The Crown

Each of the 10 episodes tells a complete and gripping story. ... By peering through what the queen calls "the mystery and the protocol" to witness the stifled humanity of these iconic public figures, this drama truly is a crowning achievement. [25 Nov - 8 Dec 2019, p.10]

It's what we do with our character that matters. This season— magnificently—reveals what Elizabeth has done with her's. You will be blown away. At least I was.

Colman is exceptional in everything she does, so she’s not afraid to make the Elizabeth of Season 3 look, at times, distressingly irrelevant and frustratingly complacent. ... Like Colman, the new cast members assume their roles with elegance and ease. ... The return of “The Crown,” with its irresistible blend of heightened history and peek-behind-the-brocade-curtain drama, is a gloriously welcome gift, arriving just in time for the holidays.

I have seen the third season of “The Crown,” which will be available on Netflix on Sunday, and it is dazzling and excellent. It’s extraordinary historical TV. ... Often, streaming series feel more like season-long blurs than a series of distinct episodes. That is not the case with “The Crown,” as it tells its story as precisely and lavishly as anything on TV these days.

It’s exceptional television that takes full advantage of the narrative structure and scope the medium provides. ... Colman’s performance is a season-long exercise in extraordinary restraint that provides a profound payoff.

The Crown distinguishes itself from other prestige television of the age through its willingness to still be episodic when the narrative calls for it, and in these standalone episodes showrunner Peter Morgan finds some of his strongest material. ... The Crown may put the “prestige” in “prestige television”, but it earns every dazzling moment.

Colman is masterful as a cold but not uncaring figurehead for a country in need of solace. ... Sweeping historical significance aside, it’s the intimate, internal battles make this season just as riveting — if not stronger — as the last two.

Probably the only series in television to have fully mastered the balancing act between slow meditative storytelling and emotional drag. This only becomes more the case as the story enters the middle years of Queen Elizabeth, played with steely, boundless soul by Oscar winner Olivia Colman. ... And “The Crown” does so with true dignity, inviting us to sit for a while, attentively and with appreciation, within its assured spell of calm.

The Crown ushers in a new cast, but the Netflix historical drama's compelling and regal formula -- exploring the obligations and indignities associated with the seemingly sun-drenched life of the British Royal Family -- remains the same, and indeed has only deepened as the principals advance into middle age.

More uneven than its two predecessors, but also more daring and surprising. When it works, it’s incredibly compelling, once again solidifying itself as one of the best shows of the year; when it doesn’t, it’s merely one of the best acting ensembles anywhere, moving about in a series that’s as richly designed, expertly directed, and satisfyingly paced as anything else in television.

It has a smashingly good new cast (whose performances are equal if not better than their predecessors) and a brisk, almost urgent sense of galloping through the long life story of Queen Elizabeth II. ... Colman is convincing in the role from the moment we see her, conveying the queen’s deepest worries with just the slightest twitch. ... It blends fact, fantasy and humanity in a way that allows us to wonder if the crown truly does rest where it ought.

The Crown remains entertaining and immersive even in these more emotionally slight hours, and its existence as a compendium of Queen Elizabeth’s reign is a stunning achievement.

This dual attempt to humanize the royals without going too far in any direction presents an uneasy balancing act that “The Crown” doesn’t always nail. The moments when it does can be transcendent, which is almost always thanks to the actors, not to mention the directors guiding them. Without these steady, nuanced performances, “The Crown” could easily droop under the weight of its own ambition and others’ expectations. With them, “The Crown” becomes as compelling a portrait of how power warps individuals, and the world along with them, as exists on TV.

In fine form, too, a seamless transition between casts with writer Peter Morgan keeping everything on an even and remarkably timely keel as the queen frets her new prime minister may be compromised by the Russians.

It is all beautifully done and tastefully told. Every penny spent is up on screen. It is immaculate. It will leave you either longing for the monarchy to be decapitated for its endless, parasitical privilege (great scenes arise from Philip complaining about being asked to cut back on his yacht consumption, for example) or abolished for the Windsors’ own good.

A character who, in Season 3, is becoming more and more unknowable. ... Colman, an indubitably brilliant actor, brings more of herself to the part than Foy did, but she’s able to capture the markedly divergent aspects of a woman who’s a wife, a mother, and a monarch in a long line of failures.

The parallels struck in each episode between what’s going on in the world and the royals’ own personal struggles can tend toward too clever, too forced, or too coincidental at times. [But] Concealing where Queen Elizabeth—the history and the person—ends, and Queen Elizabeth—the TV character—begins is where The Crown showcases its most delicate sleight of hand. And it’s in that, too, that the series continues to be the most compelling, teetering between tabloid snuff and reverent curiosity with a confident handle of the creative danger that entails.

Austere and immaculately polished, The Crown remains a model for carefully crafted episodic storytelling, a trenchant examination of the nature of power and, remarkably, now features a new ensemble that proves every bit the equal of the first.

Elizabeth is no longer the most interesting figure in her own story. Colman is conspicuously absent through much of the season, which focuses more heavily on Phillip, Margaret and Charles, and her role in her family members' stories is nominal at best. Despite the marquee position of Colman in the opening credits, "Crown" doesn't feel like her show. ... The series remains fully capable of making the family a little less mysterious and a little more entertaining.

Stiff of spine and thin of voice, this Elizabeth (played by Oscar winner Olivia Colman) may make you long for the incandescent Claire Foy ... The history lessons check some necessary boxes — Churchill (John Lithgow) goes to his eternal reward in Episode 1 — but also resurrect delicious bits that may have been forgotten. ... With an ever-present cigarette holder and air of hangover chic, Margaret is a free spirit trapped by the rules of the palace, and her contrast with Elizabeth is something Morgan returns to again and again with striking results.

At its heart, The Crown is a catalogue of the myriad ways Elizabeth must deny her true self out of duty to her country. It’s a theme that’s at once tragic and predictable, which makes the emergence of Prince Charles and Princess Anne as more prominent players all the more welcome.

What is on the screen in “The Crown” is a gorgeous display of some of the age’s best actors performing at the peak of their craft. ... And yet, Colman is relegated to reacting more than acting because of how her role is written. ... [Queen Elizabeth is] a complex sovereign in a complex time, the defender of the faith. Morgan should show some more faith in her himself.

The season makes for a less sexy, more studied viewing experience. The first half of the season, which focuses on political skirmishes in the late ‘60s, is especially slow going. ... The new cast is impressive, but The Crown has lost a bit of its verve.

Colman intuits that Elizabeth, at the height of her powers and in the middle of a calm stretch, is content. The performance is both believable and emotionally astute: Elizabeth would be settled and comfortable. But this, along with the equilibrium in her marriage, snuffs out some of the little tension there used to be. ... That the show remains appealing through this relatively slow going is largely thanks to the more high-strung characters surrounding Elizabeth.

At this phase of the story, Elizabeth is more uptight and controlling than ever, especially now that some of her children are old enough to cause her problems in the way only her sister once did. But the job and the many ugly things she has to do in it weigh on her more than ever, which Colman portrays beautifully. It’s not a thrilling time for Elizabeth, or The Crown, but it’s a complicated transition handled quite deftly.

In terms of performances, The Crown 2.0, which arrives on Nov. 17, marks an improvement over its fine predecessor. The versatile Colman makes a more complex Elizabeth, one who isn’t brittle so much as ill at ease in her own exalted skin. ... The same aura of mystery that Elizabeth defends in the documentary episode also limits the mostly reverent Morgan’s insight into his characters, to the extent that their conflicts get repetitive.

The series itself struggled between finding its own balance — with some episodes striking resonant chords ("Bubbikins," "Margretology") and others falling painfully flat ("Coup," "Moondust"). But as Elizabeth herself states during one of her meetings with PM Wilson, sometimes it's better to simply look the other way, to wait for this to pass. Season 3 is a time of transition — for the royal family, for the United Kingdom, for The Crown itself.

Season three of The Crown lacks the urgency that previously made the Netflix series so engaging. This is partly due to the more subdued relationships between the older members of the House of Windsor, now settled into their various roles as sovereign, husband, sister, and wife.