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?

Some of the Diana scenes were excruciating. The scene of her expressing her emotions through dancing alone in a studio was laughable. It was overdone, overwrought and silly. The actress said all the crew found it so emotional ... they should employ people who are more cynical then because it was awful. I think the entire season suffered from cast, crew and writers all feeling a little too smug and in love with their ideas. And it's much more difficult to reshape history when most people watching remember what happened and can see the very obvious 'creative' license.

Diana said she danced alone to express her emotions.
So it is based on fact, but obviously nobody knows exactly how she danced.

I know Diana danced. It was the way they filmed it that made her and the programme look ridiculous. Diana was much more self aware than anyone on The Crown including the actor who played her.

I don't get this either. The last series covered up to 1990. Is series 5 only going to cover 5 years or so? I can't think what happened in those 5 years that will cover 10 episodes.

Oh that’s interesting, I guess it could be we see Diana in flashback? They did this with Claire Foy and Matt Smith in series three.

Olivia Colman was a weird choice, too chippy and grumpy, but I thought that everyone else was strong, including the Philips and the Margarets. Gillian Anderson sometimes strayed into parody but on the whole was a credible Thatcher for me.

I actually thought that Olivia Colman looked right. With respect, the Queen did not age terribly well. She was pretty and radiant (like Claire Foy) post-war and in the 1950s, but she became quite dowdy during the 1960s. I do appreciate that her demeanour and style were set by her position, and 40yo men and women “looked middle-aged” in the mid-twentieth century in a way that they do not now, but regardless of all that she looked how she looked and I think that a cosmetically “aged” Foy might have been wrong for the part.

I'm looking forward to seeing Imelda as the Queen and I think she'll do a good job of it. I think OC is a fantastic actress (anyone who doesn't agree needs to watch Tyrannosaur) but she was mis cast I think. Claire Foy was much better.

Good point re flashbacks @667TheNeighbourOfTheBeast. Maybe season 5 will end with her death after all. Then 6 could cover the golden jubilee, deaths of princess Margaret and the queen mother, and William meeting Kate at university. I know an actress has been cast as Kate.

Nope, definitely another season to come after this one. DD's friend was recently involved in the casting process and was pencilled for one of the main roles.

Sir John Major has issued a very strongly worded statement about an episode where Charles - allegedly- tried to persuade him that The Queen should abdicate .
I wonder if Harry will criticise Netflix’s portrayal of his father ?

Yeah I saw that today. That’s just absolute bullshit that Charles would have tried to get the Queen to abdicate, he knows it’s a job for life. I don’t think The Crown has been very kind to Charles. I think the problem is for younger people who don’t remember Diana etc is they might believe everything on the show is true. It seems ridiculous to me as it’s so easy to fact check stuff now on the internet.

What John Major actually said was

"There was never any discussion between Sir John and the then Prince of Wales about any possible abdication of the late Queen Elizabeth II."

So you are simply ridiculing how she danced when no one except Diana had any idea how she danced?
Seems petty.

Full statement:

Sir John has not co-operated in any way with The Crown. Nor has he ever been approached by them to fact-check any script material in this or any other series.
As you will know, discussions between the Monarch and Prime Minister are entirely private and – for Sir John – will always remain so. But not one of the scenes you depict are accurate in any way whatsoever. They are fiction, pure and simple.
There was never any discussion between Sir John and the then Prince of Wales about any possible abdication of the late Queen Elizabeth II – nor was such an improbable and improper subject ever raised by the then Prince of Wales (or Sir John).
Neither Sir John nor Dame Norma have discussed the Monarchy remotely in these terms. [What you report as depicted in the script] has never been their view, never would be their view, and never will be their view.
Thus, if the scenes you describe are broadcast, they should be seen as nothing other than damaging and malicious fiction. A barrel load of nonsense peddled for no other reason than to provide maximum – and entirely false – dramatic impact.

It’s easy to be selective so I thought it best to post the full statement.

There will be evidence from someone they have used. Does anyone know from who?

What makes you certain there will be “ evidence” ?? It’s a piece of fiction not a documentary!

Because every other major event in the series os far has been evidenced.

”Fiction” means “made up”. Like a fairytale. It may be based on events that happened ie John Major talked to the Queen and the then Prince of Wales, but as Major says, no one else knows what was said or what happened. So The Crown’s writers have made that bit up. I don’t know why you think every other major event has been “evidenced” apart from to confirm that the major event took place. The details of conversations etc are fictional. Because no one has asked the Royal Family what they said or did, if it’s not in the public domain

There has been a fair amount of artistic license. For instance The Crown portrays HM’s relationship with Churchill as frosty but it was extremely cordial .
There are also issues with dates .

The most blatantly fictional event so far was the death if Philip's sister in the plane crash. The episode strongly suggested that she was travelling to the UK to remonstrate with a misbehaving Philip. And then sais that their father blamed Philip for the death of his favourite child. That's all completely untrue, as Cecile was travelling to a family wedding in London. So what the basic event (the crash) is true, the interpretation and "spin put on it is fundamentally wrong.
That is how you fictional real events, to make for "better" drama - it's been happening since Shakespeare!

Sorry for so many typos - hope it makes sense!

No one ever asked the Royal Family what they said or did?

There is lots that we know the Royal Family did or said. From ex-Prime Minsters autobiographies to interviews with Royal Family members themselves.

I stopped watching after the first season, but even then I knew some loons would think it was a true documentary! .🤨

Ah so i rewatched this episode recently and i think you may have slightly misremembered -
Its fully shown in the episode that Cecile was planning on fetching Philip from school for christmas but its decided he stays there due to misbehaviour and she travels to the wedding in London instead. Cecille explains it as such in the last phonecall between her and Philip before the flight, she calls him from the airport.

There is almost 2000 words detailing historical inaccuracies in the first four seasons of The Crown on wikipedia if anyone is so inclined. The inaccuracies listed for seasons 3 and 4 are noticeably longer that the first two seasons suggesting either sloppy research and/or a desire to create a particular narrative arc..