The Crown’s head of research calls out criticism of the show's historical accuracy

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 3 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 7

  • @janetclaireSays
    @janetclaireSays 11 місяців тому +4

    Research doesn't mean the research is actually used. You can change history in a major way by just tweaking a tiny detail and then give a whole other impression of what actually happened. BTW how did they research Diana's ghost visitations?

    • @prismaticmarcus
      @prismaticmarcus 11 місяців тому +3

      have you never spoken to a lost loved one?

    • @billiebuffalo
      @billiebuffalo 11 місяців тому +9

      She wasn't a ghost 🙄 She was a manifestation of their grief process...

    • @antmagor
      @antmagor 10 місяців тому +1

      Yes, because anytime somebody produces a work of fiction and admits openly that it is fiction and the scripts are based on speculation it automatically constitutes an attempt to rewrite history 🙄even though It says OUTRIGHT! That it’s FICTION! You want to see what an actual rewrite of history is go watch sound of freedom. Preferably somewhere where you can watch it for free they really should not getting any more business. Anyway, The movie outright says that Timothy Ballard is some kind of hero, whose liberated women and children from the sex trade. When in reality, he is a conspiracy theorist who likes to play Rambo in his spare time. Who coincidentally is also accused of abusing women. That’s an actual attempt to rewrite history. Not this series.

  • @csongorottodande9384
    @csongorottodande9384 10 місяців тому

    Why does she have an american accent?

    • @SoulGaming22
      @SoulGaming22 10 місяців тому

      Because she's an American?