Netflix ‘plans to dramatise Princess Diana’s final tragic moments in Paris for The Crown’

Netflix is facing fury over plans to dramatise Princess Diana’s final moments in its new season of The Crown. 

The hit series, which has repeatedly been accused of blurring the lines between fact and fiction, is reportedly set to cover the hours before the royal’s tragic death in Paris in August 1997.

Season five will be released next month – just weeks after the death of the Queen.

The show is already facing criticism over other storylines set to feature in the new series, including depicting the then Prince Charles as a disloyal schemer who plotted against his mother and Prince Philip ‘pursuing an affair’ with his close friend Penny Knatchbull.

William Shawcross, the Queen Mother’s official biographer, branded the series ‘odious’ and ‘deliberately hurtful’  over an apparently invented scene where Charles tells the Queen she should be ‘thrown… into jail’ for being a ‘bad mother’. 

Last night, Netflix risked adding fuel to the fire by refusing to add a disclaimer to the series stating that the scenes, branded ‘malicious’ by one royal expert, are not fact but fiction. 

Meanwhile, according to The Sun, even crew members are concerned in relation to the scenes depicting the lead-up to Diana’s death, with one reportedly saying: ‘It feels as though a line is being crossed.’

One source close to Prince William last night told the paper that they expect the Prince of Wales will be angered by Netflix’s move to ­reproduce his mother’s final days for entertainment purposes.

Netflix insists Diana’s death, in a car crash in the Pont de l’Alma tunnel in central Paris, will not be recreated in the new series.

But one set source reportedly told The Sun: ‘To be going back to Paris and turning Diana’s final days and hours into a drama feels very uncomfortable.

‘The show always tried to present a fictional version of royal history with as much sensitivity as possible. But lately, as things get closer to the present day, it feels harder to strike that balance.’

The storyline where Charles plots to oust his mother was branded a ‘barrel-load of malicious nonsense’ by former prime minister Sir John Major as those close to the new monarch called for a boycott.

Critics argue the show should carry a warning that the ‘false, unfair and deeply wounding’ scenes are fiction, which not all viewers realise.

Yet The Crown has confirmed that series five will air from November 9 without a disclaimer.

Meanwhile, the Queen Mother’s official biographer called the series ‘odious’ and ‘deliberately hurtful’.

Mr Shawcross, in a letter to The Daily Telegraph, said that the programme is ‘filled with lies and half-truths encased in lace and velvet’.

He also accused creator Peter Morgan of organising ‘a campaign to abuse’ the monarchy and ‘to destroy by lies a vital institution’.

Former culture secretary Nadine Dorries said that it was only fair that the show regularly displays such a warning, as is common with other programmes.

The Tory MP added: ‘If a programme is purely fiction as this series of The Crown obviously is, in the name of fairness and transparency it should clearly state so.

‘It’s quite bizarre that it would feature people who are alive today but are bound by protocol and unable to rebut false impressions and invented scenarios, knowing that many viewers would believe them to be real.’

Royal insiders have previously described the programme as ‘trolling on a Hollywood scale’, and last night no one was said to have been dissuaded from that view.

But Buckingham Palace has not formally commented on the row as it is believed officials want to rise above the fray with dignity.

A spokesman for the series said: ‘The Crown has always been presented as a drama based on historical events.

Series Five is a fictional dramatisation, imagining what could have happened behind closed doors during a significant decade for the Royal Family – one that has already been scrutinised and well-documented by journalists, biographers and historians.’

The new series, set in the 1990s, opens with Charles – then the Prince of Wales – lobbying then prime minister Sir John in a bizarre attempt to force the Queen’s abdication.

The prince, played by Dominic West, actively briefs against the Queen, whom he believes is out of touch.

But Sir John told The Mail on Sunday that the meeting did not happen and the ‘improper subject’ was never discussed. His office said that not one scene is ‘accurate in any way’, adding: ‘They are fiction, pure and simple.

‘They should be seen as nothing other than damaging and malicious fiction – a barrel-load of nonsense peddled for no other reason than to provide maximum – and entirely false – dramatic impact.’

In another scene, Charles says: ‘If we were an ordinary family and social services came to visit they would have thrown us into care and you [the Queen] into jail.’

While the new series was written at least a year before the Queen died and filming completed months ago, the timing of its release may lead to criticism.

Sources close to the Palace have said the Queen’s death just six weeks ago makes the scenes particularly hurtful.

How Netflix drama The Crown twists truth time after time: Royal historian IAN LLOYD separates fiction from fact…

By IAN LLOYD for THE MAIL ON SUNDAY 

How far have The Crown’s storylines strayed from reality? Royal historian Ian Lloyd separates fiction from fact…

THE CROWN VERSION 

In a private audience with Prime Minister John Major in 1991, Prince Charles argues for a change of monarch, saying it would be dangerous to ignore a newspaper poll showing the public prefers him to his mother.

THE TRUTH 

This is utter nonsense. Charles would never have lobbied for the Queen to abdicate, as he knew very well that his mother had made a solemn oath to serve for the whole of her life.

THE CROWN VERSION The Queen (played in the new series by Imelda Staunton, right) orders John Major to pay for repairs to the Royal Yacht Britannia out of public funds, even though he is worried that in a recession it might backfire on both of them.

THE TRUTH 

Pure drama. The Queen loved the Royal Yacht but was stoic about its future. In 1997 Defence Secretary Michael Portillo announced that Britannia would be replaced ‘because we believe a Royal Yacht is an important national asset.’

THE CROWN VERSION 

In the Royal stables, Charles confronts the Queen about the failed marriages of her children. He tells her: ‘If we were an ordinary family and social services came, they’d have thrown us into care and you into jail.’

THE TRUTH 

 Any suggestion Charles would have been so vile to the Queen is malicious fiction. There was friction, but this is going too far.

THE CROWN VERSION 

The Queen Mother asks her daughter not to make her ‘annus horribilis’ speech, in case people think that ‘their Queen is depressed’.

THE TRUTH 

When the Queen spoke of her ‘annus horribilis’ during a lunch on November 24, 1992, her voice was still croaky from the smoke inhalation she suffered during the fire at Windsor Castle. In fact, the Queen Mother was supportive. She wrote a warm note in February, telling her daughter: ‘My Darling Lilibet… I do hope that you feel rested and relaxed after all the ghastly happenings of last (& this) year.’

THE CROWN VERSION 

John Major tells his wife Norma: ‘The senior royals seem deluded and out of touch, the junior royals feckless, entitled and lost. It cannot help but affect the stability of the country and it feels it’s all about to erupt on my watch.’

THE TRUTH 

John Major remained a staunch supporter of the Royal Family throughout his tenure and a close friend of the Queen. I very much doubt he ever believed the monarchy was about to crumble.

•   Ian Lloyd is the author of The Queen: 70 Chapters In The Life Of Elizabeth II

Boycott ‘hurtful’ TV Crown say King’s friends: Furious John Major condemns Netflix drama’s ‘damaging and malicious lie’ that Charles urged him to oust the Queen as Jonathan Dimbleby called the show ‘nonsense on stilts’

By Chris Hastings and Kate Mansey for the Mail on Sunday

Royal drama The Crown has been accused of fabricating a ‘hurtful’ smear against King Charles by depicting him secretly plotting to oust the Queen when he was Prince of Wales.

Friends called the portrayal of the new monarch as a disloyal schemer ‘false, unfair and deeply wounding’ and urged viewers to boycott the hit Netflix show.

The new series, due to be screened next month, shows Charles lobbying Prime Minister John Major in a bizarre attempt to force his mother’s abdication.

But Sir John told The Mail on Sunday the meeting never happened and called the scene a ‘barrel load of malicious nonsense’.

Another well-placed source said: ‘All the dialogue is completely made up.

‘All the one-to-one conversations you see on screen are utter fiction and some scenes have been entirely created for dramatic and commercial purposes with little regard for the truth. People should be boycotting it.’

 Other sources said the Queen’s death just five weeks ago makes the episode particularly hurtful.

The first episode of the forthcoming fifth series is set in 1991, against a background of speculation about the future of the monarchy and Charles’s constitutional role.

The Crown’s writers suggest that Charles believed his mother, then 65, was repeating Queen Victoria’s mistakes by refusing to stand aside for a younger heir. But critics point out that Charles was in reality acutely aware that abdication was unthinkable and would devalue the institution.

Last year, politicians and royal experts backed a Mail on Sunday campaign to demand Netflix put a disclaimer on The Crown, making clear it was presenting fiction as fact. It followed mounting criticism over the distortion of a string of incidents in the last series. The streaming giant has so far refused to add any such message to the start of episodes.

Broadcaster Jonathan Dimbleby, a friend of the King, said of the latest fabrication: ‘The Crown is full of nonsense, but this is nonsense on stilts.’

And royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith added: ‘The events depicted here are outrageous and totally fictional.

‘This programme is doing significant damage to people’s perception of history and their perception of the Royal Family. It has been packed full of malicious lies from the beginning but this level of abuse is now beyond the pale.’

In the contentious episode, due to be released on November 9, Charles is buoyed by a newspaper poll showing support for abdication among 47 per cent of the Queen’s subjects. That storyline is based on a genuine poll from 1990, but one with a crucial difference. In the real one, 47 per cent said the Queen should hand over the Throne ‘at some stage’ in the future.

The Prince, played by Dominic West, is shown actively briefing against the Queen who he believes is too old and too out of touch.

Such is his determination to draw the Prime Minister into his conspiracy that he is shown cutting short a holiday with Princess Diana and William and Harry to race back to London.

Summoning Mr Major, played by Trainspotting star Jonny Lee Miller, to a private meeting, he asks him to keep their discussions secret.

In their exchange, Charles hints that the monarchy should follow the lead of the Conservative Party which a year earlier had ousted Mrs Thatcher in favour of the younger Major. He says: ‘What makes the Conservative Party the successful electoral force that it is? ‘Its instinct for renewal and its willingness to make way for someone younger.’

He draws a parallel between himself and his great-great grandfather, Edward VII, the son of Queen Victoria, who was Prince of Wales for almost 60 years.

Charles is depicted as saying: ‘It was said that Queen Victoria had no confidence in him, thought him dangerous, free thinking. He longed to be given responsibilities, but his mother refused. Even forbad him from seeing State papers.

‘Yet when his time came, he proved his doubters wrong and his dynamism, his intellect, his popular appeal made his reign a triumph.’ When Mr Major asks what he is driving at, Charles replies: ‘I am saying what a pity it was, what a waste that his voice, his presence, his vision, wasn’t incorporated earlier. It would have been so good for everybody.’

In the episode, entitled Queen Victoria Syndrome, Charles tells Mr Major that if he joins the Queen at an upcoming ball at Balmoral he will be able to judge for himself ‘whether this institution that we all care about so deeply is in safe hands’.

Sir Malcom Rifkind, Foreign Secretary under Mr Major, said the implication that the Prince was pressing the PM to encourage the Queen to make way for him was ‘pathetic and absurd’, adding: ‘At the time, the Queen was in her 60s – younger than the King is today. It’s pure fantasy which is what we have come to expect from this particular programme.’

David Mellor, who also served in Mr Major’s Government, called the episode ‘bunkum’.

He added: ‘To conspire with the heir to the throne to try to force a monarch he had sworn to serve to stand down is simply not something [Major] would ever have contemplated. No one in their right mind would have suggested it and no one as sensible as Charles would ever have imagined that this was possible or desirable.’

Later in the episode, Charles talks to Mr Major about the Queen wanting taxpayers’ money to repair the Royal Yacht Britannia. He tells the PM: ‘Sometimes these old things are too costly to keep repairing. I’ll leave you with that thought.’

Several of The Crown’s storylines are likely to prove deeply hurtful to Sir John, who is known to have been close to the late Queen. In one scene, during a private conversation with his wife Norma, he describes the senior Royals as ‘dangerously deluded and out of touch’ and the junior Royals as ‘feckless, entitled and lost’.

But a spokesman for the Majors said: ‘What you report as depicted in the script has never been their view, never would be their view, and never will be their view.’