Currently, The Crown’s Season 6 is in production, filming in Europe. Season 6 will pick up with Tony Blair’s victory and quickly move into Princess Diana’s death in Paris later that summer. It will be interesting to see how Peter Morgan handles the subject matter now, considering he’s “revisiting” that storyline as the screenwriter for 2006’s The Queen, directed by Stephen Frears. Obviously, Season 6 will go through most of Tony Blair’s years as prime minister. What’s interesting is that Peter Morgan now insists that Season 6 won’t go all the way through until 2007, when Blair stepped down. Morgan has been telling people that the series will end on a high note for King Charles III: Charles and Camilla’s 2005 wedding in Windsor.

It will trawl through one of the Royal family’s darkest and most tumultuous periods. But the sixth and final series of The Crown will end on a high for King Charles when it is released next year, show insiders have insisted in the wake of a slew of criticism.

The last episode will depict the wedding of Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in April 2005, highlighting what proved to be a notable turning point for the monarchy and leaving viewers with a feel-good, positive image of the institution. The dramatisation of the civil ceremony at Windsor Guildhall will bring the curtain down on one of the most successful yet controversial dramas in recent history.

The final series, which is currently being filmed and is likely to be released next November, will turn its spotlight on the “adventures and misadventures” of New Labour. A source told The Telegraph that a “chief focus” will be the premiership of Tony Blair. It will also cover the death of Diana in a Paris car crash and chart the lives of Prince William and Prince Harry in the immediate aftermath of their mother’s death. The series will depict Queen Elizabeth II’s thawing towards her future daughter-in-law.

For the King and Queen Consort, as they are now, such celebratory scenes and a focus on largely positive developments will come as a welcome relief.

Writer Peter Morgan said he could not continue beyond the early 2000s as he believed that there should be at least a decade between a real-life event and its fictionalised retelling in order to gain “proper perspective”. He is said to have become irked by the recent criticism, having been keenly focused on historical research and determined not to convey events purely to be “sensational”.

A source defended the high-budget drama, arguing that the Royal scandals dramatised by Morgan were of the family’s own making.

“He purposely seeks to dramatise historical events as they happened,” they said. “He can’t change history, he reflects it – hence the controversial content of season five that is currently under discussion. Royal events took an upward turn post-1997 and, thankfully, a return to political events, so The Crown can return to that.”

[From The Telegraph]

“The series will depict Queen Elizabeth II’s thawing towards her future daughter-in-law…” WHO? Are we talking about Sophie, Countess of Wessex? That would be the only “future daughter in law” around this time frame (Sophie and Edward married in 1999). I find it curious that Morgan would end the series in 2005 and not 2007 though. What is he afraid of? Having to dramatize Prince William and Kate’s infamous 2007 breakup? Anyway, let’s be real – Charles and Camilla’s 2005 wedding was not the beginning of some grand new royal storyline, it simply put a bow on the sh-tshow that was and is Charles and Camilla’s relationship.

Photos courtesy of Netflix, WENN and Avalon Red.

For years, it’s felt like both King Charles and Prince William could not wait to get their hands on the spoils once Queen Elizabeth II passed away. William and Kate postponed their “move to Adelaide Cottage” until the very last minute, seemingly hoping that they wouldn’t have to move into the “cozy” four-bedroom cottage when they had their eye on the whole castle. William and Charles have also both seemed very eager to get their hands on Sandringham (a private estate) and of course, William wanted the Duchy of Cornwall. So… why haven’t we heard about any big royal real estate shuffle? While William and Kate are seemingly happy to be Windsor-based, and they’ve been holding events at Windsor Castle, they haven’t “moved in.” Charles also has zero plans to move into Buckingham Palace. So the two biggest symbolic pieces of royal real estate sit uninhabited.

Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace are both set to stay empty — with no royals moving in permanently following the Queen’s death. It had been thought William and Kate would live in the castle once they became Prince and Princess of Wales. But the family of five — with children George, nine, Charlotte, seven, and Louis, four — have only just settled into their four-bed Adelaide Cottage nearby on the Windsor estate.

Last week, The Sun revealed the King and Queen Consort will not move into Buckingham Palace for at least five years due to a £369million renovation. They will use it as an office while living mostly at nearby Clarence House.

Balmoral Castle, in Scotland, is also set to be opened up to tourists and will also have no royals in official residence. The Queen split her time between Buckingham Palace in the week and Windsor Castle at weekends. She spent her summers at Balmoral and her final few months there.

But a vacant Windsor Castle opens the prospect of Prince Harry and Meghan moving there, should they decide to return to the UK. They were previously disappointed not to get the 1,000-year-old castle after they wed, receiving much smaller Frogmore Cottage instead.

A source said: “It was previously said that William and Kate would move into Windsor Castle, but there are no plans for them to leave Adelaide Cottage.”

The couple moved from Kensington Palace in September, so they can do the school run. They spent no money on refurbs. The Sussexes paid back the £2.4million they spent doing up Frogmore.

[From The Sun]

The Sussexes never wanted the run of Windsor Castle or to be the sole royals living there, they simply asked for their own apartment(s) within the castle. They were told no, and given that dilapidated shack, Frogmore Cottage. I think it’s hilarious that the Sun is trying to make it sound like Harry and Meghan could come back and move into Windsor Castle… all while William and Kate made do in Adelaide Cottage? Please. If anything, mentioning the possibility of the Sussexes getting the castle will force William to move in even faster.

Since QEII’s passing, I have idly wondered what would have happened, real-estate-wise, if Harry and Meghan had never Sussexited. I’m not looking to write a dissertation on this, I just wonder how Charles would have shuffled the real estate if H&M had stayed. William and Kate would have moved into Windsor Castle already, I’m sure. Charles clearly wanted to hold onto Clarence House no matter what. So would Harry and Meghan just… stay in Frogmore Cottage? LOL.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

At the end of the day, I found the “nanny” interviews to be super-creepy. Jason Sudeikis and Olivia Wilde had a nanny for their two children for several years, then they fired the nanny – reportedly her name is Erika Genaro – in 2021. Genaro was there for Jason and Olivia’s breakup, and Olivia’s affair with Harry Styles. She gave her exclusive to the Daily Mail and I would assume she was paid a nice sum for all of the receipts she provided, including texts from Jason. Did I pore over everything? No. I read one of those Mail stories and got the gist of it, and I saw that Jason and Olivia issued a joint statement about Genaro, saying that she’s made “false and scurrilous accusations” and she’s gone on a campaign of harassment. I don’t know. It’s a big fat mess, is what it is. So I’m going to ignore a lot of it, but this one story made me gasp out loud. Genaro claims that before Olivia started banging Harry Styles, Florence Pugh had a fling with Styles. Thus, Olivia and Florence’s beef?

It’s the one question on everyone’s lips: why did Florence Pugh exactly fall out with Olivia Wilde?

Well, Wilde’s former nanny has alleged that Pugh, in fact, had a fling with Harry Styles before Wilde started dating him.

The nanny — named as Erika Genaro by TMZ and confirmed by sources to Page Six — made the claims in a blockbuster interview with the Daily Mail this week.

In a video posted online, Genaro claimed that Sudeikis told her that “Flo was f–king Harry and she had a boyfriend.” Pugh split with longtime love Zach Braff earlier this year.

As Page Six previously revealed, Pugh fell out with Wilde during filming, as multiple sources told us that the Britstar was unhappy that Wilde, her director on “Don’t Worry Darling,” and Styles, her co-star, hooking up on the Palm Springs set. One industry source told us, “I can tell you for a fact that Flo seeing Olivia and Harry all over each other on set did not go down well as Olivia was still with Jason when she first hooked up with Harry.”

[From Page Six]

So… the nanny, Erika Genaro, says that Jason Sudeikis told her that Florence was “f–king Harry” while Florence was still technically dating Zach Braff? I believe that was probably something Jason said to Genaro, but that doesn’t make it true. Personally, I believe Olivia’s affair with Harry probably started very quickly in the DWD production, and I believe Olivia was actively pursuing Harry from Day 1. I simply don’t think Harry would have time to hook up with Florence, nor do I honestly believe that Florence would have cheated on Braff. I mean, she was ride-or-die for Braff? I don’t buy this as an explanation for why Olivia and Florence fell out either – I think Florence was simply appalled by Olivia’s lack of professionalism, her behavior and her general assholery.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid, Avalon Red.

We’ve already had more than a month of screaming, crying and throwing up from the Windsors when it comes to The Crown. The fifth season of the Netflix drama premieres on November 9th, two weeks away. Y’all better prepare yourselves for two more weeks of royal tantrums, that’s all I’ll say. What’s funny is that it’s clearly just King Charles who is beside himself with anxiety. But he knows it’s not like he can come out and say “they’re going to be mean to me” and “how dare they dramatize the awful way I treated Diana!” So the king has given little “tasks” to his friends, associates and political allies to carry out. Over the weekend, an unnamed family friend ran to the Times to cry about how the series is “vicious” and how Harry should be ashamed of himself:

The close friend of the royal family, who attended the Queen’s committal in Windsor, strongly criticised Netflix, which has resisted calls for a fictional disclaimer before each episode.

The friend said: “I’m horrified by what is going on with Netflix and how they are vilifying the royal family. It is vicious. It’s as if they’re trying to destroy the royal family.”

Asked what Queen Elizabeth would have made of the plot lines, the friend said: “It would have destroyed her.” She added that it put the Duke of Sussex “in the most invidious position”, given his lucrative deal with the streaming giant. “If I had my family being vilified like that, I wouldn’t take a penny [from Netflix].”

[From The Times]

Charles is setting himself up for such awful stories once the series comes out. Because he’s raised such a fuss, everyone will feel the need to “fact check” what’s in The Crown with the actual historical receipts, and all of that will A) look worse for Charles and B) extend The Crown’s power and narrative and C) make Charles look “vicious” and sadistic. Speaking of sadism, one of Princess Diana’s old friends got a call from the new king:

Diana’s close friend Simone Simmons told The Sun that the hit drama risked forcing Princes William and Harry to recall “the most painful time” of their lives.

She said: “These are cruel, sadistic and wicked people to recreate these moments. They are the lowest of the low. They are rewriting history as they go along and that’s what makes me very angry. Netflix are deliberately reviving the most painful time in the boys’ lives. It’s forcing them to relive the pain, agony, and psychological torment they suffered when their mother died. I think it’s disgusting and sick. Why are they setting out to upset William and Harry? The makers of this programme do not care about the heir to the throne and everything he has been through. Why do these callous, insensitive people feel the need to recreate that horrible day? They are going out of their way to hurt the Royal Family.”

[From The Sun]

Considering Simone Simmons was such a good friend to Diana, you’d think she would spare a thought for her friend Diana, who was treated so abominably by the Windsors? All Diana wanted was to survive all of the pain and torment that family put her through, and to tell her story. As for Diana’s adult sons… William has clearly said on the record that he thinks his mother was paranoid and delusional. William and Charles want to solely own Diana’s life and memory for their own narratives… all while Harry, his mother’s son, has shown the world how little has changed in the House of Windsor.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, The Crown/Netflix.

It’s weird to think about how covid changed so much and there’s this new, not quite back to normal situation, and we’re all just living with it. President Biden said it’s over, but people are still getting it and people still need shots for it. Around the end of this year, Pfizer’s government contract will end and they will begin charging $110-130 per dose. However, insurance will still allow most people to get vaccinated for free or cheaply. And Pfizer has an income-based assistance program for uninsured folks as well.

Pfizer is raising the “commercial list price” for its coronavirus vaccines.

The pharmaceutical company said Friday that the drug will cost between $110 to $130 per dose once its government contract ends, according to the Associated Press, though many will continue to receive the shot for free.

New prices could go into effect as soon as early 2023, depending on when the government phases out its own distribution program, the outlet said.

Angela Lukin, Pfizer’s global primary care & U.S. president, explained that increased prices are due to the costs of switching from multi-dose to single-dose vials and commercial distribution. Lukin added that the new prices are still below the level of “what would be considered a highly effective vaccine,” per the AP.

Since the Affordable Care Act requires insurers to cover the costs of most recommended vaccines without charging out-of-pocket, many will pay little to nothing. People with coverage through private insurance or public programs like Medicare and Medicaid will also likely pay nothing.

Pfizer also has an income-based assistance program to help uninsured people in the U.S. receive a vaccination.

The new estimated list price for Pfizer’s COVID vaccine is comparable to that of other adult vaccines, such as hepatitis and shingles, which can range from around $64 to $171, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Coronavirus vaccines and boosters are expected to remain free until the government ends its public health emergency declaration over the COVID-19 pandemic or depletes its federally acquired supply, according to a report published Tuesday by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF).

[From People]

It seems like covid is moving the way of the seasonal flu. The CDC is adding the covid vaccine to its recommended immunization schedule for 2023, saying “all adults and children 6 months and older should get the COVID vaccine and booster doses when eligible.” Of course people will continue to decline the vaccine, just as people decline flu shots and others. But hopefully its addition to the schedule alongside many other familiar shots will convince some of the holdouts who felt that the vaccine was developed too quickly, etc. I have plans to get my flu shot and booster at the same time next week. Luckily, I’ve somehow managed to — knock on wood — escape covid and I’d like to continue to do so for as long as possible.  As least I know if I do get it, the vaccine and boosters will mitigate the worst of it.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: CDC via Unsplash and Getty

One of the craziest storylines from the past week has been the political resurrection of Boris Johnson. BoJo was basically forced to resign as prime minister after a wave of scandals plagued his government, specifically with his handling of the pandemic. BoJo and his cronies were throwing parties at 10 Downing Street all while enforcing strict Covid lockdowns, and then everything just kept getting worse and worse from there. BoJo announced he was stepping down as prime minister once there was a leadership race for the Tories, and Liz Truss was found to be the best candidate. Boris handed Downing Street over to Truss on September 6th, when they both met with Queen Elizabeth II at Balmoral. Two days later, QEII died and forty-two days after that, Truss resigned after a wave of bad policy and Tory-on-Tory crime. Boris saw his chance and decided to throw his hat into the proverbial ring, thinking that perhaps the time was right for a political resurrection and a return to 10 Downing Street not even two full menstrual cycles after he left in disgrace. Then on Sunday, Boris suddenly dropped out of the leadership race!!

Former PM Boris Johnson has pulled out of the Tory leadership race, saying he had the support needed to stand but it would not be “the right thing to do”.

Former chancellor Rishi Sunak and cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt remain in the contest – with Mr Sunak way ahead on declared support from MPs.

Mr Johnson said there was a “very good chance” he would have been successful, and “back in Downing Street on Friday”. But he said there needed to be “a united party in Parliament”.

The race began on Thursday after Liz Truss resigned as prime minister after 45 days in the job. Nominations for the ballot close on Monday afternoon, and candidates need the support of at least 100 Conservative MPs to go forward. The BBC’s latest tally of publicly declared backers puts Mr Sunak on 155 and Ms Mordaunt on 25.

Mr Johnson had 54, according to this tally – although he said he had 102. Not all of the 357 MPs have gone public with whom they are backing.

It is possible Mr Sunak could become prime minister by Monday, and there will definitely be a new prime minister by the end of the week.

Mr Johnson said he had been attracted by the race because “I led our party into a massive election victory less than three years ago – and I believe I am therefore uniquely placed to avert a general election now. A general election would be a further disastrous distraction just when the government must focus on the economic pressures faced by families across the country.”

[From BBC]

I’ve seen some British political analysts say that BoJo dropped out because he didn’t have the votes in the leadership race, and even if he did have the votes, his party would have still been in open revolt against him, to the point where he wouldn’t have been able to even fill his cabinet. So… at least British people were spared that particular storyline: Boris blundering his way back into Downing Street like nothing had happened. Anyway, good luck Salt Island. Y’all are gonna need it.

Photos courtesy of Mark Stewart /Avalon and Kirsty O’Connor/Avalon.

The Duchess of Sussex was seen out and about in Montecito this weekend! The photos are very exclusive, meaning that (from what I can see) only Page Six, the Daily Mail and TMZ could afford to buy them. I included some tweets at the end of the post so you can see her ensemble – she wore “a $595 strapless green Malia Mills jumpsuit, which she paired with an olive sweater, a wide-brimmed $128 Panama hat from Cuyana, sunglasses and sandals.” She looked fresh-faced and relaxed as she did some shopping at Pierre La Fond, a gourmet food boutique, and Wendy Foster, a clothing boutique. The Mail dutifully noted that Wendy Foster is “a high-end women’s fashion boutique that specializes in sportswear where clothes go for hundreds of dollars.” Gasp! You mean that a Montecito duchess was shopping for expensive clothes? How dare she!!

Real talk though, I hate this Malia Mills jumpsuit. I hope this kind of look doesn’t come back into style, because you can see clearly how unflattering it is on a woman with a slender/athletic figure (so what hope is there for the rest of us?). It’s giving saggy diaper butt!! But otherwise, she looks nice. I like the braid and the casual sweater over her shoulders. She was with a friend and what appeared to be a casually-dressed bodyguard.

Meghan Markle goes shopping with a friend amid ‘Deal or No Deal’ backlash https://t.co/HS6mBqHfjJ pic.twitter.com/zimkFiUAzU

— Page Six (@PageSix) October 22, 2022

Meghan Markle likely didn’t find any deals at this luxury boutique in Montecito, but she was happy with the buy regardless. https://t.co/gJBfVI5TGY

— TMZ (@TMZ) October 22, 2022

Meghan Markle seen for the first time amid Deal or No Deal drama enjoying a shopping day in Montecito California#Meghan #Markle #time #Deal #drama #shopping #day #Montecito pic.twitter.com/3Iqxtn6BdH

— Shahryar Sultan (@Shahryar_Sultan) October 22, 2022

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Variety YouTube screenshots.

We barely cover Riverdale’s Camila Mendes, 28, because she just keeps her head down and does her work. She has over 27 million followers on Instagram – she’s promoting herself, she just isn’t saying or doing controversial sh-t that gets headlines. She has one of those “How I get things done” profiles in The Cut, which I enjoy (although I stopped subscribing to NY Mag after this terrible story). She’s 28 and sounds both self aware and vulnerable about being a working actress and the self doubt that goes along with that. I enjoyed this interview and could relate to some of what she said. Here are highlights, with more at the source:

On establishing a routine within her schedule:
My life goes through very intense phases where I’m either working on a movie or I’m on Riverdale or I’m in L.A., so my routine is constantly changing. But when I’m on a certain project, I’ll establish a routine there. I have to make them up as I go, and as soon as I start getting into a rhythm I have to change it because that project is over or it’s on to the next thing in the next place. If I do have time in the morning to work out, that is something I really like to do — or at least stretch. This sounds so basic, but making my morning latte is how I wake up, and because I actually make it in an espresso machine, it feels like a nice way to get my brain moving. It’s therapeutic, that process, and having that one coffee in peace and quiet before the day gets too crazy.

On productivity:
I manage stress through organization. I am most stressed when I feel like everything’s all over the place. I have a crazy Google calendar that’s color-coded, and I’m always using that. The irony is that I’m not great with time management. I’m someone who’s constantly running ten minutes behind, which is something I’ve been fighting my entire life and still haven’t found the solution to.

On self-doubt:
This career and this passion of mine means so much to me. So now that I have it, it’s too precious for me to screw up. I’m always like, Okay, what’s the right thing to do at this point in my career? What’s the right next step? Am I taking steps toward where I want to get, and is this going to help me get there? I’m probably more cautious than I should be when it comes to picking projects, but I get very afraid of making the wrong choice and ruining everything. I think super catastrophically, like, I’m going to take one bad project and it’ll be the end of my career and I’ll never work again. I tend to be the most anxious when good things are happening.

[From The Cut]

Since high school, I’ve tried to be exactly on time to everything. I like being busy and productive, it’s a rush to try to fit more sh-t in a day. This results in me being a couple of minutes late to things usually, which can be stressful, but I have to admit I like that. Camila sounds similar. At least she knows it’s a problem and is addressing it. There’s something boring to me about being early for an appointment. I’m constantly thinking of other things I could be doing instead, which I know is not healthy. I just like staying busy as hell! I get a rush out of it. I also really like what she said about establishing a routine whenever your situation changes, which has served me well throughout my life.

Buzzfeed has a “facts you don’t know about” article for Camila if you’re interested in learning more about her. She graduated from NYU’s Tisch School of The Arts in 2016 and she was massively inspired by Rachel Bilson’s character in The O.C.!

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by camila mendes (@camimendes)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by camila mendes (@camimendes)

photos credit: Phillip Faraone/Netflix, Xavier Collin/Image Press Agency/Avalon

Drew Barrymore’s talk show is three seasons and hundreds of episodes in at this point. After some growing pains in the beginning, she seems to have settled into a nice groove with her co-hosts and guests. I think in general, as a celebrity and a person, she’s a good fit for the talk show format. She’s bubbly and charming and has been around forever, so she knows everyone. And she’s always been known as a free spirit and so we get tidbits like this — in a recent episode they were talking about Christopher Meloni’s nudity comments and turns out Drew loves it too.

Drew Barrymore doesn’t mind shedding her clothes when home alone.

The topic came up during the “Drew’s News” segment on Thursday’s episode of The Drew Barrymore Show, during which Barrymore, 47, cohost Ross Mathews and former NBA player Dennis Rodman discussed actor Christopher Meloni recently telling PEOPLE he is a “big fan of nudity.”

Rodman expressed that he also finds nudity freeing, saying he likes “being an individual that’s very open,” which led cohost Mathews to make a joke in reference to the 61-year-old Meloni’s admission that he enjoys exercising in the nude at his home gym.

“Imagine a jumping jack, if you will,” Mathews joked while gesturing with his arms. “Whoever you are, things are, you know.”

Barrymore then said, “I have to say, too, if I get a moment alone in my apartment and my kids have gone to their dad’s or there’s no one around, I’ll lock all the doors and I’ll walk around naked. It just feels like the most liberating act I can do.”

“That’s cool. I do it all the time,” Rodman said in response. “All the time.”

“All right, well guess what everyone: tune in tomorrow — I’ll be nude, right here at this desk!” Mathews joked. “You’ve convinced me, Rodman.”

[From People]

I see the pros and cons of nude exercising. Pros: you don’t get as hot and there’s less sweaty workout gear to launder. Cons: equipment gets sweaty and body parts bounce around uncomfortably. I think those cons outweigh the pros, but when exercising at home I try to wear as little as possible so I don’t have to do laundry as often. But I completely get what Dennis Rodman and Drew are saying about nudity at home being freeing and liberating. I mean, I don’t feel particularly liberated, I just feel comfortable, provided the temperature is right. After all, it’s our natural state. It’s also convenient to do a lot of chores and projects in the nude, if possible. Less opportunity to get paint and dust on clothes. Hm, maybe I’m really just advocating nudity because it means doing less laundry. In any case, Stabler, Dennis, and Drew are all right. Exercise naked, do everything naked at home!

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Drew Barrymore (@drewbarrymore)

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Last Thursday, the same day that a head of lettuce outlasted Britain’s prime minister Liz Truss, Netflix released their full-length trailer for The Crown. After months of sniping and crying from Buckingham Palace, the trailer was full of all of the royal drama we’ve been waiting for – Diana and Charles’s separation, the fire at Windsor Castle, the royalshambles that was the House of Windsor in the ‘90s. What was also fascinating about the trailer was that there was no disclaimer or note about “this is a dramatization” or “some elements are fictionalized.” The day after the trailer was released, Netflix added the disclaimer… but only to the YouTube description, not within the actual trailer. LMAO.

Netflix has added a disclaimer to the description for its latest The Crown trailer following a difficult couple of weeks for the royal series.

In the YouTube description below the video for the fifth season trailer, Netflix states: “inspired by real events, this fictional dramatisation tells the story of Queen Elizabeth II and the political and personal events that shaped her reign” .

None of the previous trailers included this disclaimer, instead going straight into a description of the season.

The move comes after two years of lobbying from certain circles including former Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden, who said in late 2020 that a “health warning” should be played before episodes so viewers know the series is a work of fiction. That “health warning” still doesn’t appear in the current trailer, however, only in the YouTube description. Netflix already uses the “fictionalised” line in press materials, on social media and on The Crown’s Netflix landing page.

[From Deadline]

Come on, Netflix knows exactly what they’re doing. They’re “giving” one version of what Buckingham Palace says they want, and by doing it after the trailer dropped, Netflix is extending the story and the beef. “Oh, you said you wanted a disclaimer, well here’s one in the YouTube description, what? Is that not good enough?” They’re poking the bear, only in this case, the “bear” is a new king who believes the best use of his power and authority is masterminding an unhinged campaign against a corporation. It’s going to get so much worse for King Charles III as well – once the Crown comes out and people begin talking about the storylines, my guess is that Charles will be dumb enough to send out people to try to “fact check” the series in nitpicky ways. Netflix will do the same thing they did two years ago: drop receipts. So will other people. There will be hundreds of stories about “did this really happen, well not exactly like that, but here’s what really happened and here’s what Charles said at the time.”

This is also a pretty significant point too – it’s not that the Palace has an issue with only The Crown, they simply don’t want to cooperate with any historian or historical documentary. It is, as always, about control. The Palace wants to be solely in control of their history, their message and what’s said, dramatized and written about their family.

I have a letter in The Times this morning about an old hobby horse of mine (by which I mean archives rather than The Crown). pic.twitter.com/ArKiNbtopH

— Philip Murphy (@philipvmurphy) October 21, 2022

Photos and posters courtesy of Netflix/The Crown.