Arama Sonuçları

Toys, robots; anything that looks like humans. As a technology lover who used to work with software and build robots, I have to admit to you that my biggest fear is robots and artificial intelligence. I saw the movie Megan and now I want to talk to you a little bit. It was an extraordinarily scary experience for me. Yes, a 6-axis Kuka or Fanuc robot doesn't scare me. What scares me and other people is that they look like us and have limbs and a face. Today we are not afraid of artificial intelligence. They are doing it on purpose and getting us used to it. First we started with ChatBots, now we are getting voice feedback. I'm sure they will have faces in a few years. That's when we'll have great droid friends. The Megan movie is not a Chucky the Killer Doll movie. So don't expect gory scenes, horror, suspense... There is, but it's used appropriately. In fact, this movie tells us about the first mistake humans made. These are the mistakes that people make to replace what they have lost or what they see as missing. I think people's inability to discover themselves, their souls, makes the people around them invisible. This is very well described. Let's focus on Cady now. Her mother protected her a lot and isolated her. She didn't send her to school. This shows that she is a non-socialized person. In fact, another proof of this is that you have a smart toy. In the car-inside scene at the beginning, we saw how attached she was to him. It shows that she gets the attention from him that she doesn't get from her family. After the car accident, she didn't even mourn for her family. What was good for her was the toy she saw on the shelf when she came to her aunt's house. Of course, things changed when her aunt Gemma, who did not touch those toys, made her a toy. Now let's talk a little bit about Gemma. Gemma is a software developer who makes smart toys. Think of it like companies like OpenAI or Meta today. Gemma created that toy, Megan, at the request of her niece Cady. Someone who could be her companion, someone who could fulfill her wishes, all her desires. When everything we love is offered to us, no one can say no. And what Cady lacked was not her family, but what her family didn't offer her. What Megan offered her. Let's go back to Cady. Near the end of the movie, when the murders increase, Gemma's jaw drops and she realizes that Megan is the one who did it. When she packs Megan up and throws her in the trunk, Cady gets so angry... This aggression is one of the behaviors we should give when we lose a person. Cady's like she's lost her family. She had already lost her family. We can count these behaviors as mourning for her family. Fortunately, children are fast learners. Cady was able to figure out that he was a killer. When Megan was about to harm Gemma, Cady's approach to Megan was again not out of trust in people or love for her aunt. Reacting naturally to a harmful element, she turned to the robots she trusted. She remotely controlled a robot named Bruce to cut Megan in half. At that moment, Megan's face-reading system read that Cady trusted her. But it was trust in the other robot. And they reminded her that robots can make mistakes too, and that a mistake is the work of a human being. No matter how much we focus on creating perfection, the reason why self-developing artificial intelligence can make mistakes is again the mistakes we humans make. Artificial intelligence is helping us humans in many fields today. But if we start making them do our own work, we will be alone in this world. Artificial intelligence cannot even be our enemy. Let's think a lot before making mistakes.

After 5 years, I would like to say that there is only 1 after credits scene in DC's Aquman movie. There is no need to extend the article, you will learn whether there is a scene or not and close the page anyway. But don't forget to follow us before you go! Be informed when we analyze Aquman!

The last episode of Loki season 2, Marvel's most successful Disney Plus series, aired on November 10, 2023. Although the ratings dropped compared to the first season, it still managed to be among the greatest productions. It is constantly on the tongues of fans. In the first season, we saw that Kang (The Conqueror, The Remnant; he has many names) is a really powerful being and can do anything. In Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania, we met the 616 variant of Kang, but he was in exile and was easily destroyed by the heroes of the 616 universe, who could rule multiple universes. In the second season of Loki, we met Professor Timely, so we learned where the variants of Kang came from and how he was raised. We also learned that Kang is not invincible, it's just a matter of time. Once you understand how time works, everything becomes possible. I'm going to be a bit spoiled from now on, just so you know. In the first season we learned about Kang'i and what the TVA was. It was presented to us that the multiverses were frighteningly numerous and that their order was very important. The second season showed us what happens when this order is disrupted. This is actually a preparation for Secret Wars, which we will see in the 616 universe. The merger of universes and what will happen as a result will be presented to us. According to the statement made by Loki's creative teams; "Season 1 was half the story, season 2 is the other half. It's complete for us. We don't know what happens next." We always thought that Loki would be included in the 616 universe, but now it seems a bit difficult. At the end of the series, Loki solved the problem of time slippage and now that he can bend space and time, he took Kang's throne. Loki has taken on the form where he keeps all timelines safe with his own hand. People in universes no longer die and the Kang'in genocide is over. Even the endless Kang variants are no longer growing. As I said, Loki now holds the throne. In my opinion, there will be a big uprising in the movie Kang Dynasty. The Kang variant that died in the movie Quantumania attracted a lot of attention. Kangler was afraid of this universe that ruled the multiverses. This was even reported not only by Kangler but also by TVA. According to the report prepared by Mobius at the end of the series, a Kang variant caused an incident in the 616 universe. This was either a reference to the AntMan movie or the Kangler has declared war on the 616 universe, the battle in the fifth Avengers movie could be happening. They saw that early on. Because now they can go to any time in any universe they want. I've said that the merger of universes is scary, but you know it's going to happen. In fact, we saw the preparation for it at the end of The Marvel movie. Just like in No Way Home, there were tears and crossovers between universes. We saw Monica crossing over from 616 to another universe where she met her superhero mom Cap Rabuae. What surprised us was not this but the fact that there was an X-Men with her. Beast said hello to us. New universes will bring new heroes together and great battles will ensue. And to fix the broken universes, One Subscribe All will come to restore the Marvel Universe. So we'll also get a reset movie universe. Let me answer the question in the title. I don't think Loki season 3 is coming. I don't think it's supposed to.

The Amazing Story of Sugar Henry was written by Ronald Dahl in 1977. These short stories have such an imagination and storytelling that they could be made into a film. It was made, it was not late or early. I think Netflix brought this story to the screens at the very right time. Because it was important that Wes Anderson reinforced himself and that there would be no opportunities to be filmed in the past. Wes Anderson, yes! He's the director and writer with the best storytelling in my eyes. The incredible story of Sugar Henry is no different from other films. This film, in which stories are told, is a film that presents an intertwined narrative. Again we see that a diegetic voice is involved in the film. But this time it is completely animated. Instead of the world of the characters in the story, this is a game that is completely presented to us. That's why it was turned into a short film. In order to make it short, fast narration and a lot of images are already welcoming us. I don't want to summarise the film but to tell you quickly, the author of the book starts by talking to us and how a story he found came from Henry Sugar, how he can see without using Imdad Khan's eyes, how Dr. Chatterjee, who investigates this situation, still can't believe it, and the person who is the source of this power is also mentioned (I forgot his name.) Now I will tell you about 3 important characters, firstly Imdad Khan, secondly Dr Chatterjee and finally Henry Sugar. After Imdad Khan is taught this power, he joins circuses like every other person with strange features. People don't believe in this power of his and he wants doctors to prove it. Dr Chatterjee is a scientist and such people believe in physically provable findings. He is very curious to know where this inexplicable meta-physical sense comes from and he just listens and Imdad Khan tells him. Henry Sugar is a greedy and selfish character. When it comes to seeing what the eye cannot see, he immediately thinks of seeing the bottom of the card while playing blackjack. He trains himself for years to cheat and make money, and every day he starts to see without using his eyes more and more quickly. He wins a lot of money and throws it away and an officer warns him. Instead of wasting it on people, donate it to charity, don't be spoilt. He appoints an accountant and from then on he starts to donate all the money he wins from gambling to organizations in need. They know the power. Imdad here wants to tell people that they should open their 3rd eyes and that they cannot see what they should see. Dr Chatterjee, on the other hand, only listens to his 2 eyes because he prefers to touch rather than believe. Henry Sugar, as I said, is a manipulative arsehole. But he believes in this power so much to make money. He wants more, and he improves himself. He starts to see more. He has a clearer vision now. That's because he can see through himself. In both senses. He sees a clot in his heart. He realizes he's going to die. He realizes that he can share what he has not only with himself but with all of humanity. I think this shot below was one of the best indicators in the film. This indicator symbolizes the ability to discover oneself and to see one's inner world rather than a clot in the heart. How one looks at an event is very important. Using not only our right and left eyes but also our invisible eye can change everything.

The Guardians of the Galaxy are Marvel's most colorful productions. In this series, which reflects James Gunn's spirit, we not only witness a visual feast but also enjoy a film series that delights our ears. As always, James Gunn has chosen great songs for this movie. The previous films had music from Peter, who left Earth in 1988. That's why the 70s and 80s music were dominant in the first two films. Star-Lord (Peter Quill), who came to Earth during Infinity War and Endgame, had discovered new music until the 2000s and then returned to space. In this movie, we also listen to great music. It is evident that the songs he chose reflect his longing for Earth and his family. "Creep (Acoustic)" by Radiohead (1993) – In the opening sequence, it is playing during the Knowhere scene. "Crazy on You" by Heart (1975) – It is playing when Adam Warlock flies to Knowhere and attacks Rocket Raccoon. "Since You've Been Gone" by Rainbow (1979) – Rocket is injured and The Guardians of the Galaxy are trying to save him during the scene where the song is playing. This song was also featured in the trailer. "In The Meantime" by Spacehog (1995) – This song is playing during the scene where The Guardians of the Galaxy are trying to infiltrate the Orgoscope. It was also featured in the December 2022 trailer. "Reasons" by Earth, Wind & Fire (1975) – It plays during the scene where Groot is fighting in the Orgoscope. "Do You Realize??" by The Flaming Lips (2002) – We hear this song as The Guardians of the Galaxy travel to the Counter-Earth. "We Care a Lot" by Faith No More (1985) – This song plays when they arrive on Counter-Earth. "Koinu no Carnival (From Minute Waltz)" by Ehamic (2018) – This song plays on the radio of the car that Peter, Nebula, and Groot ride in as they go to the High Evolutionary. "I'm Always Chasing Rainbows" by Alice Cooper (1976) – It plays in the Bowie (the spaceship). Rocket is in a coma, and The Guardians of the Galaxy have gone to the High Evolutionary. "San Francisco" by The Mowgli's (2012) – This song plays when Gamora is flying Bowie. In that scene, Bowie is forced to land and nearly crushes Groot and Peter. "Poor Girl" by X (1983) – This song plays during the gambling scene at Knowhere. "This Is the Day" by The The (1983) – This song plays during the scene where the Guardians of the Galaxy go to rescue Nebula, Mantis, and Drax from High Evolutionary. "No Sleep Till Brooklyn" by Beastie Boys (1986) – This song plays during the battle sequence at High Evolutionary's. "Dog Days Are Over" by Florence + the Machine (2008) – Everyone gathers in the square at Knowhere for one last celebration. Even Drax dances in this scene. "I Will Dare" by The Replacements (1984) – It plays during the Credits. "Come and Get Your Love" by Redbone (1974) – Rocket plays this song in one of his missions. He says he wants to play a song that everyone knows. This song can also be considered as the final word in the script. The second song played in the series is also the second-to-last song of the series. "Badlands" by Bruce Springsteen (1978) – It's the last song. It plays just before the after-credits scene, as a reference to the time when Peter was born.

Although the documentary seems to be based on Friedkin's commentary on the Exorcist film in its introduction, it is about his entire directorial approach, his view on movies, and his personal life inferences. We can say that it is unique for enthusiasts. It's impossible to watch from outside the US. I don't know why the documentary was not opened to the public. First and foremost, the most significant event in the documentary, in my opinion, is a secret revealed for the first time by Friedkin. That is, the film says that the author of the novel will give Friedkin all the proceeds from the film to play the role of Reverend Karras. Of course, Friedkin denies this and casts someone with no acting experience in the film, but the role seems tailor-made for him; after all, "the camera loves him (Miller)" At the beginning of the documentary, Friedkin says that he created the shooting plan for the film based on the novel, not the original script for the Exorcist adaptation, for which Blatty won an Oscar for "Best Adapted Screenplay." He clearly explains why, while writing the book, the initial Iraq scene seemed "unnecessary," even to the editors who included it in the film. Those scenes create a great deal of mystery and tension for the events that will take place in the movie. He talks about how important those scenes are, even though they don't seem to be necessary without big things happening in both northern Iraq and Washington. In fact, those scenes set up what will happen next and prepare the audience. The scene in the iconic poster of the movie is inspired by René Magritte's painting The Empire of Light. We knew that, and of course, he says it again. When the high priest (Max Von Sydow) fails to perform well in the exorcism scenes, Friedkin suggests that because Sydow has worked with Ingmar Bergman for many years, he should invite Bergman to the set and call Bergman. The actor says that the problem has nothing to do with Bergman; he just couldn't get into the role because he doesn't believe in God. It is strange that someone who has even played the role of "Jesus" before would make such a statement. "There I was playing the human Jesus," he says. Friedkin is good too; when you say play like that, the role of Merrin we see in the movie starts to perform. This is an anecdote that sounds ridiculous to me. At the end of the movie, the controversial scene is Father Karras telling the devil to "get inside me" after his fight with Regan and Karras jumping out of the window when the devil leaves the little girl and enters Karras. Friedkin sees this page as a small stain on the white sheet, which he still sees as a problem 50 years later. Because there are things in his mind that are not understood and do not fit. Suicide is a great sin. Friedkin claims that even if Karras sacrifices himself to the little girl and jumps with the devil inside him, knowing he will die eventually, he will not be able to live.So, is the devil taking over Karras and throwing him down? Friedkin asks the author. The author says no. He claims that if he jumped consciously, he committed suicide.In the end, even if his friend, who is truly a father, comes to confession, committing one of the greatest sins can still have the same meaning as the devil's victory... or it can be shown as the reason for regaining his faith by sacrificing such an event while Karras claims to have lost his faith as a director.He says he can't defend the stage. He talks about the meaning of the small moments of the movie, the scenes that seem to repeat each other. For example, Chris sees the nuns walking towards the house. The nuns are in white. They are happy. Chris is happy. We see two children dressed as witches running after the nuns, chasing them. We hear a phrase thrown at Father Karras by a homeless man on the subway, pronounced by Reagan with a demon inside him. Karras isn't quite sure there. Was that what the man on the subway said the other day? Maybe even this small detail is one of the deceptions that we have witnessed that the devil fulfills in the movie. In one scene of the movie, Father Karras is startled by a sudden phone ringing. Friedkin, the phone didn't ring there. "I shot," he says. "It was a method for the director to have this kind of mobbing with the actors in the filmmaking concept at the time," he says. "We saw it that way," he says. After dealing only with the content of this movie, which I have become obsessed with, it never occurred to me to mention its director and writer. I can say that Friedkin does not have a single known film in Turkey other than The Exorcist. Even if "French Connection" did win an Oscar, few people know it's a Friedkin movie. I haven't watched his other movies, and I don't plan to watch them either. Sometimes I think one movie is enough to love the director and learn about his style. And in the documentary, he talks about some of the patterns in all of Friedkin's films, specific to auteur cinema. Finally, my favorite thing about Friedkin is that, even at this age, he talks about movies with a passion. In addition to having definite judgments about the subjects, it is completely unknown why we came, what is happening, and what it is to live, but it is full of life. In the last 10-15 minutes of the documentary, he talks about how valuable it is to have stones that have been found since ancient times during his visit to Japan and Kyoto, the existence of civilization, and the ability to come to these days and engage with them. This causes him to marvel at all kinds of things and derive great pleasure from the little things. Therefore, I listen to all the interviews I come across on the internet. The majority of his interviews spanned nearly 50 years; even what they say in this documentary is the same. It's like a repertoire is always getting new pieces, but the main structure stays the same.

(Spoilers Ahead) It has been a month since I shared my expectations about The Crown Season 5 right here on this site, and boy was I unprepared. It was much more and less than what I was expecting. I expected more historic 90's events but it was more involved with what's happening in the mansions inside. I also expected the same for earlier seasons, but got Royal Family drama again. I don't know why I keep expecting more when the series' name is literally The Crown, which tells the story of the Royal Family. I guess it's because they're able to tell historic events so well and so detailed that I forget it's supposed to be a show of the Royal Family. The episode I loved the most called "Mou Mou" told the story of people outside the Royals and it also got the most votes on IMDB with 8.5 rating. So I guess it's time for me to tell Peter Morgan that we need another historical drama. Definitely a show which takes place somewhere between 60s-00s , I don't have the patience for any type of media that involves World War II. There has been so many. Enough, really. Anyway, I found this season very well-made, well-written, and well-shot in The Crown fashion, just like earlier seasons. You can tell it's the same series despite the whole cast being new. Some episodes stood out more, like "Mou Mou", "Couple 31"and "Annus Horribilis". The only thing I didn't like was probably the slow start with the Royal Yacht that I'm sure nobody gives two shits about, and the gruesome and terrifying scene at the start of "Ipatiev House". The whole episode was dark and unsettling, I was a fan of the work put in, but not in the story. The ugly truth of war, ego and politics... Russian politicians though. Yeltsin cracked me up when he talked behind the queen NEXT TO the queen. I loved the way they opened season 5, the scene where the queen has an appointment with the doctor. Such a simple way to tell "we switched the cast! and now they're older!" It also describes the monarchy. It's like the monarchy is getting old & having health problems as the queen does. The other queens and kings probably did not face such drastic social change in their reigning years. Elizabeth has seen it all, War, Communism, Liberalism, Globalization,Technology etc. She has been a queen since the 1950s. I think It's pretty normal to fall behind after some time, and one of the main arguments of this season was this. How can you "lead" multiple countries with an old mindset in a changing world? We understand that better in the last episode. Britannia the royal yacht gets decommissioned, Queen-lover John Major leaves his place for Tony Blair and Hong Kong finally sets free from British colonialism. ( I love the shots of the Hong Kong scene though, I would like to add that.) The queen is seen worrying about her precious yacht while there are people living in poverty outside her mansion. This might have made sense in 1800s but it's the 1990s. We're talking about sovereign countries and human rights. We're also supposed to believe Charles is this modern royal who believes in"New Britain". I guess he sees himself as "modern" because he defied the church & monarchy with the affair, divorce and Camillagate (the dirty phone call) Charles, to begin with, you wouldn't even have half the fortune and privilege you have and we wouldn't be asking your opinion with "New Britain". Enough me being over with the monarchy, but still I'm glad the show is questioning the place of monarchy in modern times. Even seeing a bit of 90's TV channels were a pleasure, when William was switching channels, until he went back to boring BBC upon his grandma's request. I didn't mind the episode with Prince Philip and the close family friend finding themselves a new hobby. I felt like I was not watching a member of the Royal family, just a woman who was grieving and an old dude enjoying life. Which also made me extra happy, since you won't see those people having fun in the slightest, one should be grieving and one should act old (whatever that means in this society) So, yes, I enjoyed it. I'm not sure about the Prince Charles episode where he had this interview to save his reputation and apparently established a foundation which supported diversity? And we're supposed to feel sorry because his dirty calls with Camilla went public. Nope, I won't buy it because Dominic West is handsome as hell. (Charles is nowhere near as charismatic as he is! I see what you're trying to do show runners. You tested me once with Josh, and you're still testing me) I know for a fact that no one is all white or all black. He might be a good person in real life (I mean I don't know him in real life, I haven't lived/know that much to judge) but it's a fact that he's not in the best royal members club. The episode did not have to put his charity work at the end, after his scandal went public. What was the point if it's not to make us sympathize with him? I don't know, I'm very confused about Charles, is he the victim or the villain? Maybe even both. The show is not helping me decide either. One thing is for sure that something about him and Camilla sounds and looks wrong? Maybe love is like that, defying the odds and falling in love with the wrong person. I also don't know that, this was supposed to be about me reviewing The Crown. Yes, I found the last bit of the episode lame, where he gives a speech about being different? That audience will never be as privileged as you are Charles (or in that case the character Charles, since I don't know if it was his exact words) , and you're different because of your choices. I have always loved the video where he tries to breakdance though, so maybe you're forgiven The Crown. Some highlights in the season could be the whole storyline with Princess Margaret and Peter Townsend reuniting. I saw that coming, but the way it was told was beautiful. Margaret getting excited like she was 16, her snapping at her sister at last, and the old couple having one last dance... The flashbacks also made it better, I forgot that they were that madly in love. I just love Margaret to be honest. Any scene with her is going to be a delight, I'm pretty sure. As for Diana, anything with her in it, I was hooked to the screen. I don't know why, but I just want to know any possible thing about her life. Not in a creepy way though, as in admiring and trying to understand. How was she mistreated and how did she cope with it, did she deserve the treatment she got? Those are the questions I previously asked myself. I also did not live in the same time span as she did, so I'm always curious to know more. I loved her interview scene, her relationship with Hasnat and Mohamed, just her in general. Give me 20 hours of Diana, and I would still watch that. Something about her just feels very sweet, organic and charismatic. What do I think about Elizabeth Debicki though? She had Diana's mannerisms, the look with her doe-y eyes, voice that alters towards the end of the sentence etc. But I also wanted to see her being "People's Princess", getting her energy from them and her showing kindness & empathy in return. Seeing her alone and suffering was quite depressing. People using her and her just wanting to be loved... Her treating everyone equally, like Hasnat, just a regular doctor guy when she is a world-renowned, rich PRINCESS. You might say, what about it? Trust me, if you were a princess, you wouldn't be at that hospital anyway. And the scene where she almost crashes the car? Too soon, dear show runners, too soon. I see your foreshadowing and I don't like it. I loved the Couple 31 episode, just everything about it. I'm a psychologist who took couples counseling classes, so seeing other couples describe their marriage and breaking point was extra interesting for me. The 15 minute conversation between Charles and Diana? It was CHEF'S KISS. Well, to me, at least. I could have watched an hour of that. The fact that they were talking about their real feelings and struggles after their divorce tells me so much about how much they had this pressure to stay married. I also saw that Diana truly loved Charles, which is very obvious in the way who is trying to save the marriage and who is ruining it. Diana's stance in every scene she's in, I'm behind my tv yelling "Exactly, make them suffer, you deserve it". Like the scene with her voting against the monarchy, doing the scandalous interview, telling literally everything to the guy who came to collect info for his book. Her just going to the queen"Hey, So I made this interview, I talked against you guys, K. Bye." What didn't sit right with me was William's behavior towards his mom. I always saw Diana and her sons as this inseparable loving trio. The boys were always smiling and having fun next to her, and she took them to unusual places, so that they could have fun. These were in the pictures and videos though. It's the media, I don't/can't know the truth. But you can't fake such a bond like mother-child to look good to the media. I really don't know where Peter Morgan got his source from, but i hope it's not true. He even preferred his grandma? Very weird. Harry is also nowhere to be seen. What is he doing while William's at school? The house seemed empty so I guess they forgot to add him? Poor Harry. Let's talk about Mou Mou now. The pacing and character development was brilliant. The fact that we are finally witnessing an actual Arab playing an Arab is extra important. Since I'm familiar with their culture more, I was able to sympathize right from the first minute and was curious about how they reached their success. We have been watching people who were born into privilege, wealth and royalty most episodes in The Crown, so episodes like this are just like a breath of fresh air. Mohamed's character is very interesting; he is ambitious but in an obsessed kind of way. Dodi is also very interesting, you wouldn't think the son of a rich guy would want to become an ambitious filmmaker. The whole episode them trying to fit in to the English culture is interesting and pathetic, on Mohamed's side. His obsession is very weird and unnecessary. You can't take the culture in you that easily when you were born & raised in a somewhere else and you shouldn't need to. Anyway, I'm glad that they were able to make it in the U.K., that really is a success story and an example that cultures do not matter when you're good at what you do. The reaction Mohamed gives when Dodi says he wants to make movies though, that my friends, was so close to home, the ungrateful "My son wants to make "useless" art when I want him to become a businessman or work in a socially acceptable job". The storyline with Sydney, I loved it. Again, someone outside the Royal Family, being more interesting than them in like 20 minutes of screen time. And finally, the end of the episode, shows two of the outcasts meeting and bonding, Mohamed and Diana. The father and son duo returns in the last episode, to my surprise and joy. Like I said, they make things more interesting and flow-y. The episodes go faster when they're around, when The Crown is supposed to be a dialogue based historical drama. I was surprised when I found out Dodi had a girlfriend though (they even got engaged!!), because I thought Diana and him would have met by now. It was getting closer to the tragic event and I wondered how they did not even meet. So I looked it up on the internet and apparently, Dodi may have called off his engagement for Diana? And when they passed away together on that car accident, they have been going out for 2-3 months. This means that we are very very close to Diana's death, I wouldn't be surprised if she doesn't make it for the most of the episodes next season. Looking that up and knowing that Diana's packing up & getting ready for her own death, made me quite emotional I'm not going to lie. Thank you Hans Zimmer and Martin Phipps though. When I'm feeling something, 80% of the times the score is pretty damn good. Now, to sum up, (yes I've talked a lot) I liked this season as much as I did the other seasons. Seasons 3 and 4 was a tiny bit better for me, but it may be because of the excitement of getting to meet grown up Charles and Diana respectively. Now that we know them, their awful marriage and the story, it might have been a little less exciting. It goes downhill as the years pass by anyway. Another criticism I had was that the show focused too much on Charles and Diana's marriage or them as individuals. I think more than half was about them. Not that I'm complaining but what about the queen herself? I feel like she wasn't that present as much as she was in the previous seasons. It's pretty ironic when she and Philip show up to a party, they dance for like 30 minutes then go straight to their beds. The party seemed to start right when they left, and this was exactly how the season went. The real drama (party) happened when they weren't involved at all. Elizabeth was just a little jealous, that's all. It had been decades since the two got married and it was obvious they had different lifestyles. You should've understood that by now, Elizabeth. Kudos to them for staying married that long with that many differences though. Plus, I wanted to see the drama between Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson. Divorces and marriages of the queen's other children were not prominent. Well, the children were not prominent either. I guess there wasn't any material to cover up, but they could have prevented this with making less seasons and earning less. Since we know that isn't going to happen, it's good to enjoy the ride. They make more seasons, and I get to enjoy it longer. Somebody just make me stop now, I can talk about this show forever. Su Evci nsuevci@gmail.com

As we are hours away from The Crown's newest season, we can't help but to be excited for which historical 90's events will make it to the cut this season. As we saw in the trailer, with the beautiful Bittersweet Symphony playing in the background (which was a very clever choice) I can see that the Windsor Castle Fire is definitely taking place in one of the episodes, the iconic Martin Bashir Interview with Princess Diana is being recreated, and last but not least Di's Revenge Dress continues to be one of the most popular & iconic moments even in the trailer. I'm very excited to welcome the new cast into the series, since season 6 is the last and will also be revolving around them. Elizabeth Debicki will be playing Diana, and when I tell you how shocked I was about the similarity between Di and Debicki when I saw the first official stills, I wasn't overreacting. As you can tell, I love Diana and her philanthropy and bravery, so I have to talk about her first, before I move on to the Queen herself. Diana in the 90's gains her confidence and defies the rules once again. We saw her hugging the AIDS patient in the previous season, now we will see her back in the dating game as a divorced former royal, some stylish moments from her that can be considered "too much" at that time for a royal, her desire to spend quality time with her sons and make sure they have a normal childhood while still being in the spotlight and as always, her philanthropy. She will reveal lots of information about her personal life; like her eating disorder, "crowded" marriage and self harm. She's a trailblazer for revealing such people like the Royals can have these disorders. And I love that she will wear that dress to get back at Charles, so fearless and bold. PS. I hope they will include the song "New Dress" by Depeche Mode in the series somehow. It's about how people are paying attention to Diana's dresses rather than world problems. (Thanks Papa for teaching me the song) The only concern I have is the Martin Bashir Interview scene. I'm sure it will be the exact same as the real one, but from what I saw on the internet, people were concerned about Diana's stance in the scene. She always has had this sad and calm nature, but people were saying Debicki's Diana looked too confident in that particular scene. I did get what they were saying, you can see the gif below. But it's just a 2 second scene from the trailer, we don't know how the entire scene is going to play out. I'm pretty sure Debicki did a wonderful job, we can see the essence of Diana in her voice & body language. So I'm very excited to see her. "I do things differently because I don't go by a rule book, because I lead from the heart, not the head" -Princess Diana,1995 Now, let's talk about our Queen. Imelda Staunton, who some of you may know her as the wonderfully horrible Dolores Umbridge from Harry Potter, but cinephiles may recognize her instantly. She is a brilliant actress, as well as Claire Foy and Olivia Colman. Every actress who has been cast as her, have been nailing it. As we see it from the trailer, we're in for a ride once again. One scene in particular, that I'm very excited to watch is her "Annus Horribilis" scene. As her children were going through divorces (a very unusual word for the Church) & after the Windsor fire, she declared that 1992 was the worst year for her. I'm also excited how she will react to Princess Diana's bold statements and her sons' ongoing affair with Camilla Parker-Bowles. Now that she's older & wiser, I'm ready to see a stronger Queen opposed to Prime Ministers as well. “1992 is not a year on which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure. In the words of one of my more sympathetic correspondents, it has turned out to be an Annus Horribilis” -The Queen, 40th Anniversary of her Reign, 1992 I'm not that ready for seeing Prince Charles and Camilla though. They got on on my nerves most of the time when I was watching the previous season, and based on the trailer and historical data, I'm afraid I have to sit through them again. But, here's the thing, they were brilliant as actors and they're just doing their jobs. Plus, Josh O'Connor almost made me sympathize with Prince Charles, so I wonder if Dominic West will do the same for me. I don't really know why, but I like Prince Philip, seeing him is a delight as well. What I'm also looking forward to, is seeing Peter Townsend (Princess Margaret's lover from Season 1) whose name was on the list for the cast,Princess Margaret herself, Dodi Fayed (Diana's lover) and more screen time for the Queen's other kids. As we come closer to the present, I wonder how far they are willing to go to show some events, like Diana's tragic death. We know it's coming since Netflix has already cast its William and Kate. I think it's the right decision, to end the series after season 6, because as we get closer and closer datewise, I feel like it's too soon ; it doesn't give the same nostalgic feel & doesn't feel like it's history. However, I would love to see some rebellious Prince Harry and his scandals. So I hope it's there when we come to Season 6. Back when the show first began, it was supposed to end after season 5. So I guess we're lucky that we are getting more storylines. As for the Di's death part, it should be done very carefully. Nobody but the Royals themselves know the real truth, so I'm sending my prayers to the Writer's Room for the next season. But I wonder how it's going to work out with respecting both parties on the matter. Anyway, it's The Crown, they have shown some controversial scenes, they will be fine. Last but not least, I don't care if the show is portraying the truth or not, and I don't care if the number of meetings between Charles and Camilla were 2 instead of 40. It's entertainment, and I'm consuming & enjoying it. Some people love the historical part of it, some love the drama. It's the portrayal of real people, I know that. But if they were doing horrible stuff while being on the public eye, then I guess you have nothing to do for. Again, it's entertainment and we love drama. Su Evci nsuevci@gmail.com