Sandringham Christmas 2018 thread for the BRF

Started by TLLK, December 21, 2017, 04:19:32 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

wannable

But the Queen did use the paparazzi  picture of H&M at the sunken garden (there were more than 30 photographers there) rather than any of the formal picture portraits, it's telling when the Queen has used past formal pictures of her children and their spouses, grand children and their spouses in past Christmas speeches.

The DM was able to get a wider picture of the setting...

Curryong

#26
She and Charles have used informal shots of their relatives as well, in interviews etc. What is your contention then? That the Queen absolutely adores William and Kate, cannot see anything wrong with them and she dislikes Harry and can't stand Meghan? All on the evidence of one photograp placement!   :hehe:

royalanthropologist

I would point out that Meghan has actually worked before so she is perfectly entitled to wear nice things if she buying them. Of course if she was on the civil list, people would be well within their rights to inquire about costs. But on this occasion, she is not yet past that.

As for the "firsts" I really think the queen is either fond of Harry  and wants to indulge him or quite sensitive about the risk of causing offense to Meghan because of her race. Hence, all the accommodations. It might also be the BRF realizing that when someone marries into the institution, you do your best to make them feel welcome. One of the happy quirks of the British monarchy is that it is able to adopt at a very fast pace depending on the situation.

Indeed with the exception of the royal house of Denmark, the BRF will be the only one that has a fully acknowledged member of mixed heritage. That just shows how clever the Windsors are about adapting to the world as it is. Some of the criticism of "Phillip the racist dinosaur" will now seem a tad ridiculous.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

wannable

That the Queen preferred the picture of their announcement at the sunken garden rather than the cheesy and OTT formal pictures. That is telling when one compares what the Queen uses in the settings (portrait displaying) of past Christmas speeches.

Curryong

Well, we will see next year if the Queen has a wedding photo of Meghan and Harry on one of her tables in 2018, won't we. That is if, in your opinion of course, the bride's dress in not too expensive, the poses are not too OTT and the photographer meets with your approval!

royalanthropologist

Ha ha. I think that is the definition of a "tough crowd". Meghan has her work cut out :hehe:
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

wannable

@Curryong we shall see, but the Queen did use W&K formal picture portrait standing side by side taken by Testino at 2012 Christmas speech and not the announcement picture with her Issa blue dress taken by the photographers gathered there.

This one https://i.huffpost.com/gen/1570345/thumbs/o-PORTRAIT-570.jpg?1

The Queen preferred the sunken garden picture as that is the one that was used in the wider setting.

Curryong

Well, as I've said, you obviously think that the Queen thoroughly approves of everything the Cambridges do and nothing that Harry and Meghan do, so we shall see, in 2018, subject to your approval, of course, whether their wedding portraits get a pass!  :lol:

wannable

Each to its own, my opinion is the Queen preferred the paparazzi pictures of H&M versus the formal ones.  :shrug:

Why did she not use any of the formal pictures?

Curryong

The Queen doesn't personally go around dressing these rooms for her Xmas message and so forth. You think the POW or Camilla race around with handfuls of photos in silver frames prior to him doing an interview at Highgrove or CH? Ask whatever assistant did the placing of the photos if you want an answer to that one. It may be as simple as a photo quickly grabbed from a private sittingroom.

wannable

But history buffs have said and reported the Queen inspects all formal settings she is involved in. I see no difference of her inspecting the setting of her annual Christmas speech, which will be and is matter of factly viewed by millions.

Each year the Queen's setting is different, just an observation that the paparazzi picture of the couple was used rather than any of the formal pictures. It might not mean anything to you, and it may very well be a telling detail to others.

Curryong

#36
Oh, goodness! Talk about determined to have the last word in a debate.

Very well. As you obviously believe that the Queen feels that Meghan is a disgusting Hollywood type that she can't stand, and her grandson Harry is a disgrace beyond words who ought to be exiled for even wanting to marry such a ***, she decided to show them both exactly what she thought of them and that photo was the showpiece. (It was going to have a red light shone on it during the message to underscore her thoughts, but the bulb exploded at the idea of being near such a vulgar, vulgar couple!)

wannable

 :thumbsdown: that is your opinion on Meghan not mine.

My opinion is the paparazzi pictures look more natural and the couple look better combined than the formal pictures, which other than the choice of clothing, the setting looks quite like for an advertisement.

Curryong

#38
Everything we post on here is just an opinion, including yours. And I would put money on my opinion (and those of members of the royal family) of Meghan and Harry being higher than yours.

Kritter

The Queen did not use the engagement photo because the Queen's speech was taped weeks ago & the engagement photo had not yet been taken. How could she produce a photo that was not in existence?    :loco:

Kate sure is trying to get some recognition for her lazy self by hanging close to Meghan. To bad for Kate but Meghan beat her in the royal style contest today.

Who needs 250,000 pounds worth of clothing when they spend most of the year in hiding?    :monkey2:

TLLK

Some in the press are dubbing the Cambridges, Harry and Meghan as the new "Fab Four."

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DR7HQX2WsAE_8ni.jpg:large :xmas15:


MissFrouFrou

Quote from: TLLK on December 26, 2017, 04:49:06 AM
Some in the press are dubbing the Cambridges, Harry and Meghan as the new "Fab Four."

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DR7HQX2WsAE_8ni.jpg:large :xmas15:

That will not go down well with the general public who don't care for the monarchy. Frankly, to compare royals who have not earned their own way in life [except Meghan, who is only getting all this praise because of her future husband] with the musical genius and standing of the Beatles does not accord with reality. The Beatles are generally regarded as the most significant pop band in the history of modern music.

Curryong

That title sounds like the sort of cheesiness beloved by the media. 'Fab', really!  :lol: However, I doubt whether people would take it seriously. As for the Beatles, it's been nearly fifty years since that  band last played together. There are a couple of generations that can't remember them at all.

MissFrouFrou

#44
Correct, those who support the Beatles would not take this comparison with the royals seriously. However, I don't agree that the Beatles have faded into oblivion. Paul McCartney, one half of arguably the world's greatest songwriting duo, is treated now as one of the biggest musical and popular icons of all time. He's constantly touring, but his solo work is not as revered. I'm not sure how you can dismiss that. His funeral will rival the Queen's. And I'm not particularly a fan.

Double post auto-merged: December 26, 2017, 10:15:23 AM


Quote from: royalanthropologist on December 25, 2017, 07:23:57 PM
I would point out that Meghan has actually worked before so she is perfectly entitled to wear nice things if she buying them. Of course if she was on the civil list, people would be well within their rights to inquire about costs. But on this occasion, she is not yet past that.
...

Apparently, KP did not confirm who bought the dress. That is why the perception is negative. It's interesting that this issue has been turned on its head, not necessarily by you. When Kate was just plain Kate Middleton, there was criticism that she didn't work and the only thing that mattered was what happened when she married William. Now, the fact that Meghan worked prior to engagement is used as a positive. It surely matters as to how Meghan is perceived now as Harry's fianc?. And this $100k dress is a shocker. As of now, she is subsidised heavily by taxpayers, including free housing at KP. Hopefully she has learned from this mistake.


amabel

Quote from: wannable on December 25, 2017, 08:13:20 PM
But history buffs have said and reported the Queen inspects all formal settings she is involved in. I see no difference of her inspecting the setting of her annual Christmas speech, which will be and is matter of factly viewed by millions.

True, I am sure that she ensures that the setting for her broadcast has the varous items that she wants in it, to convey the message that she wants to convey on that occasion. Of course she does not put the stuff out herself but she will certainly be the one controlling what is set out.

sandy

Quote from: wannable on December 25, 2017, 06:57:58 PM
That's one year, Meghan isn't married yet and wears a GBP 56K dress no matter if it was loaned or paid for by her, a friend, Harry, whomever, the point is the image is already damaged forever, as its part of history, equated to Harry and Meghan's Formal Engagement Portrait. Season dress of yesteryear, still Rebecca English confirmed her team directly consulted the cost with R&R, that is why the price was and is a scandal.

And also, Kate's 1 year budget should be pricier than Meghan's because of rank, position, who she will be in the British monarchy POW, Queen Consort,mQueen Mother. I do think most expressions of comments in sections of the British press in reference to Meghan's choice of the said black dress was very bad and negative. Time will give her opportunity for damage control,mdepsite the annals of history with that portrait.

Matter of fact, the Queen decidedly did not use that picture in the Christmas speech, nor the informal closed eyes ones, she used a paparazzi picture of their announcement in the sunken gardens. It is telling us a story of disagreement with the OTT black evening cocktail dress with Harry's office charity daytime blue suit, or the too sensual informal picture.

WHy is it a problem if the dress was loaned to her?

Kritter

^ Since she hasn't married in yet I think the focus should be on what Kate spends. I bet Kate had something to do with the press going on & on about the cost.   :ninja:

Plus Kate's fans have been working overtime trying to destroy Meghan's reputation trying to overcompensate for Kate's reputation being lazy & boring.     :mad7:

wannable

#48
Quote from: sandy on December 26, 2017, 12:23:40 PM
WHy is it a problem if the dress was loaned to her?

I don't have a problem, and I clearly stated that no matter if purchased or loaned, it's the PR image that is damaged. No Royal engagement portrait has been OTT (clothing wise and posing wise) as Ms. Markle and Harry. Since cameras were invented, do check, no Engagement portrait is so cheesy and Hollywood Commercial advertisement eschew, cringe. Will the couple cringe later in their lifetime? I think they will rock the boat too much causing problems.

I highly doubt any of their official formal portraits will ever be used for a setting of HM, the future King Charles, or William. The pictures are simply too sexually charged, the sheer number fill in the blank, the couple will very likely place the pictures in their night table, family living room.

If any of the pictures are ever used in a setting by the Monarch, I will be the first to say I was wrong.



amabel

Quote from: wannable on December 26, 2017, 02:15:03 PM
I
I highly doubt any of their official formal portraits will ever be used for a setting of HM, the future King Charles, or William. The pictures are simply too sexually charged, the sheer number fill in the blank, the couple will very likely place the pictures in their night table, family living room.

If any of the pictures are ever used in a setting by the Monarch, I will be the first to say I was wrong.



Is this the pic with Meghan leaning against Harry, with her eyes closed? I found ti a bit fakey and posed but then I suppose she's an actress...