Harry + Meghan series really well done

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was really bummed by M throwing Kate under the bus. I understand that she might have felt Kate was formal, standoffish, not as fun 6 years ago when they met, but now in hindsight, of course there were stark differences: M. was living a carefree life, loved her job on her show, was a minor celeb but not at all famous enough to be hounded or lose any freedoms, had her life of friends and travel and yoga. Kate at that time was married to the future King and was living a life of service, had 2 young children, had been married for years by then, had been ripped apart by the press....of course she wasn't going to be in ripped jeans and bare feet and totes chill. I mean they were in 2 very different stages of life.

I just think by now as a mom and a wife and seeing what the royal life is like she would be more understanding. Including that remark seemed super petty.

Likewise, Kate could have taken Meghan under her wing, knowing what she would inevitably experience. She’d experienced the waity Kaity years, etc. In effect, she threw Meghan under the bus early on

Remember Will was in the military the first few years of their marriage and they lived out of the limelight for quite some time. They didn’t go back
To London until George had to start school. I don’t remember the press being hard on Kate. And Kate gets something M will never have…title of Queen and her son will be King.

[Anonymous]

I think using stock imges in a documentary is odd. A documentary is supposed to be about actual life experiences. They are saying terrible headlines were written about them but they show headlines written about other people or unrelated events. It takes away from the validity of the documentary if there isn't evidence to support it so stock imagery is used. I am not doubting it happens as most TV is pretty fake but I would think in a dcumentary, producers would want it to be a little more real

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was really bummed by M throwing Kate under the bus. I understand that she might have felt Kate was formal, standoffish, not as fun 6 years ago when they met, but now in hindsight, of course there were stark differences: M. was living a carefree life, loved her job on her show, was a minor celeb but not at all famous enough to be hounded or lose any freedoms, had her life of friends and travel and yoga. Kate at that time was married to the future King and was living a life of service, had 2 young children, had been married for years by then, had been ripped apart by the press....of course she wasn't going to be in ripped jeans and bare feet and totes chill. I mean they were in 2 very different stages of life.

I just think by now as a mom and a wife and seeing what the royal life is like she would be more understanding. Including that remark seemed super petty.

Likewise, Kate could have taken Meghan under her wing, knowing what she would inevitably experience. She’d experienced the waity Kaity years, etc. In effect, she threw Meghan under the bus early on

You don't know that to be true, Meghan has a well deserved reputation for "coloring" the truth to her advantage. I would not take anything she says as gospel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have only watched the first episode. I don't think this series will change anyone's opinion of them. Those who like them will continue to like them and those who don't will find new reasons to dislike them.

No, it made me look at the situation a little more critically. I think it was well done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think using stock imges in a documentary is odd. A documentary is supposed to be about actual life experiences. They are saying terrible headlines were written about them but they show headlines written about other people or unrelated events. It takes away from the validity of the documentary if there isn't evidence to support it so stock imagery is used. I am not doubting it happens as most TV is pretty fake but I would think in a dcumentary, producers would want it to be a little more real

Every documentary uses stock images, especially when history or context is illuminated. It was used well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have only watched the first episode. I don't think this series will change anyone's opinion of them. Those who like them will continue to like them and those who don't will find new reasons to dislike them.

No, it made me look at the situation a little more critically. I think it was well done.

Says the "ultra" Meghan fan. Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the niece couldn’t come to the wedding. There is no way someone could convince me not to invite someone I supposedly was so close to. Please, are we supposed to believe this nonsense.

The niece was brought in to the documentary to show that Meghan has a relationship with one family member. Given the brouhaha around other family members, it is not surprising that Meghan was easily persuaded not to invite her. The revelation about the niece is the same reason Meghan’s mother did the extensive interview. They have to show that Harry has a family now that he has left his birth family. It is a classic PR move to rewrite family dynamics.

Was she also not invited to the wedding because the BRF forbade it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think using stock imges in a documentary is odd. A documentary is supposed to be about actual life experiences. They are saying terrible headlines were written about them but they show headlines written about other people or unrelated events. It takes away from the validity of the documentary if there isn't evidence to support it so stock imagery is used. I am not doubting it happens as most TV is pretty fake but I would think in a dcumentary, producers would want it to be a little more real

Every documentary uses stock images, especially when history or context is illuminated. It was used well.

It was used well in the sense that it might make some people believe she was harrassed by the media but it isn't used well in the sense that she likely wasn't harrassed by the media if there is no media of that happening. It isn't like actual headlines or video clips are hard to get if they existed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you mean to tell me that even though the intrusion of the press and media was integral to their story and a major part of why they were forced to leave they couldn’t find enough of their own footage to use? They just had to source stock footage to illustrate their point?

You don't understand documentaries.

[Anonymous]

All those bashing them for making money, why wouldn't they? They made an attempt to be working Royals, but that didn't pan out. Clearly there was a LOT that happened behind closed doors. There's a lot of they said / they said. When that happens the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. We can all guess there's a ridiculous amount of "protocol" one needs to follow. If you want someone to fail at being a royal then don't fill them in. That seems easy enough. I'm sure you can't even google a lot of that.

There's also a lot of racism in the royal family. I know that wasn't referenced here, but it was in the Oprah interview. That leads me to lean towards believing M & H.

Watching what Thomas Jr said about the documentary on Piers Morgan seems suspect. Apparently the Markle's are coming out with their own documentary. That should be fun...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you mean to tell me that even though the intrusion of the press and media was integral to their story and a major part of why they were forced to leave they couldn’t find enough of their own footage to use? They just had to source stock footage to illustrate their point?

You don't understand documentaries.

This isn't a documentary...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All those bashing them for making money, why wouldn't they? They made an attempt to be working Royals, but that didn't pan out. Clearly there was a LOT that happened behind closed doors. There's a lot of they said / they said. When that happens the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. We can all guess there's a ridiculous amount of "protocol" one needs to follow. If you want someone to fail at being a royal then don't fill them in. That seems easy enough. I'm sure you can't even google a lot of that.

There's also a lot of racism in the royal family. I know that wasn't referenced here, but it was in the Oprah interview. That leads me to lean towards believing M & H.

Watching what Thomas Jr said about the documentary on Piers Morgan seems suspect. Apparently the Markle's are coming out with their own documentary. That should be fun...

It is just kind of hypocritical that they are making money by selling stories and pictures of themselves and their family members after cutting off others for doing the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I binged the first 3 episodes on Net today. Really well done-- charming!

Was it well done? I read that the picture they show of the press coverage is really from a Harry Potter premiere, not press hounding them, and that there is a note that the royal family declined to comment but the royal family denies this. So, a couple examples of maybe how it wasn't well edited or vetted?

The trailer alone had 3 images that were from stock images of paparazzi that had nothing to do with the Sussexes, plus one image that implied that they were being stalked where the positioning of the photographer had prior approval. They don’t seem to care about credibility. It will be interesting to see how many points of contention are in the actual video.

You realize the stock photos were used to make a point of situations, they were not atrributed directly to them. What you are doing is just repeating early preemptive strikes from several British tabloids. Tabloids today are continuing, even calling it a disaster, panned by critics, which, in fact, it is not. It's been praised.

[Anonymous]

I think next three episodes will give more behind the scenes info and why they left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I binged the first 3 episodes on Net today. Really well done-- charming!

Was it well done? I read that the picture they show of the press coverage is really from a Harry Potter premiere, not press hounding them, and that there is a note that the royal family declined to comment but the royal family denies this. So, a couple examples of maybe how it wasn't well edited or vetted?

The trailer alone had 3 images that were from stock images of paparazzi that had nothing to do with the Sussexes, plus one image that implied that they were being stalked where the positioning of the photographer had prior approval. They don’t seem to care about credibility. It will be interesting to see how many points of contention are in the actual video.

You realize the stock photos were used to make a point of situations, they were not atrributed directly to them. What you are doing is just repeating early preemptive strikes from several British tabloids. Tabloids today are continuing, even calling it a disaster, panned by critics, which, in fact, it is not. It's been praised.

Why not use actual clips and footage given how integral it is to their story? I will feel the same if they use random clips of people yelling racist things to support their point that they experienced racism. I agree it isn't a documentary. They are using stock imaging in an intentional way to create the feeling they want you to have in the absence of actual evidence or maybe even actual events. If they show a montage of racist clips, people will feel angry about racism even if it all has zero to do with H and M and then they can use that emotion to make you feel that for H and M even if they had never experienced any racism at all but by pairing imagery and music and shouted words and various other sensory inputs, they can tell an entirely different story - any story they want really. I get that is how TV works, I just don't think that type of TV is documentary style. Usually they call that based on a true story not a documentary.