When I watched the conversation between Margaret and her mother in episode 7, I realized that Helena Bonham Carter played her as well in "The King's Speech". Funny, I had totally forgotten about that. It was nice to see Claire Foy again in episode 8. As was hearing Linton Kwesi Johnson (twice).
Just finished Season Four. A little Diana - heavy perhaps but good just the same. Thinking of leaving it a bit and start watching it all again over the Christmas holidays in one massive binge.
I’d watch Princess Anne’s spin-off. I also thought Helena Bonham-Carter, Olivia Colman, and Emma Corrin all killed it this year as well. As others have noted, the music from Bowie, Joy Division, the Cure, the English Beat, etc. was very welcome. And hearing that music in this context drives home that my childhood is now, to some degree, “the past” or “ancient history.” I’m glad to live in a country that did away with royalty, yet watching the Queen do her best to do her duty was just as compelling this season as it was in the previous three. However, I would agree with the show’s fundamental premise, as I see it, that the aristocracy destroys and warps all of those who benefit from it, as we see when Margaret gets indignant about her cousins being dumped in the mental hospital, yet refuses to give up her own privilege in response, or as we see in the portrayal of spoiled royal dimwits such as Prince Andrew, and, most powerfully, in one of the last of the final scenes of the final episode, where Elizabeth finally tells off Charles and advises him to suck it up and enjoy his wealthy life and beautiful wife and stop whining about how hard done by he is. And, while I thought the “Fagan” episode was pretty ham-fisted, from the perspective of those at the bottom of the ladder, the spoiled lives of Andrew, Margaret, and Charles look even more noxious.
Diana celebrating with her flatmates to "Edge of Seventeen" after getting engaged to Charles (Feb 3 1981) was a bit of an anachronism. The Belladonna album wasn't released until July 1981 and the single wasn't released until Feb 1982. Rollerskating in Buckingham Palace to "Girls on Film" was borderline, having come out 2 weeks before the wedding in July.
The historical accuracy seems to be a growing theme in recent criticism of the series. Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden demands Netflix make it clear The Crown is 'fiction' | Daily Mail Online I find the idea that television needs to state regularly 'this is a fictional imagining of the lives of real people' to satisfy the guardians of culture like several of the newspapers this week to be risible. It's on Netflix, for fek's sake! And has never once been described as a documentary. It all boils down to fears about 'the media' misrepresenting the truth, and 'the public' being too passive and stupid to investigate that truth. When I see something that interests me on tv or in the movies, I look it up on-line and often read a book or several about the subject and make up my own mind. What I don't do is get worked up over a dramatisation becoming 'the official version of history'. That can only happen in a world where history has a lot more to worry itself about than Netflix. If I were the makers of The Crown I would take solace in the fact that the series has been criticised for being both propaganda in favour of the British monarchy, and cynical manipulation of the truth by 'left-wing persons' (today's Mail on Sunday) who harbour a desire for the end of that monarchy. Shot by both sides=doing something right.
...and said farewell forever to being ruled by a rich, privileged, and powerful family who rejects wholeheartedly the idea that they might be replaced by popular mandate. I say - well done you!
I agree. Further, many of the more embarrassing moments for the royal family are ripped directly from real life, as when, at the press conference announcing his engagement to Diana, in response to a journalist noting, “You two look very in love,” Charles issued the tone deaf response, “Whatever ‘in love’ means.”
They’ll be gone in two months, which is more than you can say for Charles, Andrew, Wills and all the rest of the royal brood.
I too would normally run a mile from this, until I found out John Lithgow was in it. Starting from the very beginning, enjoying Matt Smith's performance also.
I agree - I only started watching last week. Lithgow is marvellous. And I only decided to take a look at all because of the the spluttering furious outbursts of critics and detractors. A lesson The Crown no doubt learned from Oscar Wilde, The Evil Dead, and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.
Just finished season four. I remember the late 80s. So the series is now up to date for me, which feels weird. I have liked each season a little less than the one that came before.
I have enjoyed all four seasons equally. I’m completely uninterested in the cult of Diana, and was skeptical that anyone, even Olivia Colman, could fill Claire Foy’s shoes, but found this season just as bingeworthy as the previous three.
A television show or dramatic movie can only be reasonably understood as historical fiction so yes, the fear that this series may become "the official version of history" is ridiculous. Shakespeare's historical plays are also riddled with fables and propaganda and that hasn't kept those who want to from learning the actual history of monarchs and their reigns. As for "being shot by both sides", I note with amusement events and comments by various personages which I believe are placed in the script to make them come off poorly which I believe make them come off well, and vice versa. The series does seem to accommodate a variety of perspectives. I expect that a person who despises the institution of the monarchy and its members and a person who respects it and them will find both their positions, by turns, affirmed and assailed .
Not being schooled in even the basics of your standard issue Royalty Handbook for Dummies ™ and far from being an an ardent watcher of the UK monarchy or even BBC dramas of this ilk, I have to say, I find this show entirely fascinating! The protocol, the snide little digs, the dowagers with a twinkle in their eye and the ever present servants, footmen, butlers, equerries, telephone assistants and assistant to telephone assistants all listening in makes this thing a joy to watch. Of course I was aware of the abdication, of Churchill and some of the more notable figures who make an appearance, but seeing this play out in the grandeur of a first class television production is almost as good as watching Monty Python for the first time. (I'm hoping they make an appearance). Oh, and the cars--"bring the Rolls around" certainly would cause confusion in that household. We are still in Season 1-- alas, John Lithgow is no Gary Oldman, but he'll do.
Well, I stuck with it as long as I could, after Matt Smith and John Lithgow. Gillian Anderson’s take on Thatcher is so overdone.
I agree; in a series with so many standout performances, Anderson's is distinguished in its deficiency. It's like they want us to believe she was 100 years old or something.
I also agree that Anderson’s performance of Thatcher fell into caricature, and was probably the single worst take on any of the major historical figures we’ve seen so far in the series.
What's the British term for dumpy middle aged women like the two in the Penguin on the Tellie routine in Python?
I think it's coincidence. In the classic pre-Python comedy program "How To Irritate People", John Cleese explains that they're called "Pepperpots" because they are shaped like pepperpots.
