The Crown
Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
Some ofThe Crowns most standout, stand-alone episodes have been centered on Philip.
(We also get an introduction to the bacchanalian Boris Yeltsin, Russias first democratically elected president.)
Meanwhile, Elizabeth is in low spirits over the growing chasm between her and her husband.
Its an indirect kill but fueled by an informed decision.
Saving them wouldve been controversial and contradictory and might have led to local unrest.
Elizabeth defends her ancestors actions, in a sense.
As a royal, though, she just had to hide and bury those feelings.
Thats the nature of the role.
Of course, shouldering those decisions would be traumatic.
Queen Mary felt bad, yes, but the Romanovs were murdered.
Whats noble about that?
The legacy of colonialism and its associated violence is more or less swept under the rug.
Still, the amount of blood on the hands of the British monarchy could fill an ocean.
suddenly becomes relatable to colonized communities across the globe.
(Only to a certain extent, of course.)
It feels like an oblique way to confront the shows elephant in the room.
Shedreportedlyscare palace visitors by randomly screaming, WELL, WHAT ABAHT IT?.
Is it just me or has this season felt more didactic than previous ones?
Did we need that crash course on DNA sequencing?
This episode has Imelda Staunton and Jonathan Pryce doing so much lovely work, particularly with their eyes.
Its heartbreaking (and feels vaguely reminiscent of Emma Thompsons devastating bedroom scene inLove Actually).
I couldnt help but be fixated on Pennys hair this episode.
Her blowouts were serving 90s supermodel realness.
