Why in the world would they put in such a total made-up thing that Prince Albert was shot when the attempted assassination happened? Neither he nor Queen Victoria were injured AT ALL. I find it completely baffling why they would do such a thing. Just imagine if in the future they make a movie about Kennedy's assassination, or when Ronald Reagan was shot, and Jackie Kennedy or Nancy Reagan were shown to be shot, too? Horrible.
share[deleted]
It was probably to provide a climax for the movie and to wrap up their quarrel.
Please don't feed the trolls.
Hollywood man! Good ol' Hollywood!
---
Do not let your cat eat dry food! Go to Dr. Pierson's CATINFO.ORG to know why.
I have no idea why Hollywood puts in these dramatic pieces into an already interesting story. It gets to the point that I rarely believe anything I see in movies now, even if they are based or true stories.
If it harms none, do what thou wilt.
Except this movie was made in England, directed by a Canadian and written by an Englishman, so Hollywood doesn't have anything to do with it.
shareNot Hollywood, but Julian Fellowes.
sharecinematic liberty or something like that
so many movies, so little time
yes, agree very annoying and just plain stupid.
Once you realize that was bogus, it calls into question everything else in the film.