15 thoughts on “Coming Soon: Victoria, as in Queen

  1. Not completely thrilled by the costumes (but I do like that riding habit). Why on earth is the Garter sash so wide (see Privy Council Dress)? It’s about twice as wide as it needs to be, and looks completely silly!
    See here http://www.gogmsite.net/_Media/1842-queen-victoria-after.jpeg
    (spot also the real Victoria wearing the Garter around her arm, first female monarch to wear it. They researched 15th c. effigies to let her know how Ladies of the Garter wore it…speaking of which, nice to see it around Albert’s knee in this upcoming series).
    What is the fashion for differences of UK/US broadcasts? Advert breaks? I remember you got War and Peace (still shudders in horror) in different sections.
    Re the post on Anne Boleyn, I’m a bit Victoria-ed out. Really hoping that rumours of film on Queen and Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough will see the light (although in the meantime, there is always the wonderful 1970s ‘The First Churchills’, which is a periwig-fangirl’s delight…)

    1. I enjoyed the First Churchills and I’m afraid the new one won’t be as good. And also how are they going to handle the Sarah/Anne possible lesbian relationship?

    2. Actually she didn’t wear the Garter in her first Privy Council appearance. Sir David Wilkie was commissioned to do a painting of the event and she’s not wearing the insignia of the Order of the Garter (although Wilike himself took artistic liberties by depicting her dress as white rather than black).

  2. I too am excited about series. I believe Victoria’s coronation dress exists.

  3. Looks good!

    That blue satin gown with the black net edging at the top… is ringing a bell somewhere, as if I’ve seen it before…

  4. According to “In Royal Fashion,” Victoria was buried in her wedding lace, which is why it’s no longer with the dress.

  5. Hmm I have to agree with above… Kinda ‘over’ Victoria and Anne Boleyn, as you ladies pointed out, there are *so* many other interesting figures in so many periods to feature instead. Isn’t this the same timeline as the not-that-old young victoria? That said, will probably watch as it does look pretty.

    Side note, wtf is up with the real victoria’s hands in the 1842 portrait?! And then again in the picture from badger up there. Seriously those are almost identical, crazy looking hands.

  6. theres an upcoming exhibition at Buckingham palace on the current queen’s iconic gowns that I’m intending to see when next down sarth. interestingly the photos in the sunday times last week showed that both her coronation and wedding gowns have faded from brilliant white to deep ivory bordering on yellow,

  7. Wait, wasn’t this already done in the Young Victoria?
    Are they trying to make Victoria the next Elizabeth-in that there will be a zillion movies/TV special about her?

    1. In the last fifteen or so years, there have been three movies/TV series on Queen Victoria. The first Victoria and Albert starring Victoria Hamilton & Johnathan Firth, Colin’s baby brother. It’s worth watching for them and Diana Rigg as Baroness Lehzen. The next is the movie Young Victoria costumes by the ‘Costume Goddess’ Sandy Powell and this version.
      Only version that portrays Victoria as not pixie pretty is first.
      Three in 15 years is not a glut.

      1. Thank for the info, I’ll definitely have to check them out!
        I think I’ve just seen a bunch of stuff recently that has Victoria in it tangentially/is set in Victorian times, so that’s mixing me up.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: