A few questions for the Brits

by sir82 28 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  juni

  Interesting topic Sir82. I want to see the movie.

  I love you Brits! LittleToe too.

  It seems that the USA govt like everything to be a big razzle dazzle show whereas in the UK we just get on with it.

  That statement is so true!! Our press is so out of control. I just shake my head at some of the questions they ask people who have experienced horror in their lives. They are so invasive and the answer to the question is so obvious - why are you asking this I'm thinking. How unfeeling. It's like asking someone, "Does this hurt?" while hitting their thumb w/a hammer.

  Yes. When you have the President move through your state, they close down the freeways from anyone entering it - his motorcade is very long and there are helicopters hovering overhead. It's quite a scene.

  But as someone said here, there's more reason for the President to be a target than your PM.
• 

  Crumpet

  Interesting topic Sir82. I want to see the movie.

  I've got the movie at home - so I'll do a little review when I get back.
• 

  Crumpet

  Disculpame = doble posta!
• 

  Zico

  I like the Queen, she seems like a friendly woman. How do you find the small island thing LT? On my small island, rarely a day goes by where I don't see a JW, and I think I'm the only apostate here. This can make island life a bit sucky at times, I feel starved of apostate conversation. I can only remember one visit by the Queen as well.
• 

  sir82

  Thanks for the feedback.

  What do you think of the film's portrayals of:

  -- Prince Philip: A stodgy snob hung up on tradition, cold and unfeeling toward nearly everyone, especially "commoners"

  -- Prince Charles: A rather weak person, who might be inclined to "modernize" some royal traditions, but thoroughly intimidated by his parents

  -- Queen Elizabeth: also extraordianarily tradition-bound, but a bit more flexible than her husband - kind of "sees the light" that sometimes tradition must be at least "bent" a little. An overwhelming sense of "duty" towards her subjects - even more important than family or personal emotions

  -- The Queen Mother: Perhaps even more tradition-bound than her daughter & son-in-law, just utterly out of touch with common folk

  -- Tony Blair: Desirous of "modernization", but also appreciative of the service & dedication that the queen provides

  How much of that would you say was more or less accurate, and to what degree? How much was "artistic license" to make a better story?

  I was just fascinated by the differences in outlook and perspective from my American experience.
• 

  Clam

  Arise Sir 82

  What do you think of the film's portrayals of:

  -- Prince Philip: A stodgy snob hung up on tradition, cold and unfeeling toward nearly everyone, especially "commoners"

  Bang On - he's a reactionary old Dinosaur who's about as PC as Archie Bunker

  -- Prince Charles: A rather weak person, who might be inclined to "modernize" some royal traditions, but thoroughly intimidated by his parents

  He's always had a lot of progressive ideas, but yes he is a weak person. He's not too well liked and he knows it. The portrayal of him thinking he was being shot at I definitely believe.

  -- Queen Elizabeth: also extraordianarily tradition-bound, but a bit more flexible than her husband - kind of "sees the light" that sometimes tradition must be at least "bent" a little. An overwhelming sense of "duty" towards her subjects - even more important than family or personal emotions.

  That's pretty accurate I'd say. She puts duty above everything. Her family must be a huge disappointment to her, but she's coped amazingly well as the Royal Family has been forced to modernize.

  -- The Queen Mother: Perhaps even more tradition-bound than her daughter & son-in-law, just utterly out of touch with common folk

  I never liked the Queen Mother. I saw her as very manipulative. She thought Charles could do no wrong and she never got over the Edward VIII issue, where her husband George VI was unexpectedly pushed onto the throne. It undoubtedly caused his early death and I believe she became very bitter and twisted over that. SHE certainly felt she had the common touch, but that seemed to be primarily due to the fact that she stayed in London during the WW2 blitz. Big deal!

  -- Tony Blair: Desirous of "modernization", but also appreciative of the service & dedication that the queen provides.

  Yes I think he respects and admires her a lot. He's promised much but delivered very little.

  How much of that would you say was more or less accurate, and to what degree? How much was "artistic license" to make a better story?

  I reckon it was a good portrayal. By the way ( Sir 82 and everyone else), what did you believe the Queen's meeting with the stag and her subsequent interest in it represented? What did it symbolise if anything?

  Clam
• 

  juni

  Clam said:

  what did you believe the Queen's meeting with the stag and her subsequent interest in it represented? What did it symbolise if anything?

  Now I must see the movie.....lol

  What "stag"?

  Thanks Crumpy for doing a review. (((Crumpet)))

  Juni

  Dang, I always remember something after I've posted! I was going to say that the Queen's fashion line is so ' 50ish. She dresses and resembles my grandmother - it's frightening!!!
• 

  LittleToe

  Juni:

  I love you Brits! LittleToe too.

  I get the feeling that you think that Brit = English.

  Brit covers Scotland as well. I'm happy to be called British.

  Zico:
  Which island? Feel free to PM, as I understand you'll want privacy.

  Sir82:I haven't seen the movie, but your impressions would accord with general public perceptions of the Royals in real life.
• 

  sir82

  what did you believe the Queen's meeting with the stag and her subsequent interest in it represented? What did it symbolise if anything?

  I'm sure I am the world's worst when it comes to deciphering symbolism, but here are my thoughts...

  I thought it presented her with an opportunity to feel real emotion over _something_. All her life, or at least all her life as queen, she felt compelled to stifle her own desires, her own feelings, to put up the brave face, duty first, never let the public see her in a weak moment. That spilled over into her private life, even when there would be no one around to criticize her for such things.

  When she saw the stag for the first time, she was caught unawares, and had a real moment of _human_ emotion - she admired its grace, nobility, beauty, etc. It then seemed to dawn on her that she couldn't display such emotion toward the persons in her life, i.e. on something far more important - her family. Forty plus years of repressing her feelings finally caught up to her, and she felt regret.

  Of course, she quickly stifled those emotions, realizing that others would soon be there, and couldn't be allowed to see her weeping.

  But even so, she felt a connection with the stag - it rekindled her humanity, if you will, allowed her to feel, if but for a brief moment, like a "normal" human being. When it was killed, she was saddened & she had to go to "pay her respects".

  Perhaps that was the incident that enabled her to see that should make an effort to allow the public see her grieving for Diana - or at least recognize the grieving of others for her.
• 

  LittleToe

  Are you sure it wasn't just regret that she had no gun to bag one for the pot?