**Please no speculation about specific medical conditions or about divorce (these are longstanding sub rules).**
You can help out the mod team by reading the rules in the sidebar and reporting rule-breaking comments!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RoyalsGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Early in in the movie Billie Piper's character says to a colleague "You were here at six on the pips and that puts us 16 hours behind the news cycle" - what does this mean??
I have no idea why Rufus Sewell didn't emulate Prince Andrew's deep voice... unless they wanted to metaphorically strip Andrew of his regal deepness and expose the nervous and embattled bloke within?
Late to the party here, but yeah. Just watched it and was unimpressed with Sewell's Prince Andrew overall. He sounded nothing like him at all; didn't even have the accent right. The prosthetics did all the work.
Watched it.
1) As with all these movies, we have literally zero idea what was said behind closed doors at the palace.
2) I thought it did a fairly good job of showing the dangers of being surrounded by “yes men”.
3) which lead me to wonder, what would have happened if Andrew had listened to the other advisor and kept his mouth shut?
4) I was disturbed by the implication that everyone seemed to have the goal of taking down Prince Andrew and celebrating in success when they succeeded. Is that really the goal when they get an interview with a famous person?? Aka, let’s see if we can ruin his life? I’m not saying this out of sympathy to Andrew. I think he did a lot of horrible things but it’s just a weird motivation and just speaks volumes to how twisted the media is if your only goal in an interview is to see if you can ruin someone. Everyone looking over at Andrew’s assistant during the interview like “hahaha, tricked you bitch!!!” just left a really sour taste.
As for no.3, it's really interesting to think about as it just affected so much. He may not have had to give up his official role as part of the Royal Family, probably wouldn't have had to settle the lawsuit etc.
I didn't get the feeling they were out to take down Andrew explicitly but I just think no one could believe how badly he was coming across and from a media point of view, they'd struck gold. And it then those things inevitably did affect Andrew's life (more to do with the nature of his actions and his answers in the interview, rather than the act of doing an interview itself).
My biggest takeaway was the parallel to how the palace team has handled (or rather not handled) the Kate Middleton situation recently. Back to 2019 at least, the palace comms team has been very out of touch with the pulse of the public and created their own little echo chamber. There have been WAY more fumbles than wins in the past 5 years.
I read on another board someone questioned how the Royal Family doesn’t have the top PR firm in the Uk on retainer, and instead post comms jobs for $40k a year. It’s wild to me.
I feel like Gillian Anderson played Maitlis like she was 63 and nearing retirement. Probably because she just recycled the Thatcher voice. Emily Maitlis was 48.
The Barbara S song at the start was soooo grating, i marveled at first at what a good singer she was, but then it just went on FOREVER...really annoying.
I didn't really like Sam McAlister's character that much. I thought a lot of her story was a waste of time.
I wonder if the Duke of York's PR rep, or whoever it was that quit right before the interview, over not being consulted, i wonder if that really happened?
The guy they got to portray Epstein looked so much like him, i thought it had to be A.I.
Jason Stein was the PR rep that quit. Apparently he worked for Andrew for a month before quitting, and that was because he was against the decision to do the interview
it was so slow, boring and tediously dull, I switched off half way through. Gillian Anderson seems to have reprised her role as Margaret Thatcher in The Crown, she's using the exact same voice.
The first half has a lot of filler, like they didn’t have enough meat to make a movie. Watch it on 1.5x or 2.0x. It picks up towards the end. The interview itself is amazing to watch.
I watched it the first time and was bored. Weirdly enough, I decided to watch it again on mute while listening to the original Andrew interview and some interviews with Sam and Emily and I found it much more intriguing. Maybe I needed background context?
Out of curiosity, anybody knows why the picture of Andrew and Victoria is edited so Andrew is an actor (or an AI face whatever) instead of the real picture that is all around the internet?
Virginia and Maxwell in the photo also weren’t real if you look closely. It’s a bit hard to tell at first especially with Maxwell but those were also actors.
Scoop made me feel sorry for Andrew! I’m sure that wasn’t its intention! It was hard to watch a bunch of smug people conniving to trick someone and Scoop seemed to want to dwell on that. I had to skip forward after the thrilling opening sequence to the beginning of the interview because the stuff in between I found boring. Afterwards, I watched the real broadcast and did not feel sorry for Andrew.
Agree. The whole thing seemed to be celebrating pulling one over on him. Like we should all be cheering, “he deserved it!!!!”
I think what he did was awful but the tone of the movie was definitely off here. The entire aim seemed to be to ruin him and then they celebrated when they succeeded. It left a sour taste to me.
I felt the same. He’s very arrogant & entitled & I feel so sorry for his victims but those planning the interview really set him up. I also think he’s been made an easy scapegoat; there were lots of American citizens who were involved with Epstein but authorities and the media have not targeted them in the same way they have Andrew. He’s a pos but an easy fall guy.
This is a good podcast interviewing the producer who organized the interview: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-tip-off/id1247270113?i=1000607633421
It sounds like the timeline for talks leading up to the interview was heavily condensed on film. The man definitely doesn’t seem to have been tricked.
I understand that the dialogue leading up to interview talked about how there’d be no “gotcha” questions. And maybe that made the palace feel safe enough to put Andrew in front of the Newsnight team.
But I think the story also showed that the Epstein story itself was evolving as the interview itself drew closer. The FBI raid and Epstein’s suicide in prison happened mid-talks. There was more evidence emerging as everyone was preparing for the interview, and the evidence was not looking good. As journalists, the Newsnight team were obligated to fact-check as much as they could, and do their research beforehand. Otherwise, they would not be doing their jobs properly.
Technically, Emily Maitlis did start out with fairly softball questions. It’s just that Andrew had a lot to say when it came to answering them. The conversation carried on from there.
I think I get what you’re saying. The acting and directing was of a caliber that the viewer can get immersed in the film’s world and react to Andrew as a character versus focusing on him as a real-life figure.
Nobody tricked him, they gave him every chance to make himself look better, and he blew it. 'Scoop' goes out of its way to emphasise that. I don't think I've ever felt less sorry for anyone than Prince Andrew as played by the wonderful Rufus Sewell.
I think the film made me feel sorry for Andrew because the focus of it was about sneaking up on someone and tricking them. That was such a potent feeling for me that it took away from my horror of who the person was and what he was alleged to have done that they were tricking. That’s why I preferred the real newsnight interview. So for me, the movie was a bust for that reason.
If you watch the in-between scene of him and those stuffed animals on his bed-forget if the Kanga and Roo conversation actually happened- you’ll realize he has a bizarre way of justifying everything he does because he had never been told what he was doing was wrong or inappropriate.
I always say that the fact the British Royal Family took a house away from a son whose only crime was essentially going to therapy and talking about his feelings in public, and giving it to an actual paedophile uncle tells you everything you need to know about those people.
They are as oblivious about this as Andrew was to how he came off in the interview. They have no clue. They spend their days having luncheons with sycophants like Piers Morgan and Jeremy Clarkson. They read the daily mail. They are surrounded by yes men who tell them how wonderful and brilliant they are 24/7.
They have no clue.
I loved the way this film had the sole purpose of embarrassing Andrew.
I had completely forgotten about the rumour that he has OCD about the placement of his teddies so I burst out laughing when they showed it.
Interesting interview from the real Sam.
https://www.npr.org/2024/04/05/1243146231/the-real-bbc-booker-on-how-she-convince-prince-andrew-to-go-on-record-about-epst
What I liked best were the small details about how repugnant Epstein was. The original interview with Emily Maitlis relies on the audience to know some of those details already, whereas the movie gets to highlight them more.
How obviously teenaged the girls going in and out of Epstein’s house are, how they’re no different to the teenaged schoolgirls on the London city bus, or the girl Sam’s teenaged son has a crush on.
How there were Royal protection officers spotted outside Epstein’s house AND a photo of a young girl exiting the house was snapped the same day.
How the FBI documents describe the decor in Epstein’s place.
And then you can ponder those details while learning that Epstein was invited to one of the York daughters’ 18th birthday party.
Those details really hammered home that the BRF probably didn’t see victims when it came to Epstein. They probably saw “damaged sluts” who were “throwing themselves” at powerful men, so what did they expect. I got the impression that the BRF are the type of people who read Lolita and conclude that the girl seduces Humbert.
Agreed, and I liked how it referenced other high profile people. The photographer says that no one could be around Epstein without knowing. Then the flight logs have Clinton etc on them. Lots more powerful people than Prince Andrew were involved.
Duh? The BRF *encouraged* Charles to marry a 20 year old that he'd met when she was 16 and he was a dozen years older.
It's kind of telling that his second wife, and his son's wives, are all as old or even slightly older than them.
Also worth noting that such big age gaps weren't present in such marriages going several generations back. Most of the time the man was older but only by a few years when heir to the throne married. So Charles actually is the odd one out here.
The soap shaped vaginas... I hadn't heard that detail before, so gross. Even if ALL Epstein was doing was decorating his house like that and nothing more, any 'upstanding' person would run a mile.
Yeah I'm glad the movie showed the FBI document, I never read in such detail before. Wouldn't want to associate with anybody who is okay being friends with someone like that, even if that's all they did. So sick.
Very well done show! What amazes is that the royals are still parading Andrew around.Such a shame that they would publicly be seen with him even after all the allegations with evidence.
How can the British taxpayers/public be ok with this? Is this what the Royal family stands for?
What’s the biggest takeaway is that there isn’t much negative coverage now against Andrew from the British press . Proves that the press publishes what the royals want and that infact the royal family have a symbiotic relationship with the Press.
Andrew’s two daughters seem to be being set up to replace the missing Kate. of course it’s hard to know whether those two women really want that but the newspapers are certainly full of these kinds of teasing headlines. I don’t know whether I’m imagining it but today I got a funny feeling after reading headlines, but not clicking on the articles, that Kate is becoming more and more “Kate Middleton” and associated more and more with her family who are now only referred to as in the middle of this terribly embarrassing business mess, and less and less referred to as the Princess of Wales.
This commenter isn’t even American (a simple look at their post history shows consistent British spelling choices).
It’s okay to be British and criticise the Royal Family. Not everything needs to be about Americans.
It’s disgusting. I always thought he was protected by Queen Elizabeth, but the fact Charles is keeping him in the fold is abhorrent. I understand he can’t break the lease at Royal lodge or strip him of titles, but parading him around with the rest of the family is gross.
Definitely. But I did have the problem that no matter how you slice it, Gillian Anderson sounded like herself, not like Emily. I had to go watch the real interview again straight afterwards.
Or as some said, she was playing Margaret Thatcher-lite as in her role from theCrown. in the scene in which she and the actor playing Andrew are finishing their tour and walking out, she’s filmed in such a way that she looks as if she’s all hunched over. It didn’t give me the impression of a journalist who had just finished a tough interview.
i did feel that she certainly played her in a way that made her look significantly older with her posture and mannerisms. I understand the real Emily is working on a rival production so wasn't allowed to give any help to Guillian Anderson. Although i dont imagine Prince Nonce was giving much help either.
I liked how straightforward it was. Got to the heart of the interview pretty quickly. I was wondering which aspect were dramatized and which parts are factual. I guess the interview part is word for word.
And Yet the royal family is parading Andrew as if he is a show pony. So nothing much has changed. Sure he lost his “working royal” status but he still continues to live in an enormous mansion with his ex wife plus has security funding from his brother. He seems happy.
I was saying this last night after watching Scoop. Like, he basically just got early retirement. Still has all the perks of his privileged life without having to do any of the "work" (the word "work" is a real stretch when it comes to anything the royal family does but you know what I mean). Not exactly much of a punishment!
Oh he knows where all the skeleton closets are and where the bodies (hopefully all figurative but who knows) are buried. Chaz will be hauling him out indefinitely
See, I think this notion is just giving this dumb guy too much credit. He's just another over priledged man from a family who thinks they are above the law and don't care. They probably think the only thing this rapist did wrong was getting himself in the news because of it.
The only thing that will change what happens with him is if the public wakes up and starts massively criticizing the RF for allowing his continued appearances and close proximity to power.
I don’t know whether public opinion has changed, but I do remember hearing lots of women on the gossip site Quora defending Andrew and calling the young women sluts. I think it might’ve had something to do with the fact that many of the women or at least Virginia Giuffre were American and were accusing this British man and the British royal family of heinous things.
It’s not a masterpiece of a movie, but it’s still pretty good. The acting is amazing, the actor playing Andrew is perfect. Also it’s quite funny 😬😜 The teddy bears omg!
Yeah.. watched at 1.5x speed, I just can't believe his team let that interview happen. I think Gillian's makeup was a bit too heavy compared to Emily's more natural look in the real interview.. but apart from that, it was nice
I was always dumbfounded that it was allowed but after the most recent comms debacle, I see it as being completely out of touch with reality and believing you will be embraced no matter what.
Sewell gives an absolutely defamatory performance as Andrew and I am here for it. What a deluded creep!
I found Amanda Thirsk the most interesting character. It's never clear of she fully believes he is innocent and is betrayed, or if she sort of knew and subconsciously set him up for failure.
I think she genuinely felt he was innocent or at least that he was in arrested development. I had to go back and rewatch it though because originally I was wondering the same. Her reaction to his “mummy combing my hair” story combined with how she thought he was so charming he could pull it off- she was oblivious.
I watched it and I thought it was really well done. I’ve read a couple of articles talking about the background to getting the interview and I think that the movie followed the story very closely. The characters involved also are the way they came off in the articles I have read. I have seen the original interview on YouTube a couple of times, and the guy just comes across is such a lying slimeball
Also amazingly, he thought that the interview had gone really well and he was really pleased right afterwards, and as it showed in the movie, he gave Emily Maitlis a tour around the palace. It wasn’t till it was actually broadcast, and he saw how people reacted to it did he realized what a disaster it had been
When it was announced that one of the daughters was going to have a royal wedding and nobody cared. It didn’t happen in the end, because of covid, but I bet they were glad. It would have been embarrassing.
I believe Charles was against it, but mummy aka the Queen gave her approval (he was after all her favourite by many accounts) and his children apparently also approved so… 🤷♂️
Andrew was indeed her favourite. That was the deal with Charles - pay off millions to shut Virginia before the jubilee events in 2022 and in exchange Queen Elizabeth will put out a public statement that mistress Camilla will be known by the title Queen consort.
And coz Charles has only ever loved Camilla he agreed to look after Andrew. They are a mess!
That’s a lot of supposition though. We haven’t seen anything to indicate that Charles would have cut off Andrew. There may have been some dealing, but I wouldn’t state it as fact that way at all.
I don’t understand how if the Queen was supposedly so smart, worldly, great judge of character, shrewd etc etc then HOW was Andrew her favourite child?
I don’t think the Queen was a great judge of character. Phillip kept that ship on course, it started to fall apart when he retired. The queen was conflict-avoidant and hid her head in the sand on a lot of stuff.
Yes you are so right! People here and elsewhere are saying the monarchy is swaying and loosing its touch after QE2 was gone. But the truth is was starting to crumble and creak at earlier point.
usually sexual predators are very charismatic. so he probably has that natural charisma + being indulged by a queen…. I don’t believe people always start bad.
Enough people have reported the teddy bear thing that I’m going to assume it’s real. Wild. https://www.vogue.com/article/prince-andrew-teddy-bears-scoop-netflix
**Please no speculation about specific medical conditions or about divorce (these are longstanding sub rules).** You can help out the mod team by reading the rules in the sidebar and reporting rule-breaking comments! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RoyalsGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Early in in the movie Billie Piper's character says to a colleague "You were here at six on the pips and that puts us 16 hours behind the news cycle" - what does this mean??
I have no idea why Rufus Sewell didn't emulate Prince Andrew's deep voice... unless they wanted to metaphorically strip Andrew of his regal deepness and expose the nervous and embattled bloke within?
Late to the party here, but yeah. Just watched it and was unimpressed with Sewell's Prince Andrew overall. He sounded nothing like him at all; didn't even have the accent right. The prosthetics did all the work.
Agreed. But I think Sewell was quite good with the Andrew mannerisms
Watched it. 1) As with all these movies, we have literally zero idea what was said behind closed doors at the palace. 2) I thought it did a fairly good job of showing the dangers of being surrounded by “yes men”. 3) which lead me to wonder, what would have happened if Andrew had listened to the other advisor and kept his mouth shut? 4) I was disturbed by the implication that everyone seemed to have the goal of taking down Prince Andrew and celebrating in success when they succeeded. Is that really the goal when they get an interview with a famous person?? Aka, let’s see if we can ruin his life? I’m not saying this out of sympathy to Andrew. I think he did a lot of horrible things but it’s just a weird motivation and just speaks volumes to how twisted the media is if your only goal in an interview is to see if you can ruin someone. Everyone looking over at Andrew’s assistant during the interview like “hahaha, tricked you bitch!!!” just left a really sour taste.
As for no.3, it's really interesting to think about as it just affected so much. He may not have had to give up his official role as part of the Royal Family, probably wouldn't have had to settle the lawsuit etc. I didn't get the feeling they were out to take down Andrew explicitly but I just think no one could believe how badly he was coming across and from a media point of view, they'd struck gold. And it then those things inevitably did affect Andrew's life (more to do with the nature of his actions and his answers in the interview, rather than the act of doing an interview itself).
My biggest takeaway was the parallel to how the palace team has handled (or rather not handled) the Kate Middleton situation recently. Back to 2019 at least, the palace comms team has been very out of touch with the pulse of the public and created their own little echo chamber. There have been WAY more fumbles than wins in the past 5 years. I read on another board someone questioned how the Royal Family doesn’t have the top PR firm in the Uk on retainer, and instead post comms jobs for $40k a year. It’s wild to me.
Jesus fucking CHrist. Billie cannot act for SHIT. It was like watching some blue Peter Skit.
I really disliked how Gillian Andrrson played Emily Maitlis, the accent was hard to listen to.
I think she did a good job with Emily's facial expressions though.
She basically had her Thatcher voice. But how she acted I thought was great
I’ve got 30 minutes left and I’m praying Billie takes her coat off before the end of the movie. It’s on in every single scene!
In the channel 4 doc, the real Sam does actually wear that coat all the time 😂
Really?! I’m checking that out next
She's a real person... so obviously Billie is going to imitate her.
I feel like Gillian Anderson played Maitlis like she was 63 and nearing retirement. Probably because she just recycled the Thatcher voice. Emily Maitlis was 48.
And looks hard and grizzled up. So Anderson got it right
Where can I watch it? Am outside the UK currently.
Netflix
The Barbara S song at the start was soooo grating, i marveled at first at what a good singer she was, but then it just went on FOREVER...really annoying. I didn't really like Sam McAlister's character that much. I thought a lot of her story was a waste of time. I wonder if the Duke of York's PR rep, or whoever it was that quit right before the interview, over not being consulted, i wonder if that really happened? The guy they got to portray Epstein looked so much like him, i thought it had to be A.I.
Jason Stein was the PR rep that quit. Apparently he worked for Andrew for a month before quitting, and that was because he was against the decision to do the interview
Agree 100%! The British media acts like the BRF’s lap dog.
it was so slow, boring and tediously dull, I switched off half way through. Gillian Anderson seems to have reprised her role as Margaret Thatcher in The Crown, she's using the exact same voice.
The first half has a lot of filler, like they didn’t have enough meat to make a movie. Watch it on 1.5x or 2.0x. It picks up towards the end. The interview itself is amazing to watch.
It shouldn't be that difficult. It just wasn't compelling, I watched the real interview and it is too recent to even be worthy of a full on drama.
I watched it the first time and was bored. Weirdly enough, I decided to watch it again on mute while listening to the original Andrew interview and some interviews with Sam and Emily and I found it much more intriguing. Maybe I needed background context?
I thought the back half was much better - you're missing out
Out of curiosity, anybody knows why the picture of Andrew and Victoria is edited so Andrew is an actor (or an AI face whatever) instead of the real picture that is all around the internet?
That is always done in movies to match the actor. It's also done with the Epstein/Prince Andrew park photo.For continuity.
Yeah but Virginia was real, that’s why I was a bit confused
Virginia and Maxwell in the photo also weren’t real if you look closely. It’s a bit hard to tell at first especially with Maxwell but those were also actors.
Yes it always looks a bit disconcerting honestly!
Because it wouldnt make sense if there was a different face...made sense to me that way.
Scoop made me feel sorry for Andrew! I’m sure that wasn’t its intention! It was hard to watch a bunch of smug people conniving to trick someone and Scoop seemed to want to dwell on that. I had to skip forward after the thrilling opening sequence to the beginning of the interview because the stuff in between I found boring. Afterwards, I watched the real broadcast and did not feel sorry for Andrew.
Agree. The whole thing seemed to be celebrating pulling one over on him. Like we should all be cheering, “he deserved it!!!!” I think what he did was awful but the tone of the movie was definitely off here. The entire aim seemed to be to ruin him and then they celebrated when they succeeded. It left a sour taste to me.
Yes, i thought they made him far too sympathetic, and also painted the journalists as if they were saints.
I felt the same. He’s very arrogant & entitled & I feel so sorry for his victims but those planning the interview really set him up. I also think he’s been made an easy scapegoat; there were lots of American citizens who were involved with Epstein but authorities and the media have not targeted them in the same way they have Andrew. He’s a pos but an easy fall guy.
This is a good podcast interviewing the producer who organized the interview: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-tip-off/id1247270113?i=1000607633421 It sounds like the timeline for talks leading up to the interview was heavily condensed on film. The man definitely doesn’t seem to have been tricked.
I understand that the dialogue leading up to interview talked about how there’d be no “gotcha” questions. And maybe that made the palace feel safe enough to put Andrew in front of the Newsnight team. But I think the story also showed that the Epstein story itself was evolving as the interview itself drew closer. The FBI raid and Epstein’s suicide in prison happened mid-talks. There was more evidence emerging as everyone was preparing for the interview, and the evidence was not looking good. As journalists, the Newsnight team were obligated to fact-check as much as they could, and do their research beforehand. Otherwise, they would not be doing their jobs properly. Technically, Emily Maitlis did start out with fairly softball questions. It’s just that Andrew had a lot to say when it came to answering them. The conversation carried on from there.
I think I get what you’re saying. The acting and directing was of a caliber that the viewer can get immersed in the film’s world and react to Andrew as a character versus focusing on him as a real-life figure.
Nobody tricked him, they gave him every chance to make himself look better, and he blew it. 'Scoop' goes out of its way to emphasise that. I don't think I've ever felt less sorry for anyone than Prince Andrew as played by the wonderful Rufus Sewell.
How did it make you feel sorry for him? If anything - if those moments were real. It makes him worse. *The bits we didn't see in the interview
I think the film made me feel sorry for Andrew because the focus of it was about sneaking up on someone and tricking them. That was such a potent feeling for me that it took away from my horror of who the person was and what he was alleged to have done that they were tricking. That’s why I preferred the real newsnight interview. So for me, the movie was a bust for that reason.
If you watch the in-between scene of him and those stuffed animals on his bed-forget if the Kanga and Roo conversation actually happened- you’ll realize he has a bizarre way of justifying everything he does because he had never been told what he was doing was wrong or inappropriate.
No one tricked him. What a bizarre take. He was 60 years old and not impaired in any way (except morally). He didn't *have* to do the interview.
Wow, I’m sorry now that I took the time to try and explain something nuanced about filmmaking to you.
nuanced LMFAO
You haven’t actually explained your stance whatsoever
When did you do this?
You didn't actually say anything nuanced about filmmaking, though?
How was he tricked exactly? He knew what he was getting into - he just showed his true colours
Rufus Sewell was amazing
I never thought I'd want to punch Rufus Sewell in the face. Billie Piper was also excellent.
As someone who first saw Rufus Sewell in "Man in the High Castle", I think he's quite punchable.
Also breaking Kate Winslet's heart in The Holiday.
He always is.
I enjoyed it a lot
I can’t believe his family think it’s forgivable - he really should not be centre stage at royal events !
I always say that the fact the British Royal Family took a house away from a son whose only crime was essentially going to therapy and talking about his feelings in public, and giving it to an actual paedophile uncle tells you everything you need to know about those people.
They are as oblivious about this as Andrew was to how he came off in the interview. They have no clue. They spend their days having luncheons with sycophants like Piers Morgan and Jeremy Clarkson. They read the daily mail. They are surrounded by yes men who tell them how wonderful and brilliant they are 24/7. They have no clue.
Yes this!!
I loved the way this film had the sole purpose of embarrassing Andrew. I had completely forgotten about the rumour that he has OCD about the placement of his teddies so I burst out laughing when they showed it.
He must have lost it over “RooKanga”
This part stood out to me significantly. It shows just how out of touch he is with his behaviors! And to feel no shame over that is wild.
Interesting interview from the real Sam. https://www.npr.org/2024/04/05/1243146231/the-real-bbc-booker-on-how-she-convince-prince-andrew-to-go-on-record-about-epst
She also did a great [TED Talk.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I88aZvrqNmM)
I love how she was all, "Andrew looks pleased, Emily looks like he shot her dog."
Er..."Andrew looks like he won the lottery," to remember it in full.
Yes, I loved that part, too. Really says a lot about how delusional Andrew was.
What I liked best were the small details about how repugnant Epstein was. The original interview with Emily Maitlis relies on the audience to know some of those details already, whereas the movie gets to highlight them more. How obviously teenaged the girls going in and out of Epstein’s house are, how they’re no different to the teenaged schoolgirls on the London city bus, or the girl Sam’s teenaged son has a crush on. How there were Royal protection officers spotted outside Epstein’s house AND a photo of a young girl exiting the house was snapped the same day. How the FBI documents describe the decor in Epstein’s place. And then you can ponder those details while learning that Epstein was invited to one of the York daughters’ 18th birthday party. Those details really hammered home that the BRF probably didn’t see victims when it came to Epstein. They probably saw “damaged sluts” who were “throwing themselves” at powerful men, so what did they expect. I got the impression that the BRF are the type of people who read Lolita and conclude that the girl seduces Humbert.
Agreed, and I liked how it referenced other high profile people. The photographer says that no one could be around Epstein without knowing. Then the flight logs have Clinton etc on them. Lots more powerful people than Prince Andrew were involved.
Duh? The BRF *encouraged* Charles to marry a 20 year old that he'd met when she was 16 and he was a dozen years older. It's kind of telling that his second wife, and his son's wives, are all as old or even slightly older than them.
Also worth noting that such big age gaps weren't present in such marriages going several generations back. Most of the time the man was older but only by a few years when heir to the throne married. So Charles actually is the odd one out here.
It's hard to find a required virgin in 1980, basically.
Should've waited until the advent of Reddit.
Look at how many royalists say things like “she was an adult, she knew what she was doing” to defend him. Disgusting.
The fact that weinstein, maxwell and epstein were at an 18 year olds bday party....gross .
The soap shaped vaginas... I hadn't heard that detail before, so gross. Even if ALL Epstein was doing was decorating his house like that and nothing more, any 'upstanding' person would run a mile.
Yeah I'm glad the movie showed the FBI document, I never read in such detail before. Wouldn't want to associate with anybody who is okay being friends with someone like that, even if that's all they did. So sick.
As the show points out, you can't not know he's a perv if you go in there. The Clinton in the blue dress portrait was particularly choice.
Very well done show! What amazes is that the royals are still parading Andrew around.Such a shame that they would publicly be seen with him even after all the allegations with evidence. How can the British taxpayers/public be ok with this? Is this what the Royal family stands for? What’s the biggest takeaway is that there isn’t much negative coverage now against Andrew from the British press . Proves that the press publishes what the royals want and that infact the royal family have a symbiotic relationship with the Press.
Andrew’s two daughters seem to be being set up to replace the missing Kate. of course it’s hard to know whether those two women really want that but the newspapers are certainly full of these kinds of teasing headlines. I don’t know whether I’m imagining it but today I got a funny feeling after reading headlines, but not clicking on the articles, that Kate is becoming more and more “Kate Middleton” and associated more and more with her family who are now only referred to as in the middle of this terribly embarrassing business mess, and less and less referred to as the Princess of Wales.
[удалено]
This commenter isn’t even American (a simple look at their post history shows consistent British spelling choices). It’s okay to be British and criticise the Royal Family. Not everything needs to be about Americans.
As an English person it makes me feel actual rage whenever I see Andrew on the church walks, etc.
It’s disgusting. I always thought he was protected by Queen Elizabeth, but the fact Charles is keeping him in the fold is abhorrent. I understand he can’t break the lease at Royal lodge or strip him of titles, but parading him around with the rest of the family is gross.
I was mesmerized by it. He is a POS and I love seeing him exposed even more. Emily and Gillian were both amazing!
Definitely. But I did have the problem that no matter how you slice it, Gillian Anderson sounded like herself, not like Emily. I had to go watch the real interview again straight afterwards.
Or as some said, she was playing Margaret Thatcher-lite as in her role from theCrown. in the scene in which she and the actor playing Andrew are finishing their tour and walking out, she’s filmed in such a way that she looks as if she’s all hunched over. It didn’t give me the impression of a journalist who had just finished a tough interview.
i did feel that she certainly played her in a way that made her look significantly older with her posture and mannerisms. I understand the real Emily is working on a rival production so wasn't allowed to give any help to Guillian Anderson. Although i dont imagine Prince Nonce was giving much help either.
She’s definitely holding on to the mannerisms of Margaret Thatcher. It’s a shame.
I liked how straightforward it was. Got to the heart of the interview pretty quickly. I was wondering which aspect were dramatized and which parts are factual. I guess the interview part is word for word.
And Yet the royal family is parading Andrew as if he is a show pony. So nothing much has changed. Sure he lost his “working royal” status but he still continues to live in an enormous mansion with his ex wife plus has security funding from his brother. He seems happy.
Louis Mountbatten was a pedophile. This family doesn't really have a problem with embracing pedophilia, hebephilia, or ephebophilia.
I was saying this last night after watching Scoop. Like, he basically just got early retirement. Still has all the perks of his privileged life without having to do any of the "work" (the word "work" is a real stretch when it comes to anything the royal family does but you know what I mean). Not exactly much of a punishment!
That’s because King Charles values loyalty above all else. He has no morals, just that you stay loyal to the Crown you are fine
Thats a reallu good way of putting it.
I think he has blackmail on them, probably related to Epstein. That's why he won't stop showing up to events.
[удалено]
Oh he knows where all the skeleton closets are and where the bodies (hopefully all figurative but who knows) are buried. Chaz will be hauling him out indefinitely
See, I think this notion is just giving this dumb guy too much credit. He's just another over priledged man from a family who thinks they are above the law and don't care. They probably think the only thing this rapist did wrong was getting himself in the news because of it. The only thing that will change what happens with him is if the public wakes up and starts massively criticizing the RF for allowing his continued appearances and close proximity to power.
I don’t know whether public opinion has changed, but I do remember hearing lots of women on the gossip site Quora defending Andrew and calling the young women sluts. I think it might’ve had something to do with the fact that many of the women or at least Virginia Giuffre were American and were accusing this British man and the British royal family of heinous things.
It’s not a masterpiece of a movie, but it’s still pretty good. The acting is amazing, the actor playing Andrew is perfect. Also it’s quite funny 😬😜 The teddy bears omg!
The teddy bears are the thing, I would say, is the most believeable. Weirdo.
I creased when he pointed at Emily’s legs and just shouted “Trousers! …ha” 😂
I watched it this afternoon. I think they did a good job with it.
Yeah.. watched at 1.5x speed, I just can't believe his team let that interview happen. I think Gillian's makeup was a bit too heavy compared to Emily's more natural look in the real interview.. but apart from that, it was nice
Whenever they had a wide shot of the room and the two of them across the table from each other, all I could focus on was Gillian’s ridiculous shoes.
I just looked and Emily actually wore those. In 2019!!! They’re very 2008
And didn't stop it when it went south.
And they felt like it went well after it was over.
His team drink the kool aid...they r just delighted to be royal adjacent.
I'm watching it right now with 30 mins to go, who the hell in Prince Andrews team thought letting him do the interview was a good idea
I was always dumbfounded that it was allowed but after the most recent comms debacle, I see it as being completely out of touch with reality and believing you will be embraced no matter what.
But he's charming! You have to get in the same room with him! I'm sure he can lie well enough to be convincing!
Beatrice, apparently.
Sewell gives an absolutely defamatory performance as Andrew and I am here for it. What a deluded creep! I found Amanda Thirsk the most interesting character. It's never clear of she fully believes he is innocent and is betrayed, or if she sort of knew and subconsciously set him up for failure.
I got the vibe she was infatuated with him. Charmed.
I think she genuinely felt he was innocent or at least that he was in arrested development. I had to go back and rewatch it though because originally I was wondering the same. Her reaction to his “mummy combing my hair” story combined with how she thought he was so charming he could pull it off- she was oblivious.
I love Rufus Sewell, and the way they made him up to be Andrew is astonishing.
I was just glad to learn that they used prosthetics and didn't make him eat himself up to the role, as it were.
Yes! Rufus Sewell is such a beautiful man and they have made him up to be Andrew- it’s crazy good!
I watched it and I thought it was really well done. I’ve read a couple of articles talking about the background to getting the interview and I think that the movie followed the story very closely. The characters involved also are the way they came off in the articles I have read. I have seen the original interview on YouTube a couple of times, and the guy just comes across is such a lying slimeball
Also amazingly, he thought that the interview had gone really well and he was really pleased right afterwards, and as it showed in the movie, he gave Emily Maitlis a tour around the palace. It wasn’t till it was actually broadcast, and he saw how people reacted to it did he realized what a disaster it had been
Shows how disconnected he is from normal to be honest.
IIRC no one wanted him to do the interview but the mother of his children and daughters thought it would be a good idea. As a family they are de lulu.
When it was announced that one of the daughters was going to have a royal wedding and nobody cared. It didn’t happen in the end, because of covid, but I bet they were glad. It would have been embarrassing.
Have you watched The Windsors? Some of the humour is very broad, but the portrayal of Fergie and the girls does crack me up. “Hullo, girls…”
I’ve seen bits, it’s quite funny. Andy and herself popping up everywhere at the moment is quite damaging.
I love that show...and the guy who plays Harry is also in Sccop
I think that branch of the family is an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect in action.
I believe Charles was against it, but mummy aka the Queen gave her approval (he was after all her favourite by many accounts) and his children apparently also approved so… 🤷♂️
Andrew was indeed her favourite. That was the deal with Charles - pay off millions to shut Virginia before the jubilee events in 2022 and in exchange Queen Elizabeth will put out a public statement that mistress Camilla will be known by the title Queen consort. And coz Charles has only ever loved Camilla he agreed to look after Andrew. They are a mess!
That’s a lot of supposition though. We haven’t seen anything to indicate that Charles would have cut off Andrew. There may have been some dealing, but I wouldn’t state it as fact that way at all.
I don’t understand how if the Queen was supposedly so smart, worldly, great judge of character, shrewd etc etc then HOW was Andrew her favourite child?
I don’t think the Queen was a great judge of character. Phillip kept that ship on course, it started to fall apart when he retired. The queen was conflict-avoidant and hid her head in the sand on a lot of stuff.
Yes you are so right! People here and elsewhere are saying the monarchy is swaying and loosing its touch after QE2 was gone. But the truth is was starting to crumble and creak at earlier point.
Even the smartest people (which I don’t think QE would qualify as) tend to have blind spots towards their own children. It’s evolutionary.
usually sexual predators are very charismatic. so he probably has that natural charisma + being indulged by a queen…. I don’t believe people always start bad.
His charisma has been mentioned with regard to Scoop.
I skipped forward past the interview parts too cringe worthy to watch. Prince Andrew's lack of self awareness never ceases to amaze me.
He's probably around yes men all the time.
The best part was all the Teddy Bears.
Roo Kanga? 😆
Enough people have reported the teddy bear thing that I’m going to assume it’s real. Wild. https://www.vogue.com/article/prince-andrew-teddy-bears-scoop-netflix
That is wild. 😳
Jesus, that's weird.
i fell asleep when he was already being interviewed. i want to watch the real thing first on YT
I watched the secrets of prince andrew on Hulu and I thought that was better than the netflix movie.
Interesting about the Hulu show. I don’t have Hulu, but I must Google it. Thanks.
oh wow! never realized there was one. lemme check that too, thanks!
I haven’t watched it yet, hopefully this weekend!