The Crown has received praise from both reviewers and viewers for the past five seasons. However, the series’ depictions of the monarchy and dramatization of specific plotlines have drawn criticism as the royal drama’s portrayal of historical events has gotten closer to viewers’ recent lived memories.
After the British actress Dame Judi Dencht criticized The Crown for “seeming to blur the lines between historical accuracy and crude sensationalism,” Netflix added a disclaimer to the season five trailer description on its YouTube channel last year, referring to the show as a “fictional dramatization.” Annie Sulzberger, the head of research for the show, says the clarification is needless.
The Crown researcher slams inaccuracy critiques
Talking to The Hollywood Reporter, Annie emphasised that the makers never pitched The Crown as a documentary for them to clarify it. She said, “I simply think that the audience is smarter than that. We’ve never pitched ourselves as a documentary. We’re trying to show this country, these institutions, these people in a way that humanizes them and that gives us a little insight into our own culture. I don’t think it’s been misleading in the slightest.”
Still from The Crown Season 6 | Image: NetflixSeason 6 criticised for distorting historical facts
The debate around The Crown distorting historical facts once again came into the limelight after the release of Season 6 Part 1. Michael Cole, the former spokesperson for Al-Fayed, went on record to deny his ex-boss’ involvement in Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed’s fateful romance. In the show, his character was portrayed as a matchmaker between his son and Diana.
Dodi Fayed and Princess Diana in The Crown | Image: NetflixSpeaking to Deadline, he revealed that he never once witnessed or had any knowledge of Al-Fayed engineering the relationship, or playing a role in making the tryst known to the entire world by commissioning photos of the couple.
“Netflix and the production company describe The Crown as ‘dramatised fiction’ and I am not going to disagree with that characterisation. That means it is made up,” he said.
