Anyone up? Harry & Meghan Royal Wedding Watch thread

[ENJDisneyFan]

Here's the Official Family Portrait - it's lovely! I wonder how many tries it too to get all the kids looking the same direction!

Photoshop

 

[ronandannette]

Love, love, love this. For the exception of the size of Camilla's hat... sigh.

Yeah, I'm sooo not a fan of those goofy hats. Notice how she has to stand a little apart from Charles to keep it from looking like they're both wearing it. And the big, splotchy flower on Kate's looks like some weird boutonniere sticking out of William's uniform.

 

[Turn the Page]

Here's the Official Family Portrait - it's lovely! I wonder how many tries it too to get all the kids looking the same direction!

Ha. I bet it did take a few tries.

I'm a little surprised Louis wasn't in the photo. Obviously he was too young to attend the ceremony but I would have thought he may be included in the official family photo. Oh well, I'm sure he was enjoying a snooze somewhere quiet.

 

[cabanafrau]

It was silk taffeta and that fabric is pretty much expected to look like a used paper bag. Not disagreeing it wasn't a good look, just that it didn't come as any surprise to the designer or the bride.

I never thought of it as purposely "reinventing" myself but when I moved from the remote farming community where I was raised to a big city 8 hours away I didn't stay close to any friends from my childhood. Many of them went their own separate ways as well. It never even occurred to me to invite any of them to my wedding 9 years later. I always stayed close to my immediate and slightly extended family though.

Although I DVR'd it and wasn't viewing in real-time, the coverage I watched started 2 hours early and had a "count-down ticker" going. It seemed like things ran pretty closely to right-on-time to me. They certainly never commented on anything like a 15-minute delay.

I'm sure "The Palace" would have also vetted the dress, if not actually had a hand in directing the style. It was not what many of us were expecting but I guess mandatory "WOW factor" isn't something that's on their list of rules. I still do wonder though why she didn't have any jewelry on except those tiny earrings and a bracelet which it appears she took off for the after-party. I suppose the neckline of the dress was intended to be it's stand-alone focal point, but it really wasn't that dramatic.

As for the comments about her hair, I wonder how that ridiculously long veil even stayed on as she dragged it around the church At one point when they were retiring to the side-room to sign the register it got hung up on the seats and a lady guest (I think" it was Jessica Mulroney) right at the end of that row that reached down and untangled it. If not, I imagine the entire thing would have been yanked right off.

IMO "The Palace" vetted every inch, note and syllable of that wedding -- and much less of it was the actual input of the bride and groom than we've been led to believe. Bishop Curry's address was not at all a surprise to those in charge.

The Palace is not unaware that public sentiment can turn on a dime. The annus horribilis and the public outcry that propelled the family back to London after Diana's death no doubt remain in the Queen's mind. It's understood the so-called Fab Four and the young Cambridge children offer the brightest hope for the royal future at this point.

 

[Disneylover99]

Here's the Official Family Portrait - it's lovely! I wonder how many tries it too to get all the kids looking the same direction!

I liked the Queen's and Megan's moms outfit. I wonder if they talked ahead of time to discuss what outfit colour they'd wear. Their colours are similar.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

Here's the Official Family Portrait - it's lovely! I wonder how many tries it too to get all the kids looking the same direction!

How beautiful! They all coordinated well including the flowers, that is stunning.

 

[ronandannette]

IMO "The Palace" vetted every inch, note and syllable of that wedding -- and much less of it was the actual input of the bride and groom than we've been led to believe. Bishop Curry's address was not at all a surprise to those in charge.

The Palace is not unaware that public sentiment can turn on a dime. The annus horribilis and the public outcry that propelled the family back to London after Diana's death no doubt remain in the Queen's mind. It's understood the so-called Fab Four and the young Cambridge children offer the brightest hope for the royal future at this point.

I wonder what this really means though. I don't think there's any provision to "vote" the Monarchy out of existence and a French-style revolution is unlikely. They may fade from prominence, but they're already insignificant to much of the world. And I did a little research - you'd maybe be surprised (I was!) at how many countries still have Kings, Queens, Princes, Princesses and the whole royal shebang - completely trivial and obscure on the world political stage.

 

[cabanafrau]

I wonder what this really means though. I don't think there's any provision to "vote" the Monarchy out of existence and a French-style revolution is unlikely. They may fade from prominence, but they're already insignificant to much of the world. And I did a little research - you'd maybe be surprised (I was!) at how many countries still have Kings, Queens, Princes, Princesses and the whole royal shebang - completely trivial and obscure on the world political stage.

The real threat to the British royals would be the public funding. Yes, the Queen is far from a pauper personally. Even Prince Charles has quite the private funds at his disposal. It won't go very far however if all public funding went away. Security and maintenance on several palaces and many residences alone would deplete their fortunes quickly.

 

[ronandannette]

The real threat to the British royals would be the public funding. Yes, the Queen is far from a pauper personally. Even Prince Charles has quite the private funds at his disposal. It won't go very far however if all public funding went away. Security and maintenance on several palaces and many residences alone would deplete their fortunes quickly.

Seems extremely unlikely - extremely; and it would be a revolution of sorts that would likely need to foment for decades if not generations. And if anybody, anywhere, still believes in the Divine Right of Kings, there's always that.

 

[luvsJack]

Do the palaces and residences belong to the Royal family or so they belong to the country?

 

[cabanafrau]

Seems extremely unlikely - extremely; and it would be a revolution of sorts that would likely need to foment for decades if not generations. And if anybody, anywhere, still believes in the Divine Right of Kings, there's always that.

Extremely unlikely? Members of this extended family sat on, and were thrown off of thrones that were abolished. The British contingent changed their name in an effort to blend into British society out of fears of being pushed out. Many taxpaying Britons fail to see the necessity. It is to their self interest to remain in the good graces of the British public -- and remain a draw for tourism.

 

[ENJDisneyFan]

Do the palaces and residences belong to the Royal family or so they belong to the country?

This article does a good job explaining how the wealth of the royal family is earned/distributed.

http://www.businessinsider.com/brit...m-known-as-the-sovereign-grant-to-the-queen-1

 

[ford family]

The real threat to the British royals would be the public funding. Yes, the Queen is far from a pauper personally. Even Prince Charles has quite the private funds at his disposal. It won't go very far however if all public funding went away. Security and maintenance on several palaces and many residences alone would deplete their fortunes quickly.

There is no "public funding" of the Royal family. In fact the taxpayer receives all of the income from the Crown Estates, the body that manages the assets that pass from Monarch to Monarch, and only a small percentage of that is given back to cover their expenses. Further, Prince Charles covers the costs of his branch of the family, including Prince William and Prince Harry, from the income of the Duchy of Cornwall. He even pays tax voluntarily on the profit after those expenses. The Queen uses income from the Duchy of Lancaster to cover the costs of the peripheral members of the family. Again, tax is paid, voluntarily, on any net profit.
You may hear conflicting opinions on this matter but they are generally driven by either a lack of understanding as to the true situation or by anti-monarchists with a political agenda.

It was a great day.

ford family

 

[cabanafrau]

There is no "public funding" of the Royal family. In fact the taxpayer receives all of the income from the Crown Estates, the body that manages the assets that pass from Monarch to Monarch, and only a small percentage of that is given back to cover their expenses. Further, Prince Charles covers the costs of his branch of the family, including Prince William and Prince Harry, from the income of the Duchy of Cornwall. He even pays tax voluntarily on the profit after those expenses. The Queen uses income from the Duchy of Lancaster to cover the costs of the peripheral members of the family. Again, tax is paid, voluntarily, on any net profit.
You may hear conflicting opinions on this matter but they are generally driven by either a lack of understanding as to the true situation or by anti-monarchists with a political agenda.

It was a great day.

ford family

I'm not quite sure it's as tidily explained as all that. I disagree with much of what you've said -- tidily explained by my "lack of understanding of the true situation" -- or perhaps being an anti-monarchist with a political agenda. I'll of course leave the choice to you.

 

[ford family]

I'm not quite sure it's as tidily explained as all that. I disagree with much of what you've said -- tidily explained by my "lack of understanding of the true situation" -- or perhaps being an anti-monarchist with a political agenda. I'll of course leave the choice to you.

Either way, it was still a great day

ford family

 

[powellrj]

I was such a fan girl! I had my fascinator, my tea cup ready for the big day! Because I was such a fan girl, I had to have the official fan girl channel on and I watched the wedding on E! OMG, they were like giddy little girls!

I loved everything! My nit-picky things were Joss Stone and her gum. Really, you couldn’t do without for a few hours. Posh, please smile just a little, you are at the wedding of the year, at least pretend you are smiling. Oprah, where was Steadman?

I couldn’t get anyone from my family to watch with me, so the dog and I enjoyed it together.

 

[Allison]

I wonder how long it will be before they turn on Harry and Megan and start picking apart the things they do.

Ironic being said in this thread.

I only wish everyone's wedding could be televised to the world so every nuance can be picked apart by strangers.

I finally watched...it was lovely from start to finish. Everyone looked radiant. Everyone looked happy. Just beautiful. May they enjoy a marriage full of love and happiness!

I agree.

I wonder how many tries it too to get all the kids looking the same direction!

Except one is looking a different direction.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Diana wore the Spencer family tiara. Her brother is now the Earl Spencer.

I was thinking of this one:

http://people.com/royals/kate-middleton-wears-princess-dianas-favorite-tiara/

 

[SirDuff]

Except one is looking a different direction.

In both pictures (there's another of Harry and Meghan with just the kids).

https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/royal-wedding-official-photographs-intl/index.html

 

[jrmasm]

http://nationalpost.com/news/world/...her-charges-perfectly-behaved-for-the-wedding


Maybe the one looking the wrong direction is the youngest one? Seems she was having a rough day.

I was secretly hoping the kids would misbehavior more than they did.