the audience applauded

I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

The movie is made so realistic it has a lot of that WoW feeling at the right moments and never tooo over the top. the suspense is done so well and the emotion is felt. Very well put together with the music and all.

As people mourn the death of the queen, Prince Charles prepares to become the king of the monarchy. All things good, we get the idea, but I feel like the movie emphasizes more the characters, than the action itself. Plus, it seems like the situation presented turns into a game with no end, but we already know how things may change. I mean, it's obvious that in a moment when things go wrong, the only solution for the man in power is to give up, right? I just think that the movie could have come up an impartial opinion on how things evolve after the tragic event and let the public decide what path, good or bad, the king may choose.

the movie had potential... then it turned into a nonsense... disguised as a Shakespearean novel... but completely lacking any kind of intelligence...like written by a 12yo school girl.... it was a pain to see...my Heart Broke when the shallow low IQ sons in this "Play" did not received any kind of justice at the end... the 12yo writer did not went all the way...the monarchy at that point in the play should have been abolish and the traitors should have been betrayed. but not even the end makes sense... Don't bother with this guys...I'm saving you the time.

If you are going to portray the monarchy in such a light, there are better ways to undermine it...Like factually.The name is enough for anyone with a clue not to bother.Charles is on the record as saying he will take the name George VII should his mother not outlive him. Yes, that's right, it's not an automatic naming system... Which is probably good as the king who fought Hitler would've been King Bertie the 1st.If they can't be bothered to even get the basics correct, why should we bother to watch? Unless you believe in alternative facts. Which over 40% of Americans apparently do now and this is written for such people. Only issue is that people who watch fox news are going to have trouble following the pseudo Shakespearean language. Obviously not going to be a box office spectacular.

Behold the king.As yet uncrown'd;his beloved mother,a clever and subtle queen loved by her people recently dead. He is weak,vain,embittered ;a vaunting ambition to execute his own will even to the detriment of his people's. Two princes:one of serious mien with a wife keen for power.The other a jackanapes set on earthly pleasures before duty. As their father waits to assume the trappings of kinghood they plot to steal the throne. Bernard Levin wrote a clever poem comprised entirely of quotes from William Shakespeare. It was very popular.People understood it. Quite why there is an assumption on some writers' parts that the viewing public would not "get" a 21st century play written in part in blank verse I am not sure.I think these writers are underestimating the intelligence of the audience. I thought "King Charles the third" was rather elegantly done. We all know the Royals don't occupy the same planet as the rest of us. This play merely confirmed that. Monarchist or Republican,there is nothing in it to change your point of view. Just enjoy the magnificent Mr T.Piggot - Smith having a whale of a time and enunciating beautifully as the spoiled 70 -odd year old new king. He and Miss C.Riley use the speech patterns most successfully . The conscience of the king proves to be his downfall. Aided and abetted by the Prime minister and the Leader of His Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Charles would have been justified in saying " A pox on both your houses".