DS Forums

 
 

The Crown (Netflix)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-12-2016, 09:10
derek500
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,366
John Lithgow won Best Supporting Actor for his brilliant portrayal of Churchill at the Critics' Choice Awards last night.

Golden Globe nominations announced later today.
derek500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 13-12-2016, 15:32
Inkblot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,301
John Lithgow is the standout actor in this. His scenes with Stephen Dillane as Graham Sutherland are in a different league from much of the rest of the series: funny, touching, and Lithgow gets under the skin of a British legend better than many of the the British actors.

Having watched the whole first season I'm still finding Claire Foy irritating. Maybe it's the script, which gives her some oddly non-naturalistic dialogue (the phrase "numerically dyslexic" was one example if I remember correctly) and makes her stare into the distance a lot.

And the historical accuracy seems to become less and less reliable as the series goes on. The BBC ran an article about the issue portrayed in the final episode and concluded that The Crown's version was myth not fact (plenty of spoilers so look away if you don't want to know the result): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38032464
Inkblot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 17:18
lundavra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,455
John Lithgow is the standout actor in this. His scenes with Stephen Dillane as Graham Sutherland are in a different league from much of the rest of the series: funny, touching, and Lithgow gets under the skin of a British legend better than many of the the British actors.

Having watched the whole first season I'm still finding Claire Foy irritating. Maybe it's the script, which gives her some oddly non-naturalistic dialogue (the phrase "numerically dyslexic" was one example if I remember correctly) and makes her stare into the distance a lot.

And the historical accuracy seems to become less and less reliable as the series goes on. The BBC ran an article about the issue portrayed in the final episode and concluded that The Crown's version was myth not fact (plenty of spoilers so look away if you don't want to know the result): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38032464
The articles that I have read about it, have been pointing out glaring historical errors from the start.
lundavra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 18:44
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
This bit sounds a bit odd, maybe they are misinformed or they have made a mistake

http://www.inquisitr.com/3784990/net...season-2-cast/

The producers of The Crown have revealed that fans should not get too attached to the current cast members as the entire cast will be replaced after Season 2 as the story will be brought up to the 1980s and the current cast will no longer be relevant

snip>>

The new string of episodes for Season 2 will focus on the period between the years 1955 and 1965. There will be several new historical figures introduced during Season 2
Read more at


Series 1 ran up to 1955 , If series 2 goes from 1955 to 1965 then surely they wont jump from 1965 to the 80's ? and that wouldn't fit with their being at least 6 series of 10 eps each
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2016, 18:48
anyonefortennis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 🇬🇧
Posts: 60,741
This bit sounds a bit odd, maybe they are misinformed or they have made a mistake

http://www.inquisitr.com/3784990/net...season-2-cast/

The producers of The Crown have revealed that fans should not get too attached to the current cast members as the entire cast will be replaced after Season 2 as the story will be brought up to the 1980s and the current cast will no longer be relevant

snip>>

The new string of episodes for Season 2 will focus on the period between the years 1955 and 1965. There will be several new historical figures introduced during Season 2
Read more at




Series 1 ran up to 1955 , If series 2 goes from 1955 to 1965 then surely they wont jump from 1965 to the 80's ? and that wouldn't fit with their being at least 6 series of 10 eps each
They could focus more intently on the Diana years and other troubled periods.
anyonefortennis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 10:12
bel110
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,874
Just started watching this yesterday and up to episode 4. Really enjoying it and don't quite understand the problem of the smoking as I assume that's how it was in the day.

One niggle was right at the beg of ep 1, after the Queens wedding it cut to 'twelve months later' and then cut to a time when Charles must have been 2 or 3 and Anne a baby ... so def more than 12 months later ....? Seemed either a glaringly bad mistake or I'm just viewing it wrongly?
bel110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 16:20
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
Just started watching this yesterday and up to episode 4. Really enjoying it and don't quite understand the problem of the smoking as I assume that's how it was in the day.

One niggle was right at the beg of ep 1, after the Queens wedding it cut to 'twelve months later' and then cut to a time when Charles must have been 2 or 3 and Anne a baby ... so def more than 12 months later ....? Seemed either a glaringly bad mistake or I'm just viewing it wrongly?
Exactly, some do wish us to airbrush from history anything that is deemed unhealthy these days which is just silly , mind you I was at a dinner the other evening where someone said they think it is dreadful that any smoking or alcohol consumption is allowed on TV, as you can imagine not a particularly fun dinner guest
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:59
Sara_Peplow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,464
I watched it and enjoyed it. Why do they have to recast ?. Surely with make up or CGI they could just make the characters look older as time progresses ?.

Will be sad when Mountbatten gets killed in 1979 by the IRA.
Think they were accurate but maybe with artistic licence exaggerated some things .

Look forward to series 2 next year.
Sara_Peplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 22:52
bel110
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,874
Exactly, some do wish us to airbrush from history anything that is deemed unhealthy these days which is just silly , mind you I was at a dinner the other evening where someone said they think it is dreadful that any smoking or alcohol consumption is allowed on TV, as you can imagine not a particularly fun dinner guest
That person sounds great fun!

Personally as the mum of three kids I think I'd rather they grow up seeing social drinking depicted in a responsible way on tv and also alcholism and learn about the pros and cons of drinking than it being a taboo subject that is not allowed on tv and so becomes something to be kept secret.
I find all the smoking in The Crown quite fascinating actually, it's quite bizarre to see people lighting up left, right and centre without a care for anyone else or the health risks .. strange how odd it looks given that it's not really so long ago that smoking was allowed in public buildings. It's a great piece of social history in that respect.
bel110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 07:42
jonparadise
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 3,303
I watched it and enjoyed it. Why do they have to recast ?. Surely with make up or CGI they could just make the characters look older as time progresses ?.

Will be sad when Mountbatten gets killed in 1979 by the IRA.
Think they were accurate but maybe with artistic licence exaggerated some things .

Look forward to series 2 next year.
Despite some advances in the area, old-age makeup is still pretty unconvincing, I wouldn't relish the thought of them trying to make Matt Smith and Claire Foy look 50, 60, 70 upwards for multiple seasons.

I should imagine attempting CGI in every scene would get very expensive indeed.

The children and younger characters will all have to be recast anyway so they won't be a big deal, but it'll be interesting to see how they handle the transition for the principle characters.
jonparadise is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 07:53
sarahj1986
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 8,093
We have watched I think 7 episodes and we are both really enjoying it. I must admit we do both sometimes check things after to see if things happened as they showed on screen, of course some of it is dramatisation but still fascinating to watch.I also watched a couple of old videos with princess Margaret in them.

John Lithgow, Matt Lucas and Claire Foy are all very well cast
sarahj1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 11:20
LostFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59,670
Just started watching this as my next Netflix binge. I had been put off before as I'm not usually in to the frocks and bonnets of period drama but I've been won over. Netflix's budget and production values really push this to a totally different level.
LostFool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 12:44
bel110
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,874
Just started watching this as my next Netflix binge. I had been put off before as I'm not usually in to the frocks and bonnets of period drama but I've been won over. Netflix's budget and production values really push this to a totally different level.
Enjoy! I just finished, it's very enjoyable although I found a few of the early episodes a bit slow. From the Coronation onwards ( don't think that's a spoiler! ) I thought it was excellent and the coronation is so amazingly well done ...
bel110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 12:45
sarahj1986
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 8,093
Really enjoyed the series, looking forward to series two.
sarahj1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 14:21
LostFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59,670
Enjoy! I just finished, it's very enjoyable although I found a few of the early episodes a bit slow. From the Coronation onwards ( don't think that's a spoiler! ) I thought it was excellent and the coronation is so amazingly well done ...
Just watched the first 4 episodes back to back but I'm going to have to take a break to get some things done. I don't mind it being slow, it's like having a long soak in the bath.

Not sure about Matt Smith but the rest of the cast - especially Claire Foy - are fantastic.
LostFool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-12-2016, 18:26
anyonefortennis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 🇬🇧
Posts: 60,741
Season 2 will focus on Charles as a young boy and his education, and on Philip and his back story.
anyonefortennis is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:57.