Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Royal Couple in Pictures
Steyn On-line ^ | May 19, 2018 | Mark Steyn

Posted on 05/20/2018 5:45:07 AM PDT by Twotone

Well, today was the big day for Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, so it seems appropriate to offer a few Royal romances as our Saturday movie date. The most directly relevant movie, Royal Wedding, made in 1947, was set in London against the background of Prince Harry's grandparents' nuptials and starred Fred Astaire and an actress whose dad was an actual guest at the actual real-life wedding - Sarah Churchill, daughter of Winston. But I'll say a few words about that tomorrow night in our Song of the Week department, and today cast our net a little further afield in search of celluloid romances between royals and commoners:

To be honest, when a Prince of the Blood Royal marries in the presence of Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney a half-black American actress who's dated a porn star and divorced her Jewish husband by mailing back the wedding ring and has a violent alcoholic brother who's held a gun to his girlfriend's head and sent his soon-to-be brother-in-law an open letter warning that this will be "the biggest mistake in royal wedding history"... to be honest, it makes even the racier royal romances of yesteryear seem a little tame.

(Excerpt) Read more at steynonline.com ...


TOPICS: History; TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: marksteyn; movies; royals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

1 posted on 05/20/2018 5:45:07 AM PDT by Twotone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Twotone

I only saw one?


2 posted on 05/20/2018 5:48:01 AM PDT by Delta 21 (Build The Wall !! Jail The Cankle !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Delta 21
I only saw one?

Okay, I'll bite: One what?

3 posted on 05/20/2018 5:49:02 AM PDT by Tax-chick (I have the easiest life in the history of the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Oh geeze. When will this crap be over.

Remember…We left the monarchy behind 240+ years ago.

Besides…There would have to be a mass murder of royals for Harry and his progeny to be elevated to the throne.


4 posted on 05/20/2018 5:50:15 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

There is no royalty. No such thing as royal blood. It is insane to pass power through heredity. Let the royals work for their living.


5 posted on 05/20/2018 5:50:59 AM PDT by I want the USA back (Ask me what I think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Poor Harry. He married a creature of Hollywood. By nature, they are by of and for themselves. Usually, everything a Hollywood creature does is driven by the need to advance their stature through publicity (usually putting forth a fake image that is at odds with the real nature of said Hollywood creature, think Weinstein at a feminist march wearing a pink hat).

Now that this particular Hollywood creature has gotten her main publicity boost from this, it is only a matter of time before she seeks Act II, namely, the breakup. My prediction, she gets bored, returns to acting and hooks up with a co-star.


6 posted on 05/20/2018 5:54:25 AM PDT by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
Thomas Paine, otherwise an atheist, made this point- God wanted the Israelites to have no king, because the Lord their God is their King. However, the Israelites wanted to live like the Pagan nations around them.

Why would we want to be ruled like the pagans?

7 posted on 05/20/2018 6:14:53 AM PDT by MuttTheHoople (Yes, Liberals, I question your patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

We’re much better off with the Bushs’, Clintons’, and Kennedys’...

And their “titles” aren’t ceremonial.


8 posted on 05/20/2018 6:15:26 AM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

“Remember…We left the monarchy behind 240+ years ago.”

So?

You can just not read the stories or look at the photos. I haven’t.

The American Revolution =/= an expectation that Americans are not allowed to look or talk about this stuff even at obsessive levels.

When the Price of Wales visited the U.S. in the 1860s (which was a sensation at the time), no one was pitching a fit about, nor when the king and queen visited in the 1930s.

And besides, the kid is marrying an American girl. Like how would you think no one in America would be into this?


9 posted on 05/20/2018 6:17:34 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

“It is insane to pass power through heredity. “

They have next to no real political power.

“Let the royals work for their living.”

What do you think they do now?


10 posted on 05/20/2018 6:18:38 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
America would have celebrated, from the depths and breadths of her bounteous heart, the marriage of her daughter to the grandson of Queen Elizabeth, had Harry not profoundly insulted her and her people by his reprehensible, disgusting, and inexcusable insult to her President.

President Trump has shown only the greatest respect and affection for the United Kingdom and the British Royal Family.

It was President Trump who restored the bust of Sir Winston Churchill to the Oval Office immediately upon assuming the office of the Presidency, after President Obama, whom Prince Harry has flattered, removed it.

America offers her prayers and best wishes for the happiness of her daughter and Prince Harry, as she enjoins Prince Harry always to love and care for her daughter, but, sadly, she must hope that Harry will display better judgment and more benevolence in the future.

11 posted on 05/20/2018 6:19:27 AM PDT by Savage Beast (President Trump and His Supporters Are the Resistance! VIVE LA RESISTANCE! KAG!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
They have next to no real political power.

Then why are they such useful idiots, hmmmm?

The problem is what they get into behind the scenes, political prohibitions and niceties bedamned.

12 posted on 05/20/2018 6:21:28 AM PDT by mewzilla (Has the FBI been spying on members of Congress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

Yeah..... And despite whatever any of that means, the political power in Britain rest with the Parliament.


13 posted on 05/20/2018 6:22:53 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik

My dear lad, it rests with the people controlling the Parliament. The Parliament, like our Congress, is in reality a fig leaf. The UK has a uniparty and Deep State problem, too. And the royals are part of it.


14 posted on 05/20/2018 6:28:41 AM PDT by mewzilla (Has the FBI been spying on members of Congress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

I’d like to know why Meghan looked so unkempt? In the pictures I saw yesterday her hair style wearing the veil was like someone coming out of the gym or on a weekend morning doing housework and I read the dress cost 200k, maybe the veil and train were the expensive part because the main part looked unfinished at seams like it was just darted and not an attractive neckline and shape of dress for her. She’s looked much better in other photos than she did for her wedding - odd she would want that or settle for that.


15 posted on 05/20/2018 6:29:51 AM PDT by b4me (God Bless the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik

Case in point, from 2016, and yes, I am considering the source...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/01/exclusive-royal-family-considering-dramatic-brexit-intervention


16 posted on 05/20/2018 6:31:41 AM PDT by mewzilla (Has the FBI been spying on members of Congress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: EEGator

Yeah the Brits have their Commons/Lords and parties. Their ministers can be even nastier than our congressmen, senators and presidents


17 posted on 05/20/2018 6:40:33 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
Their ministers can be even nastier than our congressmen, senators and presidents

Anyone who has ever watched "Prime Minister's Questions" on c-span can attest to that. I use to love watching Maggie rip those dolts apart.

18 posted on 05/20/2018 6:53:29 AM PDT by BBell (calm down and eat your sandwiches)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast

Excellent points.


19 posted on 05/20/2018 6:59:52 AM PDT by Nea Wood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

IDGAF.


20 posted on 05/20/2018 7:06:34 AM PDT by lefty-lie-spy (Stay metal. For the Horde \m/("_")\m/ - via iPhone from Tokyo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson