The question arises as to why the potentates only now come to mind about the series, which had about 30 million viewers, and whether anyone has so far seen the story of the crème de la crème of British acting as an expressly verbis historical era document.
Obviously not, but now specifically in such an era
Diana and Prince Charles the story reached his legendary unhappy marriage and the unemployment-ravaged world of Thatcher,
which many viewers already have concrete memories of. In this way, certain interpretations can mislead the thing and, in some cases, not coincide 100 percent with reality, or at least take on a different undertone. And there are those who, on the other hand, have no historical experience of the time and can consider it as a historical document for the fiction presented in the series, which is clearly based on elements of reality.
I am afraid that a generation of viewers who have not lived at the time of the events might confuse fiction with reality
Culture Minister Oliver Dowden said in an interview with the conservative Daily Mail on Sunday.
In contrast, Peter Morgan, the author of the series, rightly called the production a play of creative imagination, with a script that jumps back and forth between research and drama.
It seems like as a host you have to be an adult to jump back and forth, so make sure you’re at the start of each sequel:
dear viewers, it is fiction they see here.
Gallery: The CrownPhoto: Des Willie / Netflix
(Cover photo: Des Willie / Netflix)