King Charles III is the boldest BBC show of the year.

#Diana’s ghost, Camilla slapping the prince, Kate as Lady Macbeth … people have been outraged by the BBC’s potentially treasonous new drama. But after watching, the response should be more ‘hooray’ than ‘off with their heads!’

An outrage for those who believe the monarchy should always be reverenced … King Charles III.
An outrage for those who believe the monarchy should always be reverenced … King Charles III. Photograph: Robert Viglasky/BBC/Drama Republic

Some Tory politicians and royal biographers had frothed about the content of a piece that includes shots of Elizabeth II’s funeral procession; the ghost of Diana, Princess of Wales, speaking prophecies to her ex-husband and elder son; and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, slapping Prince William for plotting to seize the throne from his father. The objectors hadn’t seen the original play but considered even the idea lese-majesty.

Those not calling for the DG’s head were perhaps aware that the script had not been hatched by a bunch of crazed republicans in a Broadcasting House bunker. King Charles III is an adaptation of a stage play by Mike Bartlett already performed around 400 times in London and New York, transferring to the West End and Broadway after its premiere at the Almeida theatre in north London in 2014.

Such moments as Camilla’s slap and Diana’s ghost – white-dressed at the end of a long corridor beside an eerily rocking child’s rocking horse – will inevitably have caused more shock on TV, where it is easier for the potentially offended to stumble on the stuff, than in the theatre, where the response was standing ovations and award nominations.

However, TV viewers have now seen that the play is not an exercise in Spitting Image-style satire: the actors sample some mannerisms from their Windsor originals, but give imaginative portrayals, rather than Bremner-esque impressions.

Nor could the script ever be mistaken for a docudrama. King Charles III is a futuristic what-if – set in around 2022 – which becomes a political thriller, a Palace of Cards if you will, when the new monarch refuses to sign a parliamentary bill he dislikes, causing a constitutional crisis and civil unrest. Distanced not only by time but style, it is written in blank verse, Bartlett’s governing conceit being that Shakespeare had survived to characterise Charles III as he did the various Richards and Henrys.

A plausible emotive portrait … Tim Pigott-Smith’s performance avoids any trace of the pettiness, temper and self-indulgence attributed to Charles by biographers.
Tim Pigott-Smith’s performance avoids any trace of the pettiness, temper and self-indulgence attributed to Charles by biographers. Photograph: Robert Viglasky/BBC/Drama Republic

Conceived as a pastiche of dramatic tragedy, the play now trails a real one, in the sudden death last month of Tim Pigott-Smith, who played the title role on stage and screen and whose performance now becomes his memorial.

Pigott-Smith’s performance and Bartlett’s script avoid any trace of the pettiness, temper and self-indulgence attributed to Charles by biographers, offering a plausible emotive portrait of a man who has waited more than 70 years to start work, then finds himself incapable of being just a face on the stamps and banknotes. “What am I?,” Charles asks, a line that Pigott-Smith, with an agonised sigh, makes as existentially heart-wrenching as Hamlet’s To be, or not to be.

Even the constitutional crisis Charles provokes is a kindly choice. Bartlett doesn’t imagine him leading a military dictatorship or massacring modernist architects, but standing up for the freedom of the press (something that has never seemed high on the agenda of the real Prince of Wales).

And, in one sense, the play is optimistic and reassuring for monarchists. The coronation oath taken here makes the King of England monarch of territories still including Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, which only a plucky royalist would bet their Buckingham Palace garden party ticket on at this point.

Much of the play has been cut – the 90-minute TV slot is an hour shorter than the theatrical playing time – and some of the excisions make the text less challenging to BBC editorial guidelines. Rupert Goold, who directed the play in both media, admitted in an interview that the broadcaster had expressed unease with Diana’s ghost mocking Prince Charles’s suitability to rule. That speech has gone.

Electioneering politicians may be relieved as well that a speech from the play in which a kebab-seller laments the shrinking of Britain (“cut the army … squeeze the NHS … the Post Office closed … Devolution. Less and less”) becomes on TV a metaphor in which the Queen holds the UK together like the metal spit that splits a turning slab of doner meat.

Parts of the play are genuinely shocking, with the attitude of viewers depending on whether they believe living royals should be protected from fictional representation (as they effectively were in Britain until the 1980s), or conclude that inclusion in a drama can be no worse than the intrusions into their privacy the Windsors suffer regularly.

Bartlett gave his Prince Harry a romance with a sparky outsider, played by Tamara Lawrance, long before the real Harry’s relationship with Meghan Markle.
Bartlett gave his Prince Harry a romance with a sparky outsider, played by Tamara Lawrance, long before the real Harry’s relationship with Meghan Markle. Photograph: Robert Viglasky/BBC/Drama Republic

One pre-transmission furore concerned a line in which a nightclubber repeats gossip about Prince Harry’s paternity. But, in the context, this claim is spoken by a committed republican, who subsequently recants, and clearly represents the sort of stuff the princes have to put up with. Richard Goulding’s vulnerable, touching Harry seems a fair guess about the psyche of the fifth in line to the throne. Bartlett also gave his prince a romance with a sparky outsider, played by Tamara Lawrance, long before the real Harry’s relationship with Meghan Markle.

The appearance of Diana’s ghost, as well as being a nod to Shakespearean convention, also seems a reasonable presentation of the way Charles, William and Harry are shadowed by the dead princess both historically and, as her sons have acknowledged in frank interviews, psychologically.

Whether or not you believe that William and Catherine would ever, like Cambridge Macbeths, mount a palace coup, Oliver Chris and Charlotte Riley are completely convincing in suggesting how such a conflict of loyalties would play out within the family.

King Charles III, on TV, is two different things: an outrage for those who believe the monarchy should always be reverenced, especially by the BBC, but also a drama with the highest quality of acting, writing and filming. Strangely, those versions sometimes co-exist: a paper whose front page railed against the BBC for questioning Prince Harry’s DNA gave the play a five-star preview on its TV pages on the same day.

Sourced: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/may/10/king-charles-iii-stop-frothing-royalists-boldest-bbc-show-of-year#img-3

FURTHER READING:

cropped-stats-booming.jpg

 

Advertisements

Suffer the Hampstead kids – A Special Report by Matt Taylor

We’ve always been taught to tell the truth; never lie and never fib.

hampstead kids

Crazy really because on one hand we are teaching our kids between right and wrong, telling them not to lie and tell tales, while on the other hand every Christmas we blatantly lie to them that Santa is real.

Lies, lies- all damns lies.

Most kids understand the difference between right and wrong, truth and lies, by the time they start primary school.

We drum it into our kids to tell the truth. Honesty is the best policy, that’s there’s nothing to be scared of if you tell the truth.

From Santa to Satan.

During 2013, an extraordinary video was posted on Youtube, in which two young children, a boy and a girl aged between 9-10 years old, recounted a story so horrific and disturbing that they were promptly labelled ‘liars’ and accused of being ‘coached’ by their mother and their mother’s boyfriend, to enact revenge against Ricky Dearman.

We teach our kids to tell the truth but when they do, we call them liars.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GFkBfGaqLv4

According to their testimony, an established satanic paedophile ring is operating out of Hampstead Christ Church and the adjacent primary school, in which many prominent people in the community are involved in the whole-scale murder, sacrifice and rape of young children and babies.

Their testimony is truly heinous and upsetting. How anyone, let alone two young kids could create such an elaborate story from scratch is beyond me. The authorities want us to believe that between the two kids, their mother Ella Draper and their mother’s boyfriend Abraham Christie; a fantastic story was scripted to ensure custody of the kids, from actor Ricky Dearman.

From being sodomized by their father, priests and school teachers, to drinking blood, cutting off babies heads, cannibalism and satanic sacrifice; the children tell a story so cruel and terrifying that its understandable that anyone who hears it should immediately disbelieve it.

Only by disbelieving it can you make sense of the world and carry on as before. No one wants to acknowledge a satanic paedophile ring operating from a leafy and well to do suburb of London.

Court judge Mrs Justice Pauffley, found the children had been “tortured” into making the claims by their own mother, Ella Draper, and partner, Abraham Christie, being punched, kicked and doused with water while semi-clothed.

She said, “The claims are baseless. Those who have sought to perpetuate them are evil and/or foolish.”

Instead of protecting the children and the other victims of the satanic cult, the judge aided and abetted the perpetrators saying, “many of those individuals are now living in fear because they have been identified on the internet as abusers of children and their contact details including telephone numbers, home and email addresses have been published. Lives have been disrupted. Several of those implicated have received malicious, intimidating phone calls and emails at all hours of the day and night from all over the world.”

Without any conclusive police investigation, the Hampstead kid’s testimony was discarded as lies from the very outset.

Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, satanic ritual abuse and sacrifice is a daily occurrence across the world. The whistle-blowers and victims have told us their stories and their stories validate the story of the Hampstead kids.

Imagine a time traveler 20 years ago travelling to the future and coming back with tales that Jimmy Savile, the nation’s favourite and best loved children’s entertainer, was in fact the UK’s most prolific and evil serial paedophile?

People would laugh him off as a fool, but its true…

We know Jimmy Savile was part of a satanic ring in which he once beat and raped a 12-year-old girl during a secret satanic ritual at the Stoke Mandeville Hospital in Buckinghamshire.

Described as the Britain’s worst sex offender, evil Jimmy Savile was said to have worn a hooded robe and mask as he abused the terrified victim in a candle-lit basement chanting ‘Hail Satan’ in Latin, as other paedophile devil worshippers joined in and assaulted the girl.

Abandoned by the judiciary, police and the Alternative Media, the Hampstead kids were labeled ‘liars’, so that decent God fearing folk, didn’t have to deal with the extreme evil residing behind closed doors and down deep dark basements.

Even the Queen and members of the Windsor royal family have been accused of being satanic cult members of the Ninth Circle. Isn’t it any wonder that the Hampstead kid’s testimony has been swept under the carpet so quickly?

The British government under the leadership of the then Home Secretary Theresa May, proved to be incompetent at orchestrating a Royal Inquiry into historical child abuse within the British Establishment.

Losing one Chairwoman was bad enough, losing two was worrying, losing three was criminal and losing four is clearly a cover-up.

I find it crazy that anyone would believe what Mrs Justice Pauffley would say. After-all she is nothing but another clog in the Establishment machination.

Jimmy Savile spent Christmas with Margaret Thatcher and was a very close friend to the Royal Family. It doesn’t take a genius to put two and two together and paint a picture which isn’t being reported on the Ten O’Clock News.

We have all failed the Hampstead kids by not believing them and not acting on what they said. We drill it into our kids not to lie and to tell the truth. Then when kids do they the truth, we bash them up and call them liars.

We live in dark times. War, poverty and child-abuse are epidemic across the world. War and destruction is not a natural consequence of man living with man. War and destruction is directly influenced by the players who rule the world. The world is plagued by war, destruction, poverty and child-abuse because its intended to be.

We are all facing Judgment Day and our judgment’s will be scrutinized by a greater power. We will all have to explain ourselves. We must all justify our actions. May God help us all and may God protect the children.

 

stats-booming

King Arthur is Alive and Kicking.

king-arthurII-wildflower-graphics

One day King Arthur will return in our nation’s darkest hour, or so the prophecy says.

The legend of King Arthur has endured for centuries and rightly so. The reason the King Arthur legend has endured is because it’s actually true.

Unlike the fables of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Abominable Snowman, the true story of King Arthur can be found written in the annuals of the Ancient Khumry manuscripts, better known as the ancient historical manuscripts of British history.

Rediscovered by the historical detectives Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, there have actually been five King Arthur’s throughout British history, of which the first two were the most famous.

King Arthur I, who lived from 355AD to 388AD fought the Romans, son of Magnus Maximus, who himself was son of Constantine the Great. The second King Arthur was born in 503AD and died in 579AD, famed for fighting the Saxons, son of King Maurice, who himself was the son of King Theoderic.

Separating fact from fiction, no sword was ever pulled from a stone and Merlin wasn’t a wizard, but instead King Arthur II’s mentor and teacher. Both King Arthur I and II were directly related to each other, both in a long line of Kings reaching back to the first King of Britain, King Brutus and further back to the Holy Family, descended from Anne, sister of Mary, mother of Jesus Christ himself.

Written in the Coelbren language of the ancient British, (Welsh to be exact,) Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett contend that ancient British history is the most well recorded and chronicled history in the world.

It would appear that throughout history the tales and deeds of both King Arthurs, first recounted by 12th historian Geoffrey of Monmouth, had been rolled into one.

Boycott Guy Ritchie’s King Arthur Films.

A growing movement of historical enthusiasts are calling for the boycotting of Guy Ritchie’s new King Arthur movie set for release in 2017, criticizing it for being based on the romantic rubbish of 15th Century French writer Chretien de Troyes, and peddled on behalf of a German royal dynasty.

A growing band of patriotic Brits are claiming the real British history has been covered up since 1066, by a succession of foreign royal dynasties.

Richard Branson ‘Vooms’ to the rescue.

Just as there were two versions of the Robin Hood movies released at the same time, the ‘Boycott Guy Ritchie’s King Arthur Movie’s community’ have turned to Richard Branson’s £1 Billion ‘Voom’ initiative to finance a new King Arthur II movie to rival Guy Ritchie’s. With a budget of two million, movie producers hope to convince Richard Branson to invest his money in three blockbuster movies which tell the real story of King Arthur II, and what really happened during the Dark Ages.

From King Arthur II’s birth in Wales, to his epic battles against the Picts and Saxons, which unified Britain, to his Summer Games, to the catastrophic asteroid debris which hit Britain in 562AD, to King Arthur II’s escape to America in 575AD which a fleet of 700 ships, to his tragic assassination by a Red Indian in 579AD, its sure to be a fantastic trio of films which will rewrite history forever.

6836b-boycott-guy-ritchie-king-arthur-films87243-king2barthur33004-arthur-the-real-kingiron-bearguerrilla-democracy-view