These two ughh...

Actually that's the first thing they've done as a couple that suggests any integrity.

However I don't imagine for a moment the Queen allowed Netflix to include her story, so why would they even be asked?

I thought the crown wasn't covering the 2010's? I read the final seasons will be about the 2000's.

Good for them - why would they think they would get even a remotely sympathetic view from an English production team?

And, more importantly, he will NEVER WEAR THE CROWN!

It’s not up to them. They can’t “refuse to allow” it. Besides—Nobody cares.

If they have a choice, why the hell would they? I watched most of season one but gave it up because it was boring. I watched all of season four and found it more interesting, but every one of the characters is either thoroughly despicable or else maddeningly boring. It's bizarre but the only two I can relate to at all are Charles because of his interests in the arts and Margaret because she is shown to have some human empathy but ultimately still cares about status and abandons the people she seemed she might care about. Harry is certain to be shown in the worst possible light, probably with emphases on his wearing a Nazi costume on Halloween, partying naked in Vegas and then bringing shame upon his family before abandoning/being rejected by them. Just say no, Harry.

This is a non-issue. One that can't control anyway. Are they trying to make this about themselves?

They'll probably sue if Netflix tries to include it, and I'm not sure Netflix wants to spend money on those legal bills.

The Crown is an unwatchable load of crap.

They made a big-money deal with Netflix and may therefore have some influence with the company.

I think that may be what the article implies but I couldn't read it because it's one of those sites that barrages you with 436 popup ads to render itself unreadable.

I hope they cast a hot actor to play Harry if they show his partying escapades. I want a hot toned ginger, not a twig like Harry was in real life. Give us a bubble butt, not his flat pancake ass.

OP has got it all wrong—they want to play themselves.

Oh please. They'd be pissed if they weren't included. This is just a ploy to make sure that they are.

Like they have any say in how the production team and writers may choose to develop the program, if it continues?

I love the continual flip-flopping with "ve vant to be alone!", and "our privacy, the safety of our son", on one side, to calling the paps, and traveling with their personal publicity photographer on the other.

Good on them. Smart.

If there's any truth at all to any of the stories relating to Diana, then the royals did themselves in by forcing that marriage. They'd have been better off forcing Charles to abdicate to become Camilla's tampon and handing the keys to another kid who wanted to play the game.

The showrunner made it clear that the Crown could not cover present day. History telling requires temporal distance.

Yes, but too much shuffling around which Windsor sibling gets the Crown undermines the whole “anointed by God” concept, in which case we might as well have a Kardashian.

Stop responding to this shiteous clickbait farm.

[quote] we might as well have a Kardashian.

Well, yes. I don't really know what the difference is at this point. They all just kind of show up for appearances and put their faces and their brands on everything. Do they do anything else? According to The Crown, no; the queen's entire job is to resist doing anything at all.

They shoot things.

Pretty sure this OP is the same “Celebrating the Soaps” blog spam troll that posts BRF stuff literally every morning on here.

R21 it is.

Run by some fat frau named Annemarie LeBlanc

What hasn't been told?

Season 6 finishes in the 2000s with Kate's summer as a yacht girl and her Kris Jenner momager shipping her off to St Andrews to pursue William. They're not going into the 2010s.

The producers are skipping the 2010s because they're developing "Little Lord Saxe-Coburg-Gotha," the whimsical half-hour family comedy about the coming of age of a fancy little tow headed homo prince with the magical ability to make even a stodgy old stone-hearted queen smile!

It was pitched as "an updated Tabitha Stephens, but queer to keep with the times."

Because it's Nexflix where anything goes, season two will take a wicked turn as little Princess Charlotte comes along to add a touch of devilry into the boy's life. "Think of it," the producers told Netflix execs, "as gay Tabitha meets Damon from the Omen, except Damon is a girl who takes after her mother."

[quote] Actually that's the first thing they've done as a couple that suggests any integrity.

I am sure they want to directly profit from their story.

[quote] They'd have been better off forcing Charles to abdicate to become Camilla's tampon and handing the keys to another kid who wanted to play the game.

Andrew the pedophile or Edward the queer?

F&F it for the queer reference.

Their story has already been dramatised in another show, sex scenes too. Same for Killiam. Nothing they could do about it.

Yet they allowed that dippy Lifetime movie? K.

Honest to God, for people who are not British, U cannot think of a single reason anyone would care about this couple's world other than pure racism.

The show was always set to basically end where The Queen begins. However, if I was in charge at Netflix I'd immediately greenlight a trashy movie about their lives, just to spite them (I'd even make a big deal out of offering Meghan a chance to play herself).

Between the mortgage and private security, they need Netflix more than Netflix needs them.

[quote] I want a hot toned ginger, not a twig like Harry was in real life. Give us a bubble butt, not his flat pancake ass.

I would like to associate myself with R10's casting requirements.

As for this stupid Sussexplaining planted story, it's a non-story. I don't even watch the Crown (I saw most of the first one) and even I knew that the series wasn't ever going into their story or current events. It was already decided and at some point in their negotiations TweedleDumb and TweedleMee discussed and confirmed that fact. Then they signed on as the Netflix in-house Rent A Royal Prince, Diana's Son version, as Netflix shreds his parents and grandparents but not him and not his awful wife. It's a vicious kick in the teeth to the Queen and his family.

Now it shows up as this Sussex-serving storyline in the tabloids because of course it would. Blech.

'As for this stupid Sussexplaining planted story, it's a non-story. I don't even watch the Crown (I saw most of the first one) and even I knew that the series wasn't ever going into their story or current events. It was already decided and at some point in their negotiations TweedleDumb and TweedleMee discussed and confirmed that fact. Then they signed on as the Netflix in-house Rent A Royal Prince, Diana's Son version, as Netflix shreds his parents and grandparents but not him and not his awful wife. It's a vicious kick in the teeth to the Queen and his family.'

Will you fuck off with your pathetic conspiracy thinking. Each season of The Crown deals with a different decade. Season 5 is going to deal with the 90s, up to the death of Diana in 1997. Season 6 probably up to 2007 at the very most. Meghan did not come on the scene until 2015. It's a historical drama NOT a contemporary one.

Netflix doesn’t have to get their approval. They are public figures.

Netflix should put The Queen back up to stream as most of us haven't seen it.

Rubbish. They’re public figures like any other member of the BRF...they have no say whatsoever in whether they’re portrayed, or by whom