The Real Crown: Inside the House of Windsor

I was very taken with this series which I watched on PBS-TV. It is very much an inside look at the major events in the House of Windsor - the extended family of Queen Elizabeth II - and the Royals who have played a role over the decades. The Queen is the focus and all others are in supporting roles. We see Elizabeth's reign as she evolves from a woman in her mid twenties to an experienced head of state. We see Prince Charles, her eldest son and heir, who is mentored by Earl Mountbatten. He grows up to be somewhat of a playboy before his marriage to Diana, Princess of Wales. After she suffers an untimely death, Charles carries on his long love affair with the woman who later becomes his wife and Queen. Prince Andrew and Prince Harry appear to share much of the negative attention. Prince Andrew was a very popular Royal who served with distinction in the Falklands War. Later his lavish, self-serving lifestyle and rude behaviour eroded his early popularity. Prince Harry, a military man who served in Afghanistan, seemed to be at loose ends after his war service and marriage to Meghan Marple. To me, Harry is the victim of his mother's early and tragic death as well as being the "spare" for the throne who is now superseded by Prince William and his children. Unfortunately the series pays no attention to Prince Edward and his wife Sophie, who have assumed a larger and highly positive role in recent years. Generally, however this series is a comprehensive review of the life and times of Queen Elizabeth and her family. There is a lot of fascinating film footage and intimate profiles of her family.

A documentary that falls short of its promise to deliver an impartial and accurate account of the events it covers. While documentaries have the power to educate and inform, this particular missed the mark by presenting a narrative that is not only inaccurate but blatantly biased. This partiality can be seen in the selective omission of certain key facts and the manipulation of others to fit the documentary's chosen narrative. A truly effective documentary should strive to present multiple viewpoints, allowing the audience to draw their own conclusions. On the other hand, tended to cherry-pick evidence and interviews that supported its preconceived notions, thereby undermining its credibility as an impartial source of information. The result is a skewed representation of the subject matter, which does a disservice to viewers seeking a comprehensive understanding.

I enjoyed this series to a point until the episode titled Heirs and Spares.. which chose to omit multiple facts like Kate was attacked by the media for years but pushed the narrative that only Markle received negative press.. and the story mentioned was in fact written by an American in an American tabloid newspaper and not by the English press. I immediately knew this show was biased especially the description of the HARKLES wedding. Of course the people in attendance thought the wedding was a bit of a joke because it was a wedding and the preacher went off on a tangent which had nothing to do with marriage. He was clearly promoting himself which was a shame and even the HARKLES were laughing at him.. which the narrator conveniently didn't mention.

It's amazing how the facts are ignored these days and a particular narrative is pushed depending on who is behind it.. and this show was obviously biased and wanted to push a particular false narrative..

I just watched Heirs and Spares again because it was showing and again, I was furious because of the biased inaccurate commentary. It's obvious whoever narrated the episode has a very defined opinion that's beyond biased and not based on facts.. It was deplorable.