The Real Crown: Inside the House of Windsor (TV Series 2023) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Hiers and Spares Episode was Full of bias and untruths!
bellab197227 June 2023
I enjoyed this series to a point until the episode titled Heirs and Spares.. which chose to omit multiple facts like Kate was attacked by the media for years but pushed the narrative that only Markle received negative press.. and the story mentioned was in fact written by an American in an American tabloid newspaper and not by the English press. I immediately knew this show was biased especially the description of the HARKLES wedding. Of course the people in attendance thought the wedding was a bit of a joke because it was a wedding and the preacher went off on a tangent which had nothing to do with marriage. He was clearly promoting himself which was a shame and even the HARKLES were laughing at him.. which the narrator conveniently didn't mention.

It's amazing how the facts are ignored these days and a particular narrative is pushed depending on who is behind it.. and this show was obviously biased and wanted to push a particular false narrative..

I just watched Heirs and Spares again because it was showing and again, I was furious because of the biased inaccurate commentary. It's obvious whoever narrated the episode has a very defined opinion that's beyond biased and not based on facts.. It was deplorable.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Inaccurate (5)
mymailenvelope24 October 2023
A documentary that falls short of its promise to deliver an impartial and accurate account of the events it covers. While documentaries have the power to educate and inform, this particular missed the mark by presenting a narrative that is not only inaccurate but blatantly biased. This partiality can be seen in the selective omission of certain key facts and the manipulation of others to fit the documentary's chosen narrative. A truly effective documentary should strive to present multiple viewpoints, allowing the audience to draw their own conclusions. On the other hand, tended to cherry-pick evidence and interviews that supported its preconceived notions, thereby undermining its credibility as an impartial source of information. The result is a skewed representation of the subject matter, which does a disservice to viewers seeking a comprehensive understanding.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed