The Royals!

Films, TV shows, and books of the 'modern' era
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Re: The Royals!

Post by charliechaplinfan »

It's an incredible story, the presenters have given a press conference and look devastated. I don't feel sorry for them but I do feel that they will be blamed and with the internet there is no censorship so they'll be able to read all the nasty reports out there, people will type what they will about it although knowing what has happened to that poor nurse will be the thing that hurts them most and longest of all.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
Vecchiolarry
Posts: 1392
Joined: May 6th, 2007, 10:15 pm
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Re: The Royals!

Post by Vecchiolarry »

Hello,

Apparently, The Queen has issued Letters Patent (a royal decree) on December 31, 2012, that the children of William & Catherine will be titled Prince or Princess and styled His or Her Royal Highness.
Otherwise they would have been only Lord or Lady, as great-grandchildren of the Monarch. The Prince and Princess entitlement formerly only descended to grandchildren.

However, Prince Harry's future children will remain Lord or Lady under The Queen's reign; but will be Prince or Princess only when Charles (their grandfather) becomes King....

Larry
User avatar
Rita Hayworth
Posts: 10068
Joined: February 6th, 2011, 4:01 pm

Re: The Royals!

Post by Rita Hayworth »

Interesting, Larry!

Thanks for sharing that!
Vecchiolarry
Posts: 1392
Joined: May 6th, 2007, 10:15 pm
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Re: The Royals!

Post by Vecchiolarry »

Hi,

Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands will abdicate on April 30th - her accession date in 1980. A reign of 33 years!! Impressive...

Her son, Wilhelm Alexander, will be King; and his wife, Maxima will be Queen now.
This is the first time in 123 years that the Netherlands has had a King.

When Wilhelm III died in 1890, his daughter, Wilhelmina became Queen (1890 - 1948) and then her daughter, Juliana was Queen (1948 - 1980) and next Beatrix...
Both Wilhelmina and Juliana also abdicated....

Larry
Vecchiolarry
Posts: 1392
Joined: May 6th, 2007, 10:15 pm
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Re: The Royals!

Post by Vecchiolarry »

Hi Alison,

I read on another thread (Richard III) that you advised William & Kate not to name any son Richard....
I like the name but not for an English king anymore!! So, I'm with you on that!!

Apparently, speculation has it now that Kate is having a girl, as she supposedly flubbed a 'd' when given a present for her baby...
If it is a girl, I think I'd go with Charlotte - as the British were jipped out of a Queen Charlotte back in 1817. She died during childbirth. There never would have been a Queen Victoria had Charlotte lived....

Clarification:
There was a Queen Charlotte (the wife & consort of George III) but she was not the reigning monarch - her husband was.

Larry
User avatar
JackFavell
Posts: 11926
Joined: April 20th, 2009, 9:56 am

Re: The Royals!

Post by JackFavell »

Victoria would be nice....

I'm sure Kate will pick the perfect name, when we hear it, we'll probably all go, "of course". Something of a tribute the royal family I'm quite sure.
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Re: The Royals!

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I admit to a preference for a girl, since the heriditary rules for the crown have changed it would be great to have a little girl in line after her father. There has been speculation from the first that it is a girl as the morning sickness Kate suffered from is more common with a girl. It'll be a boy now I've made my feelings clear.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
JackFavell
Posts: 11926
Joined: April 20th, 2009, 9:56 am

Re: The Royals!

Post by JackFavell »

Do you have a name preference?
User avatar
Rita Hayworth
Posts: 10068
Joined: February 6th, 2011, 4:01 pm

Re: The Royals!

Post by Rita Hayworth »

JackFavell wrote:Victoria would be nice....

I'm sure Kate will pick the perfect name, when we hear it, we'll probably all go, "of course". Something of a tribute the royal family I'm quite sure.
I'm very curious about this and if it a girl ... I would love to see it named Victoria ... :)
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Re: The Royals!

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I like Elizabeth and how fitting after her great grandmother, after that Victoria, followed by Charlotte and Alice but traditional, it's got to be traditional. No Chantelle's, Chelsy's, Madison etc with no offence intended to people with those names, they're just not traditional, I don't think the royals should be too modern.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
CineMaven
Posts: 3815
Joined: September 24th, 2007, 9:54 am
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Contact:

Re: The Royals!

Post by CineMaven »

I take it there'll be no Shameekas or Shavonnes in the mix either. ( Darn tradition!! ) ;-)
"You build my gallows high, baby."

http://www.megramsey.com
User avatar
Sue Sue Applegate
Administrator
Posts: 3404
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 8:47 pm
Location: Texas

Re: The Royals!

Post by Sue Sue Applegate »

Or if it is twins, Pete and Re-Pete. (This is not a joke. I knew someone whose nephews were named Pete and Re-Pete on the birth certificates.)

I think I might favor Elizabeth Diana Victoria... It's alphabetical and it's the names of the three of some of the most memorable women in English history. (But adding "Diana" might seem to tempt fate a bit much, so I don't think they would choose it.)
Blog: http://suesueapplegate.wordpress.com/
Twitter:@suesueapplegate
TCM Message Boards: http://forums.tcm.com/index.php?/topic/ ... ue-sue-ii/
Sue Sue : https://www.facebook.com/groups/611323215621862/
Thelma Ritter: Hollywood's Favorite New Yorker, University Press of Mississippi-2023
Avatar: Ginger Rogers, The Major and The Minor
User avatar
CineMaven
Posts: 3815
Joined: September 24th, 2007, 9:54 am
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Contact:

Re: The Royals!

Post by CineMaven »

Re-Pete? That's just plain wrong. And demeaning.

...And stupid.
"You build my gallows high, baby."

http://www.megramsey.com
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Re: The Royals!

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I put money on Diana being one of the names for a girl but not the first.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
Sue Sue Applegate
Administrator
Posts: 3404
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 8:47 pm
Location: Texas

Re: The Royals!

Post by Sue Sue Applegate »

Yes, Allison, not the first. I'm with you on that one.

Theresa, I completely agree. The father was Dutch and the mother was American, and they enjoyed having given the twins those names. :shock:
Blog: http://suesueapplegate.wordpress.com/
Twitter:@suesueapplegate
TCM Message Boards: http://forums.tcm.com/index.php?/topic/ ... ue-sue-ii/
Sue Sue : https://www.facebook.com/groups/611323215621862/
Thelma Ritter: Hollywood's Favorite New Yorker, University Press of Mississippi-2023
Avatar: Ginger Rogers, The Major and The Minor
Post Reply