Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

The Crown is ‘odious’ and an ‘absolute disgrace’, says Queen Mother’s biographer

The Crown has been branded “odious” and “deliberately hurtful” by The Queen Mother’s official biographer as it emerged on Sunday the Netflix series appears to have invented a scene in which Prince Charles tells his mother she should be “thrown… into jail” for being a bad mother.

Details of the contents of the next series are beginning to emerge as well as criticism over The Crown’s coverage of recent historical events.

In a letter in The Telegraph, William Shawcross, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother’s official biographer, is excoriating, adding his weight to growing opprobrium.

“The Crown is an odious series, filled with lies and half-truths encased in lace and velvet,” writes Mr Shawcross, adding: “It is astonishingly and deliberately hurtful to individual members of the Royal family, public servants who cannot answer back, let alone sue for damages.”

He goes on to accuse the drama’s creator Peter Morgan of waging “a campaign to abuse” the monarchy and “to destroy by lies a vital institution”. He calls the campaign “an absolute disgrace”.

Mr Shawcross’s anger follows Sir John Major’s condemnation of the programme for inventing conversations between the former prime minister and late Queen. Sir John said he had never been approached by the programme’s makers and that the imagined scenes were “damaging and malicious fiction”.

On Sunday, Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, complained to The Telegraph that a scene had been made up in which the late Queen confides that the breakdown of her children’s marriages “begins to look like parental failure of the most awful kind”. Lord Carey said he was “surprised” that such a scene was created in the series, adding: “It bears no resemblance to any conversation I ever had with the Queen.”

The Crown’s writers also appear to have invented a conversation between the Prince of Wales, now King Charles, and his mother to have taken place in 1992, the year described by the late Queen as her “annus horribilis”. According to reports, Charles tells the Queen “that if we were an ordinary family and social services came to visit they would have thrown us into care and you [the Queen] into jail”.

Buckingham Palace has declined to comment on the contents of The Crown as they have emerged. An official said the King would not be making any statement.

But a friend of His Majesty has previously described the drama as “exploitative” and said Netflix would have “no qualms about mangling people's reputations”.

A spokesman for Netflix said: “The Crown has always been presented as a drama based on historical events. Series 5 is a fictional dramatisation, imagining what could have happened behind closed doors during a significant decade for the royal family - one that has already been scrutinised and well-documented by journalists, biographers and historians.”

The penultimate season of the drama covers the period from 1991 until 1996, meaning that the tumultuous breakdown of Charles and Diana’s marriage, and the role of Camilla Parker Bowles, will be the main plotline running throughout all ten episodes.

The focus on the fallout from the breakdown of Charles and Diana’s marriage comes at a time when the new King is enjoying a surge in popularity following his accession.

In the past, Netflix has made clear that The Crown is a dramatic series and has never sought to portray it as a documentary account.

It is understood that the description of the show on Netflix will distinguish The Crown as a drama and that viewers will be directed to other content about the events dramatised in the series.

Dominic West, the actor who plays Prince Charles in the new series, has defended the scripts which he said were based on “imagined conversations” and stressed that he was “evoking” the King, not imitating him.

“I think people understand because the cast has changed every two seasons, that this is not an imitation,” he said. “This is an evoking of a character. That’s really where the show lives: in the imagined conversations of their private life, which is something that no one knows.”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 50November 18, 2022 11:15 PM

DL fave Jeremy Northam is in it

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1October 16, 2022 8:56 PM

He's right. It's fun as trashy entertainment. The problem is too many dimwits take it as fact.

by Anonymousreply 2October 16, 2022 8:58 PM

[Quote] “The Crown is an odious series, filled with lies and half-truths encased in lace and velvet,” writes Mr Shawcross

That's like most TV "biopics."

by Anonymousreply 3October 16, 2022 8:58 PM

It was inevitable that the Palace establishment was going to start hating this series the longer it went on. When it was about the 1950s, the only think they could complain about was that Philip was portrayed (somewhat ambiguously) as a philanderer, which even they could not deny was true. But as its moved forward in time, its about more and more living people, and has been highly critical of them--I actually think it's been quite nice to Camilla so far, and it's almost never had anything bad to say about the Queen (the ONLY time was when they showed her forcing Charles to get married the night before the wedding to Diana); but it's painted Charles as a peevish juvenile child-man (which he was until Diana died), and many of the living Tory politicians and palace courtiers as sneaky and underhanded and self-serving.

As we get closer and closer to the present day, they'll complain more and more.

by Anonymousreply 4October 16, 2022 9:21 PM

Peter Morgan has made a good living off the British Royal Family but he doesn't much like Britain and he truly hates the Windsors. A very unsavoury man.

by Anonymousreply 5October 16, 2022 9:25 PM

[quote]it's almost never had anything bad to say about the Queen

I think you are right, and there was that little rule for decades. You can go after the family, but not the Queen herself. She was beyond reproach, and honestly in some ways that was accurate. But with Charles that is all gone. King Charles will be treated like Prince Charles, as a deeply flawed person who is sometimes a complete twat. That will be a big difference between the two reigns I suspect.

by Anonymousreply 6October 16, 2022 9:34 PM

R6, in that sense, The Crown will be pretty accurate in its portrayal of Charles.

by Anonymousreply 7October 16, 2022 9:37 PM

Whinge Whinge Whinge

by Anonymousreply 8October 16, 2022 10:08 PM

Charles clearly grew up enormously after Diana died, and then even more after he married Camilla. He sounds like he's still a whinger, but at least he genuinely tries to think of other people sometimes now.

by Anonymousreply 9October 16, 2022 10:10 PM

[...]

by Anonymousreply 10October 16, 2022 10:12 PM

Anyone eles think the Royal Family secretly produces all these movies and series?

by Anonymousreply 11October 16, 2022 10:12 PM

Sometimes a complete twat r6? The man is a walking bowl movement with sausage fingers and a comb over.

This will not go well.

by Anonymousreply 12October 16, 2022 10:35 PM

The thing is, the writers don't have to invent ridiculous conversations that clearly never happened. Charles telling his parents someone should have called social services on them? Why would he do that when he made it clear in his biography how cold and distant they were? That's the English way, not yelling horrible things to their face.

Pull out all the stops if you must, but don't become Real Housewives of Buckingham Palace.

I loved the Crown but Morgan should have stopped the series before Diana's death like he said he would.

by Anonymousreply 13October 16, 2022 10:47 PM

[quote]The thing is, the writers don't have to invent ridiculous conversations that clearly never happened. Charles telling his parents someone should have called social services on them?

It's such terrible writing. Obviously targeted at easily triggered youngsters.

by Anonymousreply 14October 16, 2022 10:59 PM

[quote] 'The Crown' season 5 includes a scene suggesting Charles wanted to replace Queen Elizabeth II in the 1990s

The fifth season of "The Crown" includes a scene where Charles suggests he's prepared to replace Queen Elizabeth II while she was still alive, The Sunday Times reported.

Season five of "The Crown" hits Netflix on November 9 and will focus on plotlines involving the royal family in the 1990s.

Events viewers can expect to see dramatized include Princess Diana's tell-all interview with the BBC and the Queen's infamous "annus horribilis" – a phrase she used to describe the turbulence the royals faced in 1992 with the collapse of several marriages and the Windsor Castle fire.

It is also set to frame Charles, played by Dominic West, as a king-in-waiting ready to become the monarch if the Queen abdicated. Charles was first in line to inherit the throne throughout the Queen's 70-year reign, which ended when she died aged 96 in September.

According to The Sunday Times, the upcoming season of "The Crown" includes an episode where Charles holds a secret meeting with then-prime minister John Major pitching himself as a replacement for the Queen. The newspaper reports that, in the scene, Charles asks Major whether he believes the monarch is "in safe hands."

Whether such a conversation ever took place is unclear. Buckingham Palace has long denied claims that the Queen planned to step down while she was alive, Insider previously reported.

Buckingham Palace did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment on Sunday.

A spokesperson for Major hit back at "The Crown" and told The Telegraph he had not "cooperated" with the showrunners in any way.

The spokesperson said the plotlines should be "seen as nothing other than damaging and malicious fiction" and "a barrel-load of nonsense peddled for no other reason than to provide maximum – and entirely false – dramatic impact."

"There was never any discussion between Sir John and the then Prince of Wales about any possible abdication of the late Queen Elizabeth II," the spokesperson added. "Nor was such an improbable and improper subject ever raised by the then Prince of Wales (or Sir John)."

Showrunners for the Netflix drama have long maintained that it should not be viewed as historical fact.

Amid calls for the show to include a disclaimer in 2020, Netflix said it had "always presented 'The Crown' as a drama — and we have every confidence our members understand it's a work of fiction that's broadly based on historical events," the Los Angeles Times reported.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 15October 17, 2022 2:30 AM

The show and family would be even more dull if they didn’t make up things.

by Anonymousreply 16October 17, 2022 2:33 AM

the royal family is just as useless as a TV show so who cares. never watched the crown but I'm sure it's way more entertaining

by Anonymousreply 17October 17, 2022 3:03 AM

I read somewhere that Peter Morgan is the bastard child of Philip and that's why he's so obsessed with the family

by Anonymousreply 18October 17, 2022 3:19 AM

Kate's pussy is odious.

by Anonymousreply 19October 17, 2022 3:24 AM

The Queen Mother's biographer is still alive?

That old Mary must be at least 100 years old.

by Anonymousreply 20October 17, 2022 3:36 PM

I am 100% done with people trying to convince me that the royals are poor, beleaguered victims whose suffering knows no bounds.

by Anonymousreply 21October 17, 2022 3:38 PM

William Shawcross is 76, R20. When the book was published in 2009, he presented a copy in person to the late Queen and to the present King at Birkhall, which had been the Queen Mother's home on the Balmoral estate.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 22October 17, 2022 3:43 PM

[quote] He goes on to accuse the drama’s creator Peter Morgan of waging “a campaign to abuse” the monarchy and “to destroy by lies a vital institution”.

That's been plain for quite some time. Unapologetic farce like "The Windsors" is one thing but despite the small print disclaimers they know very well a large chunk of the audience takes this as history

by Anonymousreply 23October 17, 2022 3:54 PM

They should include a scene of Charles imagining himself and his family as lower middle class and social services banging on their door. They rush in grab Charles and accuse Elizabeth and Philip of being cold, unloving parents and take little Charles to a home where love and warmth envelop him with happiness. We then see Elizabeth and Philip behind bars yelling We never wanted the little bugger in the first place! Then Charles wakes up to reality and curses ever being the Prince of Wales.

by Anonymousreply 24October 17, 2022 3:59 PM

Vulture is reporting Netflix is postponing the Markles' reality TV show. Apparently, getting called out by former PM Sir John Major (and possibly his lawyer) scared the bejesus outta them.

by Anonymousreply 25October 18, 2022 12:02 AM

Imelda Staunton was a terrible pick for this.

by Anonymousreply 26October 18, 2022 5:02 AM

[quote]R4 When it was about the 1950s, the only think they could complain about was that Philip was portrayed (somewhat ambiguously) as a philanderer, which even they could not deny was true.

Well, also as a penniless social climber, no? I mean he set his sights on her for his own advancement with little of the things to offer in return that most prospective bridegrooms posses… just an empty title.

by Anonymousreply 27November 12, 2022 8:16 PM

I've never heard Philip cast as a social climber. He was a Navy man, and contentedly so, with aristocratic Mountbatten relations and royalty in his own line.

by Anonymousreply 28November 12, 2022 8:26 PM

I’ve only watched the first episode but it seems that the character of the queen is very different from Colman’s.

by Anonymousreply 29November 12, 2022 8:36 PM

Despite his being a Tory, John Major is seen as a fairly reasonable and decent man and very much from the centre ground. If he is complaining then I think Netflix will have to take things seriously because Major has the respect of a lot of people.

by Anonymousreply 30November 12, 2022 8:38 PM

A description that could be applied to the daughter of an illiterate cook from Glamis Palace

by Anonymousreply 31November 12, 2022 8:39 PM

[quote] Despite his being a Tory, John Major is seen as a fairly reasonable and decent man and very much from the centre ground. If he is complaining then I think Netflix will have to take things seriously because Major has the respect of a lot of people.

Honey: no.

All they're going to care about is ratings and Emmys.

by Anonymousreply 32November 12, 2022 8:43 PM

Although "The Crown" stars Brits and is mostly filmed in the UK, it is mostly financed by netflix. That means

1) They are exempt from the UK standards regarding racial quotas for casting, and

2) The production company does not care nearly as much as many of you think about displeasing current attitudes in the UK.

The US market is five times larger than the UK market. Brits can hate the show (and significantly the cast and the show have won few BAFTAs despite all the Emmys they've won), but Netflix will not care so much if they're pleasing the US and other foreign markets.

by Anonymousreply 33November 12, 2022 8:47 PM

Despite his being a Tory, John Major is seen as a fairly reasonable and decent man and very much from the centre ground. If he is complaining then I think Netflix will have to take things seriously because Major has the respect of a lot of people.

He was, well after Thatcher Mussolini and Tito would have been seen as centrists. If they brought him back to be a caretaker PM instead of the fucking disaster we had with Trusspot and Bollocks Johnson there would hae been a lot more calmness amongst the old fucks who vote for the rancid cunts.

by Anonymousreply 34November 12, 2022 8:51 PM

The BRF's official biographers are usually grotesque sycophants, which is why they're chosen for the jobs in the first place. I cannot take any of their complaints seriously.

There sycophancy will be all the more apparent with the new King's court, since he has always demanded more sucking-up than is even typical from his mother given his tremendous insecurities and his narcissism.

by Anonymousreply 35November 12, 2022 9:01 PM

I don't think its very good either. I don't understand WHY the Palace or whom ever over there is bitching about it. Its dull and its lost its charm. Dominic West did a fine enough job "evoking" Prince Charles and Elizabeth Debicki was very good. However, its painfully plodding. They're trying to make Charles and Camilla more sympathetic and I get that. However, they could have come up with a better script, since their intention was to obviously bullshit people. I suppose, people do want to believe in the fairytale of the Monarchy but, this season compared to the first and second season is lacking in anything to keep you engaged.

by Anonymousreply 36November 12, 2022 9:19 PM

To me, Charles comes across as a sympathetic character in this season of The Crown. He’s trapped by his position, and prevented from doing more by his government and his family. As a result, he has married someone he can’t stand and is having an affair with the woman they should have allowed him to marry. The show presents him as human and presents Camilla and Charles as a love story-they are portrayed like a star crossed couple from a soap opera. Camillagate could have been presented in a much less favorable light.

Anne and Margaret come across as sympathetic in this season as well.

Diana comes across as a tiresome , pathetic lunatic whose beauty and position force people to accommodate her. She was a lot more manipulative (ask the wives of the men she harassed on the phone, or Tiggy Legge-Bourke, or Raine Spencer), but the show presents her sympathetically overall.

The villains are Phillip (sanctimonious bully), The Queen Mother (faltering by the 80s but the true puppet master pf the family), and The Queen, who is remote, obtuse and cold to her family, refusing to see how she has hurt her family in the name of The Crown , only caring about her horses and Britannia.

Oh and Martin Bashir is a real asshole.

Also, there were a lot of juicy tidbits they left out of the script. Supposedly Fergie was with the family when the toe suck photos were published. She came to breakfast and found the whole family looking at them in the newspapers and was “encouraged” to go home.

by Anonymousreply 37November 12, 2022 9:40 PM

As a result, he has married someone he can’t stand and is having an affair with the woman they should have allowed him to marry.

Youd have thought they might have learnt something from Princess Margaret, but no.

by Anonymousreply 38November 12, 2022 9:43 PM

No one forced him to marry Diana. He bungled that all by himself. The Crown has totally invented any notion he had a hope of marrying Camilla when they were younger. The scene with the Queen Mother sorting out the Shands and the Parker Bowles was total fiction. Absolutely made up.

by Anonymousreply 39November 12, 2022 9:47 PM

Oh and Martin Bashir is a real asshole.

Nah, just a journalist who managed to get to the truth. Fuck Saint Diana (everyone else seemed to - just like DL legend Diana Ross) she was a filthy whore who could have been in the Guiness Book of Records for the use of her vajayjay. Trampy Markle isnt so far behind

by Anonymousreply 40November 12, 2022 9:50 PM

[quote]Nah, just a journalist who managed to get to the truth.

He lied his face off. The BBC is writing cheques to settle lawsuits.

by Anonymousreply 41November 12, 2022 9:51 PM

A new report has been published following an independent inquiry looking into how a world-famous interview with Princess Diana was secured by the BBC in 1995.

The inquiry found that former BBC journalist Martin Bashir - who did the interview - acted in a "deceitful" way and faked documents to obtain it.

It also revealed failings in the BBC's own internal investigation in 1996 into what happened.

Both the BBC and Mr Bashir have apologised.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 42November 12, 2022 9:53 PM

^ she looka lika man

by Anonymousreply 43November 12, 2022 10:02 PM

Oh and Martin Bashir is a real asshole

Shame he never knew how desperate she was for brown cut cock in her pussy - he need not have done so much hard work to gain the interview

by Anonymousreply 44November 12, 2022 10:51 PM

r43 and?

by Anonymousreply 45November 12, 2022 10:52 PM

Who is this sex-hating puritanical male cunt, R40?

by Anonymousreply 46November 12, 2022 10:54 PM

r46 definitely not Fergie - the dog shagging, daughter pimping, Phil the Greek shagging slut

by Anonymousreply 47November 12, 2022 11:09 PM

Fergie was totally cut out of The Crown. So was Prince Edward.

by Anonymousreply 48November 18, 2022 9:42 PM

Why was she cut out of the Crown? One would think her character would be enormously entertaining in it.

by Anonymousreply 49November 18, 2022 11:12 PM

Peter Morgan was too busy conjuring wink wink nudge nudge about the Queen, Philip and the Wales triangle.

by Anonymousreply 50November 18, 2022 11:15 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!