The Crown - Next Series

[antelopevalley]

The next series will be starting on the 9th of November. Imelda Staunton will be playing the Queen. Tobias Menzies is playing Philip.

Historical events we’re likely to see in season 5 of The Crown:
Prince Andrew’s divorce
Princess Anne’s divorce
Windsor Castle fire
The separation/divorce of Prince Charles and Lady Diana
The Queen sues The Sun newspaper
The death of Princess Diana
Tony Blair becomes Prime Minister
www.whats-on-netflix.com/news/the-crown-season-5-on-netflix-everything-we-know-so-far-09-2022/

Who will be watching it?

www.princeofwales.gov.uk/annual-review/2020-2021/income-expenditure-and-staff

here are the accounts which show Prince Charles funding his sons for 2021
let me have a look for the breakdown between the Harry and William and I’ll post that too

@jeffgoldblum I am not engaging anymore with people who post untruths. I did say on that thread I had a visual disability and so had not seen her ring. I had to massively zoom in before I saw it. I thought she wasn't wearing one because I can usually see her rings, but it is her engagement ring I am capable of seeing, which she wasn't wearing. I explained this on the thread and said sorry.
So to be repeatedly told I have lied is incredibly nasty. This is a personal attack on me as a disabled women.

And if it is only in personal accounts then it is Harry's work against Charles's word. There is zero evidence. It is about who you believe.

I personally don't think it matters.

Harry and his wife made a big song and dance about pursuing 'financial independence'. They did so without consulting with Charles, and in a manner which caused a great deal of upset to him and other members of the family. Harry then turned around a year later, from his multi million dollar California home, in front of an audience of millions, to whine about being 'cut off'. We're not talking some 19 year old starting out on life, but a nearly middle aged man with a son of his own. Harry chose to run off to the other side of the world with no job and no home. That's on him, and his wife. Charles doesn't owe them a penny.

I thought that enough of the last series was made up shite that I don't think I want to watch the new one. I wish someone would sue the makers to make clear that it's not OK to make up lies about real, living people. John Major is clearly furious about the invented scene with him in the new series.

Because I have some time on my hands I returned to the thread in question and in none of your posts did you say you have a visual disability . You did say something like it must just be my poor eyesight but that’s not the same ; without my glasses my eyesight is poor but I don’t regard it as a disability .

I do wonder about the ethics and legality of series like 'The Crown', especially as the producers pointedly refused to add a 'fiction' disclaimer.

It seems almost like a loophole in the libel laws. You'd never get away with half of what 'The Crown' portrays in a book or documentary. But you can put just about anything in a drama and that's OK? Without even acknowledging that it is just that, a drama? Knowing full well that many will take it to be the absolute truth?

Netflix has a large team of lawyers. You do not need to wonder about the legality of the series.

I understand that under current legislation it is perfectly legal to make up anything you like about living figures in a 'drama', even one not explicitly flagged as such.

My question is whether or not it should be legal to do so.

'It seems almost like a loophole in the libel laws. You'd never get away with half of what 'The Crown' portrays in a book or documentary. But you can put just about anything in a drama and that's OK? Without even acknowledging that it is just that, a drama? Knowing full well that many will take it to be the absolute truth?'

I know. 'Its a drama' seems to mean they can make a load of PA bollocks up. As I said previously I bet Harry would be outraged if the BBC had made a soap about his childhood and tragic mother's life and death.

'My question is whether or not it should be legal to do so.'

Exactly. If they are ao keen on the impersonations and getting the clothes exactly matched it does seem odd that they can make everything else up.

I guess it's a difficult one, legally speaking.

Should shows like 'The Tudors' not be allowed either, given that they make up all sorts of stuff? Or is that different because they've all been dead for 500 years? Historical fiction has always existed, but I guess when it's clear it's fiction it's not so bad, even if some will take it as the truth.

I think at the very least, a clear disclaimer at the start of the show should be a legal requirement. It's very telling that the 'Crown' producers explicitly refused to do this. Clearly they want us to think it's all the truth.

'Should shows like 'The Tudors' not be allowed either, given that they make up all sorts of stuff? Or is that different because they've all been dead for 500 years?'

I think the fact those currently featured are mostly still alive is an issue but it's mainly how unfavourablly they are portrayed. Morgan is using 'It's a drama' to stick the boot in and its glaringly obvious.

Maybe you should offer your legal advice to Netflix who have said clearly they will not include a disclaimer.

What are you talking about?

I've said clearly that I know what they are doing is currently legal. And I've mentioned the lack of a disclaimer several times.

I'm questioning the ethics of using a 'drama' to effectively slander living people. Do you have any opinion on that, or is it all fine and dandy so long as 'the royals' come out of it looking badly?

Yes, I guess you'd never have dramas based on real people's lives if everything had to be factual. Even the most accurate of them compress timelines and 'tidy up' story lines for narrative reasons.

But in the case of 'The Crown' it is, as you say, very obvious that Morgan has an agenda and is using this 'drama' to advance it. I think it does cross a line in the ethical sense, but legally there's probably nothing that can be done about it.

As I have said many times, the Crown is kinder to the Royal Family than it could have been.

That's your opinion, many of us disagree.

That doesn't really answer my question about whether or not you consider it ethically OK to simply make things up about living people in order to advance an agenda.

Maybe you should learn about the law? Netflix can, and has been sued for inaccurate portrayals of real people

www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/jan/28/first-female-chess-grandmaster-sues-netflix-queens-gambit

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-62727106

The ethical question around The Crown is interesting. It's a bit like The Lost King which is a film about Philipa Langley the lady whose research found Richard III. Apparently the archaeologists and researchers from Leicester University have been really poorly treated and their real names etc used. Steve Coogan wrote the film and he is a bit of an arse so I can see how that happened.

Mind you, I do think Channel 4 did a bit of a hatchet job on Philipa in their original factual series so maybe this is revenge.

Then the Royal Family are free to sue Netflix if they think they have a case.

@Serenster Although anyone can sue anyone. Did she actually win?

variety.com/2022/tv/news/netflix-queens-gambit-lawsuit-settlement-nona-gaprindashvili-1235361680/amp/

Netflix had to settle as the court agreed she had a case and refused to toss it out.. The terms of the settlement are confidential, but fair play to her for taking them on

I think the fact those currently featured are mostly still alive is an issue but it's mainly how unfavourablly they are portrayed.

TBF most if not all living royals haven't done themselves any favours in the documented day to day reports.