To start, yes there is a lot of low quality clips and much of what you see here has been in previous documentaries, however, it's not exactly possible to improve video quality from thirty years ago so you shouldn't judge it based on today's standards, that's just stupid. As for it "being done before" it's important to note that many docs fall to the wayside over the years and become difficult to track down, so there will always be new editions for every generation so long as Diana stays relevant.
I found this to be an interesting watch. There is no narrative, at least not in a literal sense, but there is an obvious angle to the documentary. Not all the information is presented, some parts of the clips shown are deliberately edited to enhance mood or atmosphere, like painting the prince or princess in a certain light. That being said, it's surprisingly unbiased, there was a lot of uncomfortable dialogue from interviews with citizens or journalists who were for or against Princess Diana. It was quite polarized The worst was the paparazzi. This documentary solidified my assumption that the paparazzi were as bad as everyone made them out be. The way they talked about her was disgusting, like she wasn't even a human being. They harassed her to the point of breaking her spirit. If she resisted them she was called a f---ing b----, if she dared played along and smiled or engaged with them they had the audacity to call her a mediawhore. It's like victim blaming after a rape, and it is extremely uncomfortable to watch.
I was also surprised to see so many people given a platform to speak out against her and say such repulsive things. I guess the bar was set incredibly low for journalistic integrity in the UK in the 80's and 90's. Journalists were given the opportunity to voice pointless, unfounded arguments which often ended up in childish name calling (?!).
The truth was that Diana was an unusual woman. Her humanitarian efforts were commendable, she did more than any of the other Royal family were willing to do at the time. Yes her marriage was on the rocks from the outset. Interviews with Charles have spelled out the truth from the begginning. I don't think he ever truly deceived Diana, but I believe she had trouble accepting and facing the truth and thought, like many women, that she could change him. It was cruel to expect her to just face up and deal with the situation and take it in stride. Blasting her for having mental health crises was just stigmatizing mental illness and it's part and parcel to the incredibly prejudiced attitudes of the time (which sadly still persist to this day). She was not a saint and that is not why people still talk about her to this day, she was representative of a hope for a future that really we will never know.
I recommend this doc but it is difficult at times to watch.
I found this to be an interesting watch. There is no narrative, at least not in a literal sense, but there is an obvious angle to the documentary. Not all the information is presented, some parts of the clips shown are deliberately edited to enhance mood or atmosphere, like painting the prince or princess in a certain light. That being said, it's surprisingly unbiased, there was a lot of uncomfortable dialogue from interviews with citizens or journalists who were for or against Princess Diana. It was quite polarized The worst was the paparazzi. This documentary solidified my assumption that the paparazzi were as bad as everyone made them out be. The way they talked about her was disgusting, like she wasn't even a human being. They harassed her to the point of breaking her spirit. If she resisted them she was called a f---ing b----, if she dared played along and smiled or engaged with them they had the audacity to call her a mediawhore. It's like victim blaming after a rape, and it is extremely uncomfortable to watch.
I was also surprised to see so many people given a platform to speak out against her and say such repulsive things. I guess the bar was set incredibly low for journalistic integrity in the UK in the 80's and 90's. Journalists were given the opportunity to voice pointless, unfounded arguments which often ended up in childish name calling (?!).
The truth was that Diana was an unusual woman. Her humanitarian efforts were commendable, she did more than any of the other Royal family were willing to do at the time. Yes her marriage was on the rocks from the outset. Interviews with Charles have spelled out the truth from the begginning. I don't think he ever truly deceived Diana, but I believe she had trouble accepting and facing the truth and thought, like many women, that she could change him. It was cruel to expect her to just face up and deal with the situation and take it in stride. Blasting her for having mental health crises was just stigmatizing mental illness and it's part and parcel to the incredibly prejudiced attitudes of the time (which sadly still persist to this day). She was not a saint and that is not why people still talk about her to this day, she was representative of a hope for a future that really we will never know.
I recommend this doc but it is difficult at times to watch.