Favourites

Finally a good episode!! I don't have kids but I've been one and i know what my parents were like with me. The overall direction and depth of this episode made it so much better, interesting and dynamic.

It took me a bit to get over the petulance of Elizabeth's four children. Each has his or her own problems that to most of us would seem petty. But the elevation of them makes the show. Anne is feeling unappreciated and ignored despite her good works. Edward is a whiney, self centered little weasel who enjoys inflicting pain. Andrew is totally irresponsible and enjoying every minute of it. And, Charles, is in love with someone else and continues to talk to her and engage with her whenever possible, leaving the pregnant Diana with nowhere to go. Meanwhile, Margaret Thatcher proves to be a war monger, self centered and unconcerned about the hoi poloi. Of course, the Falklands come along just at the right time.

More of the appalling caricature characterisation of Margaret Thatcher. The family scene with her making dinner was something more worthy of a Private Eye cartoon, Viz, Beano or the Dandy. Cringeworthy! Mark Thatcher's rally adventure, which did not run concurrently with the Falkland crisis in reality, was used as a metaphor for comparing family relationships. So, we were introduced to Andrew and Edward, as part of a "what are they all doing now" concept for the episode. After the previous episode I did not want more of the Charles and Diana relationship, but the sulk by Diane behind a locked bedroom door needed something by way of explanation or context. Was Charles the bad guy by hammering on the door? I don't think so - his mother was visiting and Diana refused to be a host. Charles was frustrated, who wouldn't have been? The whole episode had no flow and had the feel of being patched together. Returning to Mrs. Thatcher, her persona during the Falklands was far and away removed from the almost manic character in this drama. As an aside, did we really go to war over some patriotic scrap metal workers on South Georgia. Why not let them have their day then send in some military personal to keep an eye on things when they had gone.

As strong as this episode was in comparison to the 3 which preceded it, I still can't shake the insurmountable feeling that the creators are speeding far too quickly through the British periodical timeline this season - with 3 / 4 years somehow covered within the first 4 episodes - contrasted by the fact that each of the 2 seasons the show launched with covered only 7 years in either (featuring Claire Foy as monarch). Now if the Thatcher era was relatively low-key & uneventful, I could've understood this creative decision but obviously, it was the complete opposite; incredibly interesting, brimming with pivotal moments in British history - that should've been featured, had they devoted more time to this adaptation.

Therefore, the stark difference in pacing leaves the episodes feeling noticeably less developed than before - which is a tremendous shame, because as I've already stated, the 80s arguably contained the highest concentration of defining moments since WW2 in our nation's past (Charles & Diana, Diana at the White House, the IRA, royal intrusion, miner's strike, recession, protests, the battle of Orgreave, gay rights, Hillsborough disaster, Dennis Nilsen, Pan Am Flight 103, the AIDS crisis, Falklands, Yorkshire Ripper etc.) & thus, although some of these events are included or referenced subtly, this decade deserved to have that richness reflected in full & far more detail - with the amount of time Peter Morgan invested in to their inclusion mirroring their significance. To do otherwise trivialises their importance - which should be accepted.

Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case & consequently, already, there's a growing list of important moments that have been ignored / skimmed over / left out entirely.

The Queen has maternal love for them all but there are moments when her revulsion toward them is apparent. When she's having lunch with Edward and he tells a joke about eating so much fish he wonders they don't have gills. She not only doesn't laugh but looks tortured by the cheese and his ringing fake laugh. She also doesn't like how he's turned into a cold authoritarian. He's not embraceable.

Ann is emotional. She's bleating on about her despair about nothing. Yes there is an oppressiveness with being in the royal family but recklessness and drama is not relatable for the Queen Elizabeth. They are different and again there's an intimacy gap.

Yes Phillip believes Andrew is her favorite but she looks like she wants to walk out. She's not just recoiling because it's not natural for her to talk about sex with her son but Phillip is callous to humane boundaries. He doesn't have empathy for anyone not even his mom who he is torturing at the moment. Would he kill Charles and his children. Who knows? Everything is good fun and can be re-framed as art or modernization.

I thought Charles was written poorly until I realized the dialogue isn't ridiculous, pompous and superficial - Charles is. And she can barely look at him. She laughs, scold, mocks him for his dry self absorption. He's sullen, cold and a walking satire of English pretension. I don't like Charles but when she demanded they get on with her lunch because she needs to get back- I felt bad for him. He's not likable. Even his mother needs distance from him and Queen Elizabeth relates to Diane who is hiding from him.