Netflix has done it again with some amazing original programming. Spending nearly $100 million on this 10 part series it's utterly amazing. I became addicted to this show over the weekend and binge watched all 10 episodes. The sets, the acting, the writing is all top notch. Have you seen this yet? If you have, a few observations: - Prince Phillip is portrayed as a much more likeable character than his real life persona in the media. He seems in the series to be completely emasculated by Elizabeth - albeit much of her fate isn't her fault either but circumstance. - I never new about Princess Margaret's love affair with Townsend. Like Phillip, she comes across a a far more sympathetic character than in real life. - John LIthghgow's portrayal if Churchill was absolutely brilliant. He should get an Emmy - and I'd wager he will - All of the people - including Elizabeth - seem to be a victim of the insitution of the monarchy in some form or fashion. In fact, I'd say the monarchy - if it could be a "character," - was the villain for everyone. I give this a series a 10 out of 10. Thoughts? The Crown Review
I have thoroughly enjoyed the series. I wasn't sure what to expect but they managed to toe a difficult line between sycophantic royalist and tabloid exposé sensationalism. It manages that rare feat, portraying historical figures as three dimensional characters with real lives.
I'm only up to episode 5, I think, and am enjoying the show immensely. I know very little about the British monarchy so much of what I'm seeing is new to me. I really liked King George and his story. Loved "The King's Speech", so he was of particular interest to me. Yes, it seems the monarchy is a heavy burden for all of those tasked with carrying it. I can't imagine agreeing that my children would not carry my last name (along with their mother's). Matt Smith is doing great as Phillip. Really looking forward to the rest of the series.
Thanks both for the replies. As CultCross notes, love them or hate them - the royal family is depicted with their faults and strengths. Also, of particular note the heavy burden these people have on them. However, it's hard to be sorry for anyone who lives such a privileged life no matter what burdens they shoulder. Another interesting character is Edward aka David. How he parlays his influence and/or lack their of into feathering his own nest post his rule. I cannot decide if the series depicts him as the victim of the monarchy or as a villain - the behind the scenes self interested narcissist.
One of the most fascinating scenes for me as an American was Elizabeth's Coronation. I guess I never realized the mystical side of the whole process. The transformation of the heir into the Queen who I assume like the Pope has a direct link to God.
Not in the sense that they want for anything physical, certainly, but I certainly feel for them in the sense that they cannot escape the spotlight, the judgement of the public or the responsibilities of lifelong public office even if they try to walk away from it. They have a lot of stuff, but I suspect the temptation to trade it for a normal life of freedom is there from time to time. Not quite the same, but the parallel is apt and deliberate, the monarch is head of the Church of England, very intentionally set equal to Rome. You can blame the horny old dog Henry for that one.
Cultcross, however you see in the series Margaret wrestle with whether to leave, "The Crown," or not. She could have just as easily left all of the trappings of living a privileged life to marry Townsend. If accurate - she stayed because of her loyalty to her sister or self interest. The series leaves it rather nebulous as to her motivations regarding that situation.
Finished the last episode tonight, and while the show was excellent, it felt a bit sluggish at times. I've never much cared for the royal family, their lives, or anything about them, really, so it was rather interesting to learn something about them . . . however accurate they're presented.
I have enjoyed the series so far (up to episode 4) but I would disagree on the OP's assessment of Lithgow. There have been better and more accurate portrayals of Churchill IMO, such as Albert Finney in The Gathering Storm.
The Monarch sits on the throne by the will of God. Dieu et mon droit, as the Royal Arms say (God and my right). Of course, one has to be religious to believe that....
The whole show will destroy the Emmys, the Golden Globes, whatever. While not a perfect 10, it's pretty darn close. It is absolutely gorgeous, the acting is on point, the tension in certain places is on point. You can really tell how Elizabeth is torn between loyalty to her husband and her sister, and the Crown...but as the series goes on, she's nudged closer and closer to the "Crown" side. I loved how they did the portion where George VI died and Elizabeth and Philip were away. Everything changed. Edward was great too. And the scene between Churchill and Eden when they were comparing their health had me laughing out loud. Netflix went all-in on this thing and I think it will pay off handsomely for them.
A few weeks back, I got an email from Netflix about this show and added it to my list. Eh... Why not, I thought. Then I decided to check it out on Friday. Eh... Why not, I thought. I don't know why I did because I'm not that fond of period pieces but I did and to my surprise, I was blown away. I agree, Netflix has done it again. I was transfixed and got up to episode 8 as of this posting. Looking forward to the last two. The show looks great and everyone is in top form. Claire Foy doesn't totally look or sound the part but she's still wonderful and captures the spirit well. I also enjoy seeing John Lithgow and Matt Smith in their roles. If I'm not mistaken, this is the most expensive show ever made. And I know it's dramatized but I feel like I'm learning something about these people's lives, tradition and life as a royal in general. I look forward to the next 5 seasons which will ultimately bring us to the present.
Not to stray too far off point, but I have to wonder how shows like this translate into more subscribers. In other words, at what point does Netflix reach market saturation and can no longer afford to add new programming without commercials?
I had reservations about watching it because I tend to get picky about historical dramas and Matt Smith is The Doctor. I was pleasantly surprised. I am a bit disturbed at the thought that out there somewhere someone is working away on some real people fanfiction where Margaret and Peter DO get together.
I think that shows like this are designed to appeal to both American and international audiences alike and that should translate into more subscribers. As for original programming and growth, Netflix rakes in billions a year so it looks like they have a healthy budget. And with only 86 million subscribers globally, they have room to grow. I used to be concerned that they spent too much on their original programming but after seeing this show, I'm thinking that it's probably worth it.
I watched the whole season on Sunday and loved every bit of it. I was hesitant about having an American play Churchill, but John Lithgow didn't a fantastic job in his performance. Matt Smith, Jared Harris, Eileen Atkinson and the rest of the supporting cast were all very good, too, but Claire Foy is the runaway star. Without her beautiful performance, the show would be a lesser thing. I doubt it's the most expensive show ever (surely it's Game of Thrones), but it is the most expensive show for Netflix.
I did a quick Google search for most expensive show and found some interesting results. The consensus seems to be that ER and Friends are the most expensive at $13 million and $10 million respectively and that this show is probably on par with or slightly below Game of Thrones' $6 million per episode. This show has an estimated budget of about $100 million for 2 seasons. Source
As with most things, wages are likely the biggest overhead - making some seemingly fairly cheap bottle shows surprisingly expensive. Several people have left the royal family over the last century, but you never really leave it behind. Only the Duke of Windsor, who was very thoroughly expelled, ever really left the Firm. Other shed royals are hounded by the press long after their departure - Diana being the obvious example, but the Duchess of York also found that private life was nigh on impossible with a royal connection. That was why in the show they talked about Margaret having to leave the country as well as renounce her titles; it was the only way to separate oneself, and nowadays even that doesn't work.
I don't think they've disclosed the actual budget. Some articles I've read say $100 million. Some say £100 million (which would be anywhere from $125-$150 million depending on when they financed it). Everything says "rumored to be". I think it very well may be the most expensive series ever. As for an "American playing Churchill"...it always amuses me when people worry about this. Brits have played iconic American Presidents and public figures (Jefferson, Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, Nixon, John Quincy Adams, Martin van Buren....probably others too). A Brit currently plays Superman. One has played Batman, two iconic American characters. So why shouldn't an American play Churchill? Lithgow did an absolutely fantastic job. And the way Lithgow tells it, it was Peter Morgan's idea in the first place. So many British actors have already played Churchill that he wanted a fresh take.
Really well done. We've only watched the first episode so far, but they've done a good job with it. My only nitpick is that the sound can be uneven at times and hard to hear the dialogue when there's lots of loud ambient noise. But otherwise, it's excellent. The casting of Matt Smith as Prince Philip is brilliant. He really does look the part, similar shaped face and all. They're really going all out on this. I've even seen a TV advertisement for it. I don't think we've seen one for House of Cards. Now I'm curious to see what the Queen herself thinks of this. I know she was quite pleased with The Queen from a few years back.