speeders
Based
Posts: 4,093
Likes: 2,211
|
Post by speeders on Jan 6, 2018 0:45:22 GMT
I was really, really hoping they'd cast Sally Hawkins as Margaret. Think Helena Bonham Carter fits better as Elizabeth than Margaret anyways. Really curious who's going to be Phillip.
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Jan 6, 2018 8:17:12 GMT
Vanessa Kirby was great as Princess Margaret. Hopefully HBC kills it too.
|
|
|
Post by notacrook on Jan 7, 2018 23:36:18 GMT
Oh my fuck, I love this show. It's sad that it kinda flies under the radar - not many people seem to watch it, and critics seem to forget about it the moment it's released. I think S2 was even better than the first. It started fairly slow that had me slightly concerned it wouldn't live up to the surprising strength of its first run, but from episode 3 onward I was utterly captivated and riveted by the whole thing.
I liked the sort of crisis-of-the-week structure, as it meant every episode felt refreshing and intense. The show continues to look absolutely fucking gorgeous without losing any human drama due to its generally excellent character work. I'm gonna miss this cast massively - Foy, Smith and Kirby were as magnificent as ever, but there's really no one in this ensemble I didn't love. Still, I can't wait for Olivia Colman and Helena Bonham Carter to take the reins.
So yeah, another fantastic season of this great show that I still can't believe is as good as it is. 9.5/10
|
|
speeders
Based
Posts: 4,093
Likes: 2,211
|
Post by speeders on Jan 8, 2018 14:56:35 GMT
Oh my fuck, I love this show. It's sad that it kinda flies under the radar - not many people seem to watch it, and critics seem to forget about it the moment it's released. I think S2 was even better than the first. It started fairly slow that had me slightly concerned it wouldn't live up to the surprising strength of its first run, but from episode 3 onward I was utterly captivated and riveted by the whole thing. I liked the sort of crisis-of-the-week structure, as it meant every episode felt refreshing and intense. The show continues to look absolutely fucking gorgeous without losing any human drama due to its generally excellent character work. I'm gonna miss this cast massively - Foy, Smith and Kirby were as magnificent as ever, but there's really no one in this ensemble I didn't love. Still, I can't wait for Olivia Colman and Helena Bonham Carter to take the reins. So yeah, another fantastic season of this great show that I still can't believe is as good as it is. 9.5/10Yeah pretty weird actually, you'd think it might be the next prestige drama ala Mad Men but it never mustered that reputation unfortunately. There's always the chance that it will pick steam over time, but if it won't happen by season 3, it probably won't at all.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Mar 14, 2018 0:38:09 GMT
A little late to the party, but I finished the first season a couple of nights ago. Pretty dang amazing stuff. Ensemble alone is worth the price of admission.
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Jul 16, 2018 14:06:34 GMT
Olivia Colman as Queen Elizabeth in season 3 She looks the part but i dearly miss Claire Foy.
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Jul 17, 2018 10:26:10 GMT
Olivia Colman as Queen Elizabeth in season 3 She looks the part but i dearly miss Claire Foy. Jeez, what happened to our Liz in 1964? I love Colman, but this is such whack casting. And is this the first screen biography that has managed to make their subject less good looking than they were in real life? I know look should be less important than everything else, but it's all we have to go on so far, and after season 2 I am already concerned... I don't want season 1 to be a peak they can never get back to.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Jul 17, 2018 15:29:11 GMT
Olivia Colman as Queen Elizabeth in season 3 She looks the part but i dearly miss Claire Foy. Jeez, what happened to our Liz in 1964? I love Colman, but this is such whack casting. And is this the first screen biography that has managed to make their subject less good looking than they were in real life? I know look should be less important than everything else, but it's all we have to go on so far, and after season 2 I am already concerned... I don't want season 1 to be a peak they can never get back to. Granted I watched 1 and 2 back to back on my first (and only so far) viewing... but I really liked S2. I thought expanding Philip's and Margaret's roles helped a lot fill the void that was left by no more Churchill and George V. They were missed, surely, and the second season isn't as good as the first (very few things are in this world) but I still really liked it. Just wish it had less Matthew Goode.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 17, 2018 16:20:17 GMT
Jeez, what happened to our Liz in 1964? I love Colman, but this is such whack casting. And is this the first screen biography that has managed to make their subject less good looking than they were in real life? I know look should be less important than everything else, but it's all we have to go on so far, and after season 2 I am already concerned... I don't want season 1 to be a peak they can never get back to. Granted I watched 1 and 2 back to back on my first (and only so far) viewing... but I really liked S2. I thought expanding Philip's and Margaret's roles helped a lot fill the void that was left by no more Churchill and George V. They were missed, surely, and the second season isn't as good as the first (very few things are in this world) but I still really liked it. Just wish it had less Matthew Goode. And more Stephen Dillane from Season 1, who was royally snubbed for his guest spot.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Jul 17, 2018 16:36:31 GMT
Granted I watched 1 and 2 back to back on my first (and only so far) viewing... but I really liked S2. I thought expanding Philip's and Margaret's roles helped a lot fill the void that was left by no more Churchill and George V. They were missed, surely, and the second season isn't as good as the first (very few things are in this world) but I still really liked it. Just wish it had less Matthew Goode. And more Stephen Dillane from Season 1, who was royally snubbed for his guest spot. "AGE IS CRUEL!" He was superb. I honestly thought until now that he did get a nod...
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Jul 17, 2018 19:25:09 GMT
Jeez, what happened to our Liz in 1964? I love Colman, but this is such whack casting. And is this the first screen biography that has managed to make their subject less good looking than they were in real life? I know look should be less important than everything else, but it's all we have to go on so far, and after season 2 I am already concerned... I don't want season 1 to be a peak they can never get back to. Granted I watched 1 and 2 back to back on my first (and only so far) viewing... but I really liked S2. I thought expanding Philip's and Margaret's roles helped a lot fill the void that was left by no more Churchill and George V. They were missed, surely, and the second season isn't as good as the first (very few things are in this world) but I still really liked it. Just wish it had less Matthew Goode. Don't get me wrong, I liked it plenty! The standout episodes were awesome, performances were strong, etc. But it's just comparatively, you know? Like you say, very few things in this world I've seen that are as good as that first season. Not sure it's even fair to expect it to get back to that height, but I do think they can do better than they just did. For me it tipped too far to the soap opera side of things, and lost focus on THE CROWN. It was a balancing act that season 1 got so right.
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Jul 18, 2018 13:30:52 GMT
Helena Bonham Carter as Princess Margaret
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Oct 29, 2018 23:17:44 GMT
I want to ask: does this get better? Or does it stay as even keel average and dull as it is now? I mean, I don't especially dislike it, but I have nothing to latch onto either. After six episodes, I'm struggling to find the enthusiasm to continue with a show that has few pros and few cons and is basically one big ball of "eh, that's fine, I guess."
I figured that there's no reason to spend four more hours on this if I'm just going to be mildly entertained, so I decided to ask what you all thought I should do.
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Oct 29, 2018 23:53:22 GMT
I want to ask: does this get better? Or does it stay as even keel average and dull as it is now? I mean, I don't especially dislike it, but I have nothing to latch onto either. After six episodes, I'm struggling to find the enthusiasm to continue with a show that has few pros and few cons and is basically one big ball of "eh, that's fine, I guess." I figured that there's no reason to spend four more hours on this if I'm just going to be mildly entertained, so I decided to ask what you all thought I should do. Well... It's not going to get different.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Oct 30, 2018 0:03:25 GMT
Martin Stett I would say give it until the ninth episode, which features a knockout guest turn from the legend Stephen Dillane. Some of the scenes between he and Lithgow are some of the most staggering dramatic television I've seen. If you don't like it by that episode, then you should probably just give up on it. As ibbi said, it's not like it gets much different.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Oct 30, 2018 0:41:55 GMT
Martin Stett I would say give it until the ninth episode, which features a knockout guest turn from the legend Stephen Dillane. Some of the scenes between he and Lithgow are some of the most staggering dramatic television I've seen. If you don't like it by that episode, then you should probably just give up on it. As ibbi said, it's not like it gets much different. That's a mighty long time to devote to a show to see if you like it (nine hours). I'm really just so... I can see how intelligent the show is. I want to like it. I just don't care. I love when there's a bigger picture but it is peripheral because the characters are devoted to their own smaller goals. I think my current problem is that the "big picture" (the importance of the royal family in the modern world) doesn't connect with uneducated, American me. Why does it matter if the Queen takes the Windsor name? Or who Margaret marries? Or if the Duke of Wherever/Uncle/David/Edward (seriously, what do I call him?) can stop being an asshole long enough to... um... sit in his house and proceed to not matter? Far too many critically raved television shows are viewed as pretty terrible by me because they can't master characters I can attach to. I don't need a big plot or grand reveals. I just want people that do something that I can see matters in some way.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Oct 30, 2018 0:54:05 GMT
That's a mighty long time to devote to a show to see if you like it (nine hours). I'm really just so... I can see how intelligent the show is. I want to like it. I just don't care. I love when there's a bigger picture but it is peripheral because the characters are devoted to their own smaller goals. I think my current problem is that the "big picture" (the importance of the royal family in the modern world) doesn't connect with uneducated, American me. Why does it matter if the Queen takes the Windsor name? Or who Margaret marries? Or if the Duke of Wherever/Uncle/David/Edward (seriously, what do I call him?) can stop being an asshole long enough to... um... sit in his house and proceed to not matter? Far too many critically raved television shows are viewed as pretty terrible by me because they can't master characters I can attach to. I don't need a big plot or grand reveals. I just want people that do something that I can see matters in some way. That's understandable. I definitely can relate to the feeling of not being able to connect with series that other people rave about. There are far too many examples from my own personal experience. I've always enjoyed The Crown, though, because I've felt that it's always done a great job at turning the conflicts of these larger-than-life figures who live in extravagance into more everyday, relatable situations with humanistic emotional value. It does such a fantastic job of showcasing how these people try to reconcile the roles they've been dealt; even if it doesn't feel like any of it matters, I've always found it interesting how the show is about these people trying to figure out how and why they do matter. That's not to say I enjoy all of it -- it has its dry patches that weigh it down -- but I do think it's very rewarding with patience. Also, as someone who loves history and 20th century history in particular, I can't get enough of the "historical account" aspect of the show. But again, I think the reasons you're not liking it are incredibly valid. I was simply recommending that you see it through to the ninth episode so that you can see just how good the show can get. But now that I'm more clear on your criticisms, I'm not sure if you'll get much more out of it than you are now.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jan 20, 2019 20:22:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jan 21, 2019 2:06:39 GMT
Nice Choice! who do you think should play Lady Diana? Elizabeth Debicki, maybe.
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Aug 12, 2019 13:08:01 GMT
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Sept 20, 2019 16:00:16 GMT
Queen Colman is just an astoundingly great talent
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Oct 21, 2019 17:42:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sirjeremy on Nov 16, 2019 12:45:57 GMT
Season three is on Netflix tomorrow:
|
|
Drish
Badass
Posts: 2,017
Likes: 1,752
|
Post by Drish on Nov 17, 2019 16:05:18 GMT
So excited to watch the new season but I'm gonna miss Foy, Smith and Kirby.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2019 15:14:53 GMT
I'm loving Bonham Carter as Princess Margaret - she's slipped into the role so seamlessly and is playing it to perfection.
|
|