnt stray far from the known narrative of the earlier royals. I have these seasons but didnt watch or view anything past this; just had other things to do. (Plus, no Alex Jennings? Love that man) Diana was a celebrity figure and yes, turned the BRF upside down, and remember how she was the most talked about figure out there, but she was not the tragic victim that people wanted her to be. Not by a long shot, and those of us who bring up these points should not get any flak for saying so. Of course it's terrible how her life was cut short, and our criticisms about some of her choices doesnt mean we are cold-hearted and mean. We are just being realistic. Oprah ruined too many - long story there. I just cannot understand why Diana's sons are supposed to be immune from all the challenges mostly everybody else have to overcome and deal with daily. How are they so special? Neither is particularly noble or giving or gifted and their almost daily bellyaching and whining is beyond hard to take. What? They are supposed to be happy and content to the exclusion of everything and anything else? I don't think so.
Thing is, that Camilla and Diana were kind of paradoxical of one another. Diana could have 'won' if she had created more of a home life and if she had had the good sense to know that she was only going places as long as she was with Charles. IF she had saved more of herself for her husband and insinuated herself into his work and stayed there and maintained her mental health, Camilla would have been quietly phased out and Camilla would be a distant memory. Harry and William did not grow up with a working mother and I have observed that young men with working mothers develop a better work ethic and learn to accept facts about life that can't be avoided. After Diana divorced her husband during their adolescence, she was partying and running around with men instead of developing and maintaining a stable, routine, working life. As for her life being cut short, she was making choices that could only lead to tragedy.
What a lot of hysterics about "The Crown" didn't like is how it portrayed the way the BRF maltreated their disabled relatives. Leaving them to rot in a gutter while enjoying a lavish birthday party and leaving them to rot until their deaths and die unannounced and unmourned. Then there is the fact that Camilla is shown as the out of control woman that she was and still is. Then Diana is shown as sick and she was and in over her head (and she was). One thing I have disliked about the pointless hysteria is how the BRF is focusing on this despite the fact that the world is currently on the edge of a dissolving economy and collapse of any semblance of world stability, and the British government is hysterical about this of all things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2022 17:31:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 2, 2022 12:44:10 GMT
www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1690880/Royal-family-live-prince-harry-memoir-meghan-markle-queen-william-charles-latestRoyal Family LIVE: 'Sad and unfulfilled' portrayal of Prince William torn apart
The new series of The Crown will be released by Netflix on November 9, 2022.
By TARA FAIR
11:07, Wed, Nov 2, 2022 | UPDATED: 11:29, Wed, Nov 2, 2022
The portrayal of Prince William in the next season of The Crown has been blasted for its negative tint. Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams told FEMAIL that young Prince William was portrayed as "sad and unfulfilled" despite Princess Diana doing everything to give her sons a "happy and normal" upbringing. He said: "William, it has been reported, is portrayed as sad, unfulfilled and melancholy in the fifth series. It was from Diana that he learned to care for the less fortunate, especially the homeless and those in hospital and that has benefited them both in later life. William later said what an eye-opener seeing a different side to life was and, when he turned 40, reportedly became a Big Issue seller in memory of what his mother taught him. She was more casual than Charles, a trip to the cinema, skiing or, most famously, to an amusement park, was more her style. She wanted her sons to have as normal as upbringing as they possibly could under very trying circumstances."  
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 2, 2022 13:19:04 GMT
www.celebitchy.com/791000/prince_william_will_be_furious_when_he_see_the_crown_dramatizing_dianas_interview/Prince William ‘will be furious’ when he sees ‘The Crown’ dramatizing Diana’s interview
November 02, 2022
By Kaiser Prince William, Princess Diana, Royals, The Crown
A young William is shown watching the interview, and being asked by a teacher if he is all right. His father Charles is shown yelling as he watches, then crying. It was thought that streaming giant Netflix had slashed the length of the recreation to tiny snippets lasting just seconds. In fact, producers have taken the most inflammatory parts of Princess Diana’s hour-long 1995 interview and condensed them into a segment lasting four minutes, 23 seconds.
They include Diana referencing the “crowded marriage” she endured while Charles was having an affair with Camilla Parker Bowles. She also says she wants to be “a Queen in people’s hearts” but does not think she will ever be queen herself.
An investigation later found interviewer Martin Bashir used forgery and deception to gain access to the Princess. But in a move that will spark widespread fury the streaming giant has exaggerated the language and made up huge sections of conversation.
Ingrid Seward, editor-in-chief of Majesty Magazine and friend of Diana, who died in 1997, said: “William will be furious. He said his piece when he said it should never be aired again. This is his mother and her memory they are doing this to. It must be very frustrating as he can’t say any more because it will just give Netflix more publicity. They should have listened to him. The interview has no credibility after the investigation. Everyone knows it has no legitimacy now.
“Charles will think they can say whatever they want about him but leave Harry and William out of it. He won’t give a stuff about how he comes across but just don’t attack his sons this way.”
The show’s tweaks and fabrications lay the blame for Diana’s plight squarely at the feet of the then Prince of Wales, and make the Princess, played by Elizabeth Debicki, sound more sympathetic. Charles, played by Dominic West, is seen yelling and swearing during the interview, as the Princess casts doubt on his ability to be King. The scene ends with him breaking down in tears as Camilla watches on helplessly by his side.
[From The Sun]
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 2, 2022 13:20:50 GMT
www.celebitchy.com/791000/prince_william_will_be_furious_when_he_see_the_crown_dramatizing_dianas_interview/" “The interview has no credibility after the investigation. Everyone knows it has no legitimacy now.” Again with this false argument that because Martin Bashir lied to Diana, the interview itself is somehow tainted, fruit of the poisonous tree. This is false because both things can be accurate at once: Bashir lied to Diana to secure the interview AND Diana meant every f-king word she said in the interview. Even the Dyson report (the investigation into how Martin Bashir scored the interview) emphasized that Diana was always going to tell her story to someone. She was always going to say all of that. It was just a matter of who gave her the platform." Some comments: Brassy Rebel says: November 2, 2022 at 8:47 am As I keep saying, furious is William’s default mode. That would be the case if Peter Morgan had never thought of The Crown. I think Diana would be furious to know her eldest son considered her “paranoid”. Reply Nicegirl says: November 2, 2022 at 9:01 am Yes, ‘silencing his paranoid mother’, wow. Reply GuestWho says: November 2, 2022 at 8:50 am “Charles will think they can say whatever they want about him but leave Harry and William out of it. He won’t give a stuff about how he comes across but just don’t attack his sons this way.” THIS is a lie. He has never protected those boys, especially Harry. He cares only how he and the Rottweiler will come across. He has spent (wasted) decades sucking up the the Rota Rats to polish that turd…and now it all blows up in his face. Such a shame. s/ Reply Tessa says: November 2, 2022 at 9:00 am Charles is such a hypocrite he says nothing when that bower person says he wants to ruin meghan. Reply Cessily says: November 2, 2022 at 8:52 am Of course he will, is Prince William ever not furious or incandescent with rage over something? Reply Nicegirl says: November 2, 2022 at 8:53 am Incandescent, even ‘ Reply Harla A Brazen Hussy says: November 2, 2022 at 8:53 am So now Charles cares more about how this will affect his children then how it will affect him, ha! If anyone believes that, I’ve got a lovely bridge for sale🙄 Reply Snuffles says: November 2, 2022 at 8:53 am I want to know if they will show William yelling at Diana and shoving her. That’s what Willy needs to worry about, being shown disrespecting his mother. Reply C-Shell says: November 2, 2022 at 9:02 am Seems to be a generational trait passed down from father to son. *inserts .gif of Louis giving his mother a very enthusiastic raspberry* Reply Becks1 says: November 2, 2022 at 8:54 am yeah, this idea that the interview has no legitimacy bc of how it was obtained is just so tiresome. Diana said what she said. I’m sure it was upsetting for William, and I’m sure Charles was enraged by it. diana took control of her narrative and got her side out there and we see now that there isn’t anything really more damaging than that for the Windsors. Reply Belli says: November 2, 2022 at 8:55 am It’s hilarious that a few years ago they were all for The Crown. Did they really have so little foresight that they didn’t think that the show would cover the years that make them look terrible as well as ‘the glory days’?? Who cares about William being angry anyway? He’s always angry. Reply ML says: November 2, 2022 at 8:55 am I hope Netflix publishes how often The Crown is viewed in Great Britain come November. Reply equality says: November 2, 2022 at 8:57 am “Charles will think they can say whatever they want about him but leave Harry and William out of it. He won’t give a stuff about how he comes across but just don’t attack his sons this way.” Seriously? Somebody wrote this BS with a straight face? Yes, it’s Will’s mother and her memory and it’s HER interview. Interesting that he is so invested in silencing his mother. And, what they forget is that other things she said and other evidence backs up what she said. Reply Woke says: November 2, 2022 at 8:58 am A part of me do sympathize with him the interview that caused so much trouble/pain, these events being dramatized and brought to the public domain again it must be hard. At the same time the way he behaved these last few years he had no problem inflicting pain to his brother and sister in law so he’s a hypocrite and selfish man only his pain count. Only he get to complain. I’m tired of him. Reply Tessa says: November 2, 2022 at 9:03 am He did not complain about his father’s damaging interview the tear before his mother’s. Charles admitted his involvement with Camilla which brought on the divorce of the Parker Bowles. And said he never loved will and Harry’s mother. Reply Tessa says: November 2, 2022 at 8:58 am Too bad William Deal with it. Trying to censor his mother is not going to work. He is a sell out.
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Nov 2, 2022 16:14:39 GMT
First, Diana should not have pressured the palace to 'give her sons a normal life,' since it would have been better for everyone if he had been raised with the strictures and norms of his way of life and stop being allowed to indulge in playing a 'version' of being 'normal.' As for William losing his keister, he does it all the time. So no real worries about how to not upset William Wails. It's not like William is such a beacon of good cheer that him being upset is supposed to be newsworthy anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Nov 5, 2022 9:11:33 GMT
Honestly and objectively, does anyone think that Kate Middleton was stunning as she dated him? I hardly knew anything about her and saw her on TV as they were friends after they had broken up. I thought her average. I mean that objectively and not in an unkind manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 5, 2022 13:53:25 GMT
Honestly and objectively, does anyone think that Kate Middleton was stunning as she dated him? I hardly knew anything about her and saw her on TV as they were friends after they had broken up. I thought her average. I mean that objectively and not in an unkind manner. Before I discovered just how bad she was, thought she was very average and wouldn't stand out for any reason. |
|
tale BS.
Oct 20, 2024 18:30:58 GMT
Oct 20, 2024 18:30:58 GMT
#JamesMiddleton