It's ironic that season 4 ended with Philip giving a speech about how their lives revolve around Elizabeth but in season 5 she is in the peripheral (kind of) while everyone else gets the spotlight.
I mean, she already was starting with Season 3. At that point, she kinda became the Antagonis of her own show. But unlike Walter White, not through Chance, but due to her rejection of change.
@@TheSorrel It's often the story of monarchy in general. As they age, they become less and less popular. When they die, there's a nostalgic up-swell but, with some exceptions, monarchs tend to loose favour over time.
The whole season made the Queen and Prince Philip seem like secondary characters, while making them appear totally alien to everyone else in the family too, which is just ridiculous. The entire season is just slanderous fan fiction which quite rightly hasn't been received very well.
I think the words "seem like secondary characters" sums up my whole video quite eloquently haha. It was a strange season for sure and for me personally a rather boring one, unfortunately
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 Well you're video covered it very well I think! Season 1 and 2 will always be my favourites. "Hyde Park Corner" is excellent.
This is exactly why I’m struggling with season 5. I think it’s also because it’s so close to the present that any portrayal was gonna go wrong no matter how much they tried to shift the details, most of all with Diana’s portrayal. It’s not surprising that Queen Elizabeth’s starting to become secondary. What was surprising was the amount of backsliding to make the characters seem out of touch. People can be out of touch without falling back to past assumptions or habits. Season 4’s conclusion felt like it was gonna buildup some great tension and Season 5 didn’t follow through. It felt rushed where they should’ve taken their time, almost like they were listing off events. For example, the revenge dress - there were so many things they could’ve pulled from that one moment alone: the tabloids, the development, and even the response. But it’s just blink and it’s over.
Exactly! It was too rushed, but it was also slowing down in weird moments. I wanted to see Elizabeth trying to bond with her children over their tragedies, some kind of change from the 4th season and her trying to be there for them rather than the other way - as for the show, it seemed the only logical direction. Alas, t'was not to the directors' liking.
Excellent argument 👌🏻 The show lost its essence and stray under the public pressures to deliver all the juicy gossip about Diana and others really turn its into sensational biopic, not what is originally planned to be, historical fiction that fill in the blank of private what-we-dont-know moments with fictional to explore the possibilities, the psychological, but just boring recreation of events.
In my notes I literally wrote, "I am going to mess up these prince names at some point"! I combed through the audio thinking I was safe but alas you got me hahaha
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 I didn't mean to Get you -- haha, you know how we are when we start typing on the internet! I'm American -- something I notice with English people - they seem to ALL be named Charles, Andrew, Anne, or Elizabeth! It's their strong attachment to Tradition, I suppose. On the other hand, here in the U.S., people have been using surnames as first names for girls. There's been a large outbreak of Madisons (or Madysyn) and I met a young lady whose first name is Kennedy, believe it or not! Thanks again for the thoughtful video.
I may be mistaken, but, going back to season 4, I remember how they never showed Diana and Charles' wedding because "well, it was so well documented you can google it and watch the real thing why show it blah blah blah", and the whole episode felt a bit anticlimactic. It didn't really feel right for me. But now, listening to you, I am starting to finally get why it was done this way. Thanks for the great review!
The common thread of the reviews is that the show is catching up to present day. It's catching up to the modern day where the royals feel more and more out of place. The 90's was kind of a mess within the family, and the outside culture, and the show reflects that. Elizabeth lost control within the family because she never fully had it. The Queen feeling totally overwhelmed by a hundred cable channels was an apt metaphor. Also there was a Prince Charles break dancing scene. Which was REAL. Enough said.
Exceptional analysis! And this is coming from someone who has never watched a single episode of “The Crown”. I aspire to be as good an essayist as you one day. You’ve just earned yourself a new subscriber! I’m excited to see what media you will turn your looking glass to next.
Oh my goodness, thank you for such a wonderful comment! And I impatiently and anxiously await the day you grace us with your very own essays. Trust me and just go for it. Thoughts to words, pen to paper. (Learning to edit was the only real hurdle.) Thank you again for such a lovely comment, made my week.🥲❤
And by this point Prince Phillip was no longer an outsider.because He himself said it took Him 40 years(1987) of marriage for become an inside! So it the 90's He was an insider.
Both main actors fail to show the character of their counterparts the Queen an the Prince, first of all, as they look nothing like them. But secondly they are just not believeable. On the other hand, the rather taller (than Di) actress portrays both the vulnerabilty an strength that was so Lady Di. As for the Mohamed an Sydney portrayal (in episode 3) it was done with such finesse a subtlety. It was very moving especially towards Sydney's death. It showed a real an emotional friendship as opposed to a servant an his master, as the roles were frequently reversed.
I'm happy you were able to enjoy episode 3 so much. It was a well done and touching episode. With regards to the Queen and the Prince, but mostly Imelda Staunton, I find it difficult to fault good actors for bad scripts. The casting for Prince Philip was jarring, particularly given it followed season 4's transcendent portrayal. But with regards to Staunton I do think she is a powerhouse in that role and completely believable but unfortunately the season simply throws her to the shadows. Elizabeth Debicki is also divine in the role of Diana but even her Princess Diana does not feel as fully realized as in the previous season. Actors can only stay afloat for so long with bad writing weighing them down.
I think that Mohamed's episode actually highlighted a thing about this series: you can make it about the "orbit" of the crown, and still come out with a lot of drama filled stories. Surely the queen was the sun of the series, but i think there is a certain beauty in watching her slowly dwindle away: but, if you wanna make this choice, you need a bigger spark than the queen's problem. And that's the problem. Just as Major says in his monologue, this season feels like watching spoiled children poking each other, while before we had stubborn adult trying to mask/co live with their mixed emotions in a political landscape with wars, prime ministers and uprisings. Actual dramatic events, that mirrored a more "adult" system. Mohamed is no Queen, but he feels like a monarch and that force of character was the powerhouse for the relationships in the crown's previous seasons. These are my two cents, i love subtle contexts with cooking hot tension underneath, but I think it got complimented with the soothing numbness some scenes elicited in the calm. And the crown really was a beautiful show.
Firstly, Wow I was blown away by your articulation! I completely see your point and where you are coming from interns of Mohamed's episode and him as a character in the series. I think I may go back and watch it again because of everything you said. I also agree, although it isn't something I would have liked to see initially, that there could potentially be something beautiful and poetic in seeing Elizabeth being "fazed out" as the centre of the crown. But season 5 has none of that subtlety, its shift to other characters just feels abrupt and jarring to me. Now that you have mentioned it, I can see how the show runners, if that was their intention, could have done it in a way that was decidedly more mature, artistic and true to the show's narrative. It's a true shame they didn't. Thank you so much for your two cents, it was beautifully written and I enjoyed reading every second of it. A truly thought-provoking comment.
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 why, thank you for the video, i also enjoyed listening to your POV :) I'm looking forwards to other chances to comment shows with you!! Definitely subscribed, greetings from Italy!!
Thank you! And honestly I really think you have a unique perspective on things. I talked about season 5 with so many people and your comment was the first that struck me so poignantly. Perhaps you should make a RU-vid channel as well!! I think so many people would enjoy and benefit from hearing your perspective. I look forward to more discussions in the future
Camilla wanted her cake and eating it to..she grosses me out. Princess Margaret was never the same after she.lost the love of her life, Peter Townsend. I love The Crown Seasons 1-4. BUT I love Jonathan Pryce as an older Phillip. Tobias Menzies is my favorite Philip
Margaret didn't "lose" Townsend: she gave him up. She was free to marry this divorced man, as long as she gave up her royal privileges, too. In the end, she was too much of a snob to a regular Mrs. to her true love. That's on HER.
Unfortunately as the Crown moved closer towards the 80’s & 90’s Diana’s death is one of those can’t not be addressed, that being said it is possible for her and Charles to have focus while not being THE focus. Something else that bothered me was the casting of Jonathan Pryce as Prince Phillip, I think Pryce is an incredibly talented and tremendous actor, but he felt miscast for this role. I could but that Tobia’s Phillip was an evolution of Matt Smiths but Pryce didn’t feel that way for me. I also wish we could’ve gotten more humorous moments with Imelda as the Queen as well.
it feels like they didn't know what to do with philip this season so they recycled his season 2 cheating arc only this time it's emotional cheating. it's not in line with the character arc he'd had
For me it's not that it's not only not in line (triple negative lol) but it's also just not creative at all. There is no complexity to this emotional affair for me. Like how does a monarch or even just a woman react to infidelity later in life, be it physical or emotional? What considerations does it take? Would the Queen even really care? And to what extent? Does Philip have any conflict over this? What does the family think? Hell what does the emotional affair mistress think? Like there are so many directions it could go in if you wanted to tell this specific story line. But instead it is the most rehashed, boring, "old man meets and likes younger, pretty woman, wife finds out/man tells wife, wife sad and feels insecure" cliche that not only have we seen before in general media but also something we've seen before in previous seasons of the crown itself. Just so unimaginative it hurts. And it is even more jarringly boring given, in retrospect, the phenomenal characterization of Philip in previous seasons
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 i’d add that it’s the same with margaret’s storyline this season: is it possible that this 60+ woman still hasn’t made peace with the difficult decision her sister had to make over 40 years ago and understood that elizabeth basically had no choice in the matter? it’s just unrealistic that all the years that had passed hadn’t given her a different perspective on the issue and that she’s still lashing out in the same way she did back in season 1 and 2?
@@kerelenis YES! I wish I could give you ten hearts for this comment. My initial reason for researching the showrunner was because I had a suspicion he didn't/doesn't know how to write older women/older people. And I had written an entire essay on how Margaret's characterization just dissolves into something more like a teenager who didn't get the toy on her Christmas list. As opposed to her being a 60+ year old woman with rich life experiences and a love for her sister. My biggest "this season is failing" moments were the one I mentioned at the beginning of this video and the scene of Margaret yelling at her sister over a man she'd lost in her 20s. In the end I had to leave the part about Margaret out because I do feel the Showrunner's failure with Elizabeth is more central to the show overall and the video would have been an hour long if I didn't leave it out. But I say all that to say that yes! I feel what you are saying on a SPIRITUAL level. Just mind-numbingly stupid.
@@kerelenis Thank you so much! I always argue/talk with my friends about it and they are quite indifferent about my critics and analysis. So they always suggested I just make a RU-vid and talk about it there. And voila! And unfortunately no I have no background in cinema😢I'm just your average economics major probably over-analyzing the tv I love to watch too much. I've always just loved stories and Sisyphus's story is one of my favorites hence my channel name. perhaps you should start a channel too, if it's something you're interested in.
Great review!!! Diana was important but not that important. In the 1880s there was a princess who was hugely popular and now no one remembers her. Diana is a popular figure but she was not historically important. Great review. I subscribed to your channel. Now I am going to watch that great BBC documentary about Princess Alice, Philip’s mom. Now there was a great lady.
Woah yes! I think you summed it up perfectly when you said Diana is popular but is not historically important. I think that is the point I was trying to get across and why season 5 is such a strange viewing experience. I hope you enjoy the documentary and thank you for such a lovely comment!
Absolutely! I noticed that too. There was a subtle friction there and I assumed it would be something explored more vigorously. In one of Peter Morgan's earlier works, The Queen (movie), the wife of Tony Blair makes a comment to the effect of "all the Prime Ministers end up going go go ga ga (baby talk) for the Queen". And here that conversation sort of occurs again. I had assumed television would have been his opportunity to expand on that motif, given it's not feasible to explore peripheral material like this in a movie specifically about the Queen, but nothing ever really came of it. Quite disappointing because he has now ignited my curiosity twice with regards to how the mere presence of the Queen directly seems to affect the marriages and family lives of her Prime Ministers. A truly fascinating realm of story telling territory that remains untouched.
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 Yeah, I thought the wife was going to say he was more concerned about the royal family then his own family.... or he was handling their divorce when he was on the verge himself. But we got nothing lol.
This season was just terrible. From the actor's dialects, body language and finally and most importantly the script is just, not even mediocre, less than mediocre. Additionally, i think the team behind this season is seriously trying to please the royal family, instead of giving us the truth, like the previous seasons, no matter what some viewers may say. No, it isn't fiction.
At around minute three he had a little bit too much fun with the metaphors, I had to laugh out loud. Was it intentional to mirror the shows obsession with shallow and repetitive metaphors?
What is galling me about this show in general is that anyone who is uneducated about the actual history will believe this is exactly what has happened. Without that perspective of the truth of history, this is nothing more than what "50 Shades of Grey" was to being a paler version of "Twilight." I fell with Morgan he's too involved in placing his dolls on the canvas, but has little if no care in terms of telling the actual story. With an average person's attention span being non-existent, shows like this are to a degree responsible for creating black mark on history. Given the current spate of cult followers Harry and Meghan have, they watch this show religiously thinking whatever is in it is the actual historical record. And to me that's irresponsible and dangerous.
I honestly couldn't connect in any way shape or form to the supposed drama in the latter seasons of the series. It was almost exclusively obscenely wealthy, spoiled idiots bumbling from one petty problem to another and somehow getting attention by the public and politicians for it. It was maddening, as it is today. These twits are basically just there to generate content for the yellow press on the British taxpayers' dime.
For you was it only season 5 you found so obscene or did previous seasons also rub you the wrong way? I'm only asking because I am genuinely curious what watching that show is like for a British person (I'm sorry if I assumed you were British and you actually are not)
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 I'd say it started whit season for, when the protagonists weren't interacting with historical events but their family feuds and romantic intricacies being front and center of the series. Their privileges were acknowledged and at times even mocked. It's hard to not consider those people self-absorbed, superficial buffoons. And the fictional account of a prime minister being tasked with settling a royal divorce is not a high-stakes drama but just an absurd and quite heinous notion. Na, my man, l'm from a european country that luckily got rid of their royalty but has relatives in the UK. Great vid, btw!
@@u1rtc7t5f64t157856v8 Thank you! And I see where you are coming from. For me Season 5 was the only time I truly became aware of the absurdity of their privilege and how absurd and honestly how uninteresting it is.
the showrunners are too focused on diana. if they wanted diana so much then they should make a separate show about diana. I am compelled to the show because of claire foy
For me, it is so interesting that their focus on Diana and also Charles doesn't equate to them liking or even wanting to tell any interesting stories about them. Every aspect of their story in season 5 feels like a 12 year old handing in their history homework on a person they clearly knew nothing about and didn't care to learn about
I think Imelda really would have sunken her teeth into this role. I mean truthfully what a waste of a phenomenal actress. It really is a shame they gave her so little.
This season really feel like a fan fiction while the other seasons feel more real then fan fiction. Also some of the actors are too good at their job, Dominic West is to good at acting that he doesn’t feel like Charles, sometimes I forget who he is playing and I am like who is he again. 😂
This is excellently laid out and I agree with many of the points made about Morgan "missing it" in Season five. Yes, what always made the Crown tick was Elizabeth's POV. How things centered around her of course. This rather mis-calculation of season five , *for me, also lies in the miscasting. He is Spot on about Debicki's Diana. She owns the role, physically and in demeanor. *Contrasting the miscasting of Staunton, (more of a Queen mother), West's Charles, and a poor choice for Phillip. All talented actors of course, a given. But this "Off" casting adds heavily to this somewhat "Off" season 5.
I’m so glad I’m not the only one disappointed with Season 5. The first 4 seasons were so well done and Season 4 really felt like it was building up to something, but we did not get that at all. I don’t understand why??? Did Covid affect the writing? To me it doesn’t really feel like an excuse. All the events in S5 are just there but it was not done in an interesting way. We had so much in the 90s that could make great story material, but even the Queen barely reacted to her children’s marriages breaking down and also her castle burning down in FIRE. Like seriously? As you said it feels like fan service now. I seriously hope S6 will do justice but I won’t keep my hopes up tbh. S5 was imo the worst out of the 5 seasons so far.
I honestly feel the exact same way, haha hence why I made this video. It was like I couldn't comprehend why season 5 was so awful. Even now, despite me filling in that question myself, it still feels like a question that will always go unanswered. As many have told me, perhaps this season was really just meant as a set up season for season 6 and that's why it is so perfunctory and sort of lifeless.
I think the coronavirus lockdowns and delays have had an effect on Season 5. I did feel the absence of the Queen from Season 5. Some of this may have been the result of stories surrounding her, but I think it may also have been the result of how to stage scenes with the various actors during the pandemic. My greatest disappointment was the episode that dealt with the fire of Windsor Castle and the attending marital crises within the family. The decommisioning of the HMS Britainnia was told with the kind of sense of loss that was missing from the fire.
I have considered this but then I also don't think that explains the overarching Diana x Charlesness of the entire season. My greatest disappointment....actually I don't think I can link it to a specific episode. It is the overall lack of imagination with The Queen and Diana's relationship. It felt like this season never really reaped the seed that season 4's portrayal of the two women sowed.
Honestly, I love your dissection of this but I think the reason the Crown falls flat is because it's tone deaf. Ever since Parasite, we've seen White Lotus and Jordan Peele's stuff and it has all been very class conscious. The Crown is blatantly pro monarchist and with the current state of affairs in Britan, this is kind of blind, really. I cannot but appreciate the artistic merits of this series, however, the politics of it are impossible to ignore. But again, this is an excellent analysis and I really do look forward to seeing more of your work!
Thank you so much for that compliment. And I agree with your sentiment on the ghost of class consciousness looming over media and it only actually hit me now that while I was watching season 5 I had that kind of lens informing my experience as well! That was such an amazing insight, thank you. For me personally I think the show runner is always pro-someone as opposed to pro-a specific side. He's been pro-Blair but not really pro-Labour, and he's been pro-Elizabeth but not really pro-monarchy. For me at least I have never felt myself having sympathetic and empathetic emotions for anyone in the series besides Elizabeth and perhaps Charles as a child.
If The Crown is pro monarchist, then i can't begin to imagine what it would be like if it were anti monarchist. The royals are shown as entirely unlikeable and only out to serve themselves. There is literally an entire episode devoted to showing that the queen couldn't cry over a legitimate disaster because she didn't care about the people involved and she ended up faking a tear. Even in the best case scenerios with the queens sister and Diana, we still see quite clearly that they are deeply self-centered and only want what is best for themselves, regardles of whether or not anyone gets hurt in the process. I simply cannot think of one single time the show portrayed the royals positively.
I completely agree with your assessment. Season 5 lacked that heart. I felt like she was just there and would appear occasionally through out the episodes. Also definitely not as heart wrenching as the previous seasons.
I stared to feel like there wasn’t enough queen in season 4. I only made it though 3 episodes of season 5. I will eventually finish but it just didn’t grab me like before
Elizabeth Debecki and Dominic West performances were brilliant. Jonny Lee Miller was an absolute surprise and a gem. However the fail was in Imelda Staunton’s performance. She was played the Queen as a posh aristocrat rather than a woman tied to living in extraordinary circumstances. This was beautifully portrayed by Claire and Olivia but Imelda’s come across as meh, bland and empty which is a shame because she is an amazing actress. Her role as Dolores Umbridge in the Harry Potter series is chilling - and scares me to this day, so really disappointed as to how she approached this role.
I think I might have commented this previously but I truly believe that there really wasn't much Staunton could do with subpar writing material. And to be honest, though I enjoyed Jonny Lee Miller's portrayal it didn't feel like we got much out of his character either. Debecki does give a good performance I agree, Dominic West's performance for me personally however feels more like a Dominic West performance as opposed to a believable portrayal of the then Prince Charles, particularly within the narrative of previous portrayals. I agree with your Harry Potter Order Of the Phoenix assessment. Staunton's work there is immaculate, haunting and visceral. Which I think further underscores the point that actors of her caliber don't just drop the ball particularly on popular franchises. Unfortunately this season she was never given the chance to truly serve, in my humble opinion.
Essentially, the Crown has a lot of interesting things to talk about, but chooses to not talk about any of them, maybe only mentioning it in passing. Season 5’s era of the 90’s arguably is the most interesting of Elizabeth II’s reign, but nothing really happens lol. Maybe the show runners respected the monarchy too much? It feels that way.
I think "respect the Monarchy too much" is a more polite way of saying they perhaps felt pressure or a direct push from the institution itself to tone it down. Regardless the end result leaves little to be desired.
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 that could’ve been the case, but it’s still in a sense respecting the institution enough to not paint it in a negative light. Of course this conversation could go on and on about critiquing that. In terms of the show, don’t see how interesting they can get past a season 6 lol
As the daughter of a former English teacher, may I correct your use of the word "disinterest?" The word "uninterested" means "not interested" and the word "disinterested" means impartial or objective.
No one normal uses Disinterested in that way. If you look it up, you will see two definitions. Disinterested is commonly used, particularly in the UK, to mean uninterested.
As an ESL professor, I have to ask- how many languages do you speak? The meaning of their utterance was received, thereby achieving the goal of language. Did you know? When these words were first introduced, their meanings were the reverse, with disinterested originally meaning "lacking interest," and uninterested meaning "unbiased." 🌈 Prescriptive linguistics is sooo 1950's.
At 23:23 you meant Prince Phillip i presume. :D It is quite interesting and alarming how a movie and series interpretations can change people's opinion about certain characters. After watching The Crown my feelings for Diana and Charles were that they are both simply annoying. How they cannot accept their given roles in life. That they enjoying the limelight, but at the same time they are feeling so caged and limited in their lives. After a while I felt so tired watching these poor rich people sitting in palaces, moaning about how hard life is... And in the contrast of the whole series, the only person who knows her place is the queen herself. She can cope with her role, she is strong enough to understand what it takes and accept it. Also there is lot of going on how generations differ: Elisabeth/Phillip generation - during/post WWII, stoic people who get things done, hold their heads high, just go on with life. Diana/Edward generation - spoiled, fragile, not able to brace themselves (maybe just for short periods), working against the institution, do not have discipline. And there were several happenings in the series where I just raised and eyebrow and said...okay...whatever...that's creepy...
I think you are right, Diana moved the Queen to the background. Queen Elizabeth was a fascinating person, her whole life. Should have kept her central to this story. I find myself really not caring about the monarchy since she passed.
0:58 I just can’t imagine the Queen would ever have to beg him not to flirt with a secretary like that. She was so stoic and regal, I can’t see her gaggling over him this far in. When they were younger it made sense. If he was still a dog she’d have turned a blind eye to it and gone to do her own thing, preferably at Balmoral
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 they probably wanted to have filler to give it enough time for them to write his funeral and it not be too soon. I think they should either do a time jump to what was going on right before Phillip passed, show the Queen’s grief, and start focusing on William, Kate, Harry, Meghan storylines because that’s the only card left to play other than the prime minister debacle and Queen’s passing
"Your Godsons Wife!" Ya you mean his Godaughter? Lol. Is it me or did I not find the relationship that weird. I only found it weird that we never saw the Godson. Like where even are you dog? A lot of elderly people make intellectual freinds with youth. He seems to have plaid a (as he should) Godfather role in her life or somewhat of an uncle or freind.
Hahahaha good point. I think the framing of the relationship is what was weird. It felt very forced hence why we never saw the aforementioned godson. The only point it seems of the goddaughter was to use her as an instrument to play the tune of infidelity once again. That's largely the extent to season 5's imagination.
I agree with your assessment that Peter Morgan's motivation is The Queen - and NOT the people in The Crown's orbit. I have not yet watched Season 5, but if what you're saying is accurate, then it makes sense: The Crown did in fact become second fiddle to those orbiting The Queen. A la"marionettes," the British Royal Family divested itself of whatever sacred quality it had left in order to remain relevant. What this means, in practice, is that the British Royal Family became little more than glorified celebrities - eschewing its Duty to serve as the proper model of the Family. The musings of Her Late Majesty's family during the time period in which Season 5 is set is more "hungry for spotlight Meghan Markle" and less "Loyalty to the Ideal you've inherited is your Duty, above everything else" and "my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be dedicated to your service." At the core, Peter Morgan seeks to answer the question: what becomes of your humanity when it is your duty to lead and model? No one makes a better case study for that type of inquiry than The Queen.
Wow, I think you have done a beautiful job in expressing your ideas. I think your point about "what becomes of your humanity when it is your duty to lead and model?" is incredibly potent and relevant. You can see this question being asked all throughout seasons 1 - 4, this pursuit of an ideal, a desperate diligence to duty despite the tumultuous nature of humanity roaring within. Season 5 asks no questions, even as it shifts to arguably more peripheral characters like Charles and Diana. It only presents information like a lackluster PPT presentation and offers no introspection whatsoever. it is hard to imagine it is the same Peter Morgan at the show's helm.
I found last season very week. The only episodes I liked were the one about Dodi’s father and Russian royals. I kept hoping the season would improve but it never happened. I was looking forward to Annus Horrubilus episode and then it ended up being about effing Margaret.
Your essay is compelling and well written. (I say “written,” though it’s your narration; I’m an OG entertainment journalist from the print days, so there it is). Makes me want to start it all over and watch more than just episodes here and there. I’ve known the show has “merit” but your take suggests levels of success and failure within a work with more than just TV-level significance.
Lol the episode of the Queen vs Philip's new gf ends with a kid giving the gf flowers instead of the queen What??? Dumb Philip isn't king where people follow his favorites, it's always about HER, THE Queen
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! It's a shame you weren't in the writing room for this show. Now that you have pointed it out that scene makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. How awfully forced, shallow and unaware that episode is
i love the video and thank you so much for your work into this! but CC is really important for hard of hearing and deaf individuals!! it would be so much more enjoyable if i could know what was being said without rewinding and pausing everything i’m doing 😅
Thank you, I'm so happy you enjoyed the video. What exactly is "CC"? Is it a setting I have to set? I'm sorry, I don't have a lot of experience with RU-vid stuff, I mostly just rant write my essays and rush through everything else
I don't understand this video. Family members like Philip and Diana, who had married into the family, had continued to struggle with feelings that they were outsiders even at this period in British history. Does this bother you? Did it ever occurred to you the series might be showing viewers that the Royal Family and British society were really beginning to show its flaws by the 1990s? Jonny Lee Miller's John Major made this perfectly clear in a line from the season's first episode. British society and the Royal Family have been revealing these flaws more than ever in the past several years. You sound like someone who demand perfection or near perfection in the portrayal of the late Queen or the Royal Family. These are not people who simply harbored minor flaws. They were FLAWED. And they still are. Perhaps Peter Morgan has finally realizes this.
I'm not entirely sure you watched the entirety of my video. It doesn't bother me that these individuals whether in Peter Morgan's TV land or in real life felt like outsiders or continue to feel that way up to the present day. I also am not someone arguing for a "perfect" portrayal of the late Queen or Royal Family, whatever "perfect" entails in this context. The core thesis of this video is that by framing his narrative around characters he isn't well versed in understanding and I personally feel not interested in, as opposed to the character he has had central focus in for 4 seasons i.e. Elizabeth, Morgan has delivered a subpar television experience. Your comment does not reflect one that has watched my video. My video and opinions aren't perfect and criticism is welcome but your critics feel like they are occurring in an alternate universe where my video was about something much much different.
So sorry about that. I just like the writing part of my essays the most, so I just record in a rush and don't pay much attention to the details of the video/audio quality. I will try my best to do better in the future.
Yes it is! Imelda Staunton took over the role of the Queen in season 5. She is also the same actress that (iconically) portrayed Dolores Umbridge in Harry Potter
Aside from the last 2 seasons going up in flames I think when her majesty says: me as your soulmate made me cringe a little especially as The Queen never used those terms before
Let’s be real they started to loose their originality after the first two seasons this last season was like the dying gasps of a person on life support terrible as it sounds and the actress that plays Princess Margaret in season 5 played as Margaret thatcher in a old old series from 2009
ok buddy. Sorry, your comentary is too obtuse. I'm used to heavy wordage, but your thesis is often so incompehensible/dense at times I had to track back in the video to try and make sense of what you were saying. At this point, I already gave up trying. I suggest a revision of the narrative for the video. cheers and the best of luck.
Thanks for your comment. The thesis/idea behind this video at least is rather straight forward. By not highlighting the Queen as the titular character in the series, the crown season 5 presents its worst season to date (in my personal opinion). The entire logic of the video is towards supporting that basic hypothesis. Perhaps you should just watch the video in its entirety instead of hopping back and forth but alas you have already given up. Thanks again for your constructive criticism, bud
@@imaginesisyphushappy2692 u see. That's the very problem. I tried. But then, I was confronted by ideas I think you could have framed in a simpler way. I'm a writer. I know the struggle. I see you're beginning your work as a RU-vidr. So again, I suggest u revise the script. It could use a good deal of editing.
@@adrianseguras.9659 haha that's fair enough but it seems you are letting your profession get in the way of genuinely engaging with something. My video essay isn't the next New York Times, it's just an essay about my feelings after I watched season 5. In that vein I don't think it needs to be "literarily" efficient. Just casually me and my opinion. But thank you again for taking the time to offer constructive criticism. I'll certainly try to be mindful of it in the future ❤💌
I bet that they would make the Royals as sympathetic as ever in Season 6, at the events of Diana death, and not critique non of their actions that lead to her deaths, and would stick to the official story.
@@fod1855 The silence of the Queen even when the UK citizens wanted that she express some emotion about it, people began to think in overthrow the monarchy, funny enough, they portray Blair in this season as a buffoon, but in the next season he would be sycophantic.
@@TheKeyser94 The Queen did speak to the nation about Diana's death and her priority, along with Philip's was to look after and protect the Boys. Which they did. No one began to think of overthrowing the monarchy because the Queen wasn't in floods of tears, which would have been completely inappropriate anyway, that's insane that you think that haha. Yes they portray him as a buffoon because by all accounts in that sort of environment that's how he came across - like a schoolboy. If they do Portray Blair as 'sycophantic' in the next season, which I doubt, they would be correct.
@@fod1855 Only after Blair pressure to do it, maybe you had born after the 2000', but I born in 1986, and Diana death and the silence of the Royal Family was all over the news, people really began to question the Royal Family and even thinking that they shouldn't have one, after people began to proclaim that, then Blair pressure Elizabeth II to give a public speech, but was no apology, was more remainder that she was their queen and never question wheat she did, and of course, then the family appear with their crocodile tears, I should have feel sorry for William and Harry, but seeing how they grow up, they become what her mother feared all along.
@@TheKeyser94 Diana was a total wild card, she couldn't hack it and made life just as difficult for herself as others did. The royal family supported her as much as was realistically possible. They were not responsible for her death and the Queen had nothing to apologise for. She certainly didn't speak because of Tony Blair, she gauged public opinion had decided to do it, despite it being totally out of the ordinary - she didn't speak when her sister or mother died. It was a tragic accident and the royal family responded exactly how they normally would. As for Harry and William becoming what Diana "feared along" I have no clue what you mean by that.
Well in Season 1, episode 2 Queen Mary wrote a note which, whether she wrote it or not, is very true to this day. THE CROWN must always win, above personal opinion, likes and dislikes. The Crown wins. That is why the real Monarchy has succeeded to this day, non political, staying out of situations unless called for and the big one...being able to dissolve Parliament if the need arrives and has happened. Just think if America was still a British possession, The Monarch could dismiss the President and dissolve the government.
As an American, we do not want another piece of government (Monarchy in this case)... They would just add to our list of things to dismiss & we have enough problems... Besides, we dismissed the Monarchy a long time ago because they wanted our money...
I believe they were forced to edit the queen's role down due to her death. Idk if there was a whole lot more to her in the original script but the shift from the crown to the diadem was for fan service for sure and I hope it lets up in the final season
Even now I really regret that decision and shift. I remember months after season 1 - 4 I would go back to re-watch episodes of the crown. I have not even thought of re-watching season 5 after finishing it the first time.
