A new documentary branding Queen Camilla an “evil stepmother” has been branded “tedious”, “unnecessarily vulgar” and “boring”.
Critics have slammed the show, which aired last night on Channel 4 and spoke to journalists and insiders about the royals’ past, as well as their supposedly strained relationship with Prince Harry.
Last year, the Duke of Sussex, 40, appeared to bring up family tensions when, in an interview with Anderson Cooper to promote his memoirs, he described Camilla as “dangerous” and a “villain.”
He said: ‘She was the villain, she was the third person in the marriage, she needed to rehabilitate her image.
“That made her dangerous because of the connections she was forging within the British press.
“And there was an open willingness on both sides to exchange information and with a family based on hierarchy, and with her on her way to being Queen Consort, there were going to be people or bodies left on the street because of that.”
However, hours later, Prince Harry told Good Morning America that he doesn’t see Queen Camilla as an “evil stepmother.”
The documentary, titled Queen Camilla: The Wicked Stepmother?, in a synopsis asks: “How did Camilla Parker Bowles rise from Britain’s most hated woman to Queen Camilla, national treasure?” And her transformation was at Prince Harry’s expense?
A new documentary branding Queen Camilla an “evil stepmother” has been branded “tedious”, “unnecessarily vulgar” and “boring”.
The documentary, titled Queen Camilla: The Wicked Stepmother?, in a synopsis asks: “How did Camilla Parker Bowles rise from Britain’s most hated woman to Queen Camilla, national treasure?” And her transformation was at Prince Harry’s expense?
However, with two-star ratings across the board from mainstream critics, it was poorly received, largely for repeating old material with few new ideas, and doing so in a “tacky” manner.
He Guardian He found the program “tedious” and “weak”, claiming that there was no real need for the documentary to air.
Elsewhere, The times called Channel 4’s offer a “disaster” that “serves no one.”
The telegraphMeanwhile, the arts and entertainment editor said the film was an “unnecessarily vulgar deep dive” into Camilla’s past.
It was in September that it was reported that Channel 4 was is going to broadcast a documentary about stretcher which paints royalty in a negative light.
According the sunthe film, which is said to be titled Camilla: Harry’s ‘Evil’ Stepmother? – was to portray the 77-year-old as Prince Harry’s “evil mother” and posit that Camilla spent some three decades creating a positive image, but that the late Queen Elizabeth II never wanted her to sit on the throne.
According to anonymous sources, the broadcast of the documentary was delayed after King Charles revealed his cancer diagnosis.
Due to her illness, there were fears that the documentary against Camilla could have provoked a violent reaction, according to sources.
Charles and Camilla photographed on their wedding day, in 2005, in the White Drawing Room at Windsor Castle.
Camilla pictured in 1997. Critics have criticized the documentary depicting the royals’ lives as “in poor taste”.
They added that Channel 4 was aware that the documentary “is going to cause a big stir” and that many people, particularly at Buckingham Palace, “are not going to like it”.
Reports claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were approached by documentary producers to contribute.
MailOnline contacted representatives for the couple for comment at the time.
A Channel 4 spokesperson told MailOnline in September that the documentary will “look at Camilla’s biography and background as she is now queen”.
THE GUARDIAN
Lucy Mangan of the Guardian harshly criticized Channel 4’s “tedious” and “weak” programme, which simply glosses over the same facts that even the most “disinterested of us have absorbed by osmosis over the years”.
The television critic said she couldn’t say who the viewing was actually for, or “why anyone thought it was necessary.”
He posited that it’s probably just “cheap” to “sweep the cutting room floor and gather scraps of stuff to make a new show that’s as old as time.”
Lucy also explained that although the final 20 minutes address “Harry’s animosity toward his stepmother,” the approach does little to make the show seem relevant.
‘Does anyone really care about a documentary chronicling Camilla’s rise from bubbly schoolgirl to Diana’s nemesis to queen?’ she questioned.
THE TIMES
The times has described Channel 4’s offer as a “random mess” that “doesn’t serve anyone.”
Deputy TV editor Ben Dowell said he “wanted to deflate the Queen’s balloon but instead she fell flat on her face”, repeating old information that viewers are all too used to seeing.
He added that while Prince Harry’s “apparent belief that Camilla was running briefings at the Palace” appeared to be the driving force behind subsequent questions raised about her “evilness”, even that struggled to be retained.
“As most real hackers told this program, that reasoning demonstrated a slightly vague understanding of how news originates,” he concluded.
“While one can sympathize with Harry… this was a disaster that served no one.”
THE TELEGRAPH
The telegraphThe arts and entertainment editor called the show an “unnecessarily vulgar deep dive” into Camilla’s past.
And although, Anita Singh writes, most contributors were on the Queen’s “side”, they still spoke of her in “distasteful” terms.
Despite criticizing the repetitive nature of the story depicted in the documentary, the writer said there was interesting information offered by the journalists.
However, overall, Anita felt that the show felt like it had only been commissioned “to fill space.”