Jump to content
Essential Maintenance Nov 28 :We'll need to put the forum into "Under Maintenance" mode from 9 PM to 1 AM (approx).GMT+7

Here's All the People Who Have Said No To Performing at King Charles' Coronation


Recommended Posts

Posted

 

Prince Charles With The Spice Girls At The Manchester Opera House For A Royal Gala Performance To Celebrate The 21st Anniversary Of The Prince's Trust Charity.

 

King Charles III is learning the hard way that leaving it too late to finalize a big soiree is a bad idea. As the newly ascended British monarch prepares for his coronation on May 6, the palace is reportedly struggling to book A-list British entertainers to mark the historic event, with many citing busy schedules to explain their absence.

 

That’s a sharp break from the last major royal celebrations in June to mark the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, or 70 years on the throne, before she died aged 96 in September. A star-studded concert at Buckingham Palace had featured Queen + Adam Lambert, Diana Ross, Alicia Keys, Elton John, Craig David, Elbow, Sir Rod Stewart, Celeste, and other big names.

 

The May 6 coronation will see Charles crowned alongside Camilla, the Queen Consort, at Westminster Abbey. The next day, coronation lunches are due to take place in communities across Britain before an evening concert at Windsor Castle.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-people-said-no-performing-165836215.html

Posted
11 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Probably he can have his stars - or at least the version 30 year after they were successful. 

But probably that is a good match for him. ???? 

 

les-spice-girls-enfin-reunies-au-complet

 

Took me a long time to forget about them, so thanks for reminding me, NOT.

  • Haha 2
Posted

As an American this makes no sense.  He became King in September.  A bit late for any ceremony now isn't it???   <deleted> he has the money to throw himself a party anytime he wants....5555

  • Sad 2
Posted
57 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Probably he can have his stars - or at least the version 30 year after they were successful. 

But probably that is a good match for him. ???? 

 

les-spice-girls-enfin-reunies-au-complet

 

They have already said no.

Posted
29 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

As an American this makes no sense.  He became King in September.  A bit late for any ceremony now isn't it???   <deleted> he has the money to throw himself a party anytime he wants....5555

Yeah, it's fair play. If you've got the money you can throw a big party if you feel like it

Posted
32 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

As an American this makes no sense.  He became King in September.  A bit late for any ceremony now isn't it???   <deleted> he has the money to throw himself a party anytime he wants....5555

Well it wouldn't to you, the USA is a young country, but I bet the Native American Indians had "King's" and big coronation's before it was taken away....:whistling:

  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, transam said:

Well it wouldn't to you, the USA is a young country, but I bet the Native American Indians had "King's" and big coronation's before it was taken away....:whistling:

Incas & Aztecs _'S of the (USA) Border' maybe, but not present USA native Americans ... just a chief of the tribe/clan.  No major silliness or drama.

 

Royals ... self importance to themselves and ignorant subjects ... IMHO

Edited by KhunLA
  • Sad 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Incas & Aztecs _'S of the (USA) Border' maybe, but not present USA native Americans ... just a chief of the tribe/clan.  No major silliness or drama.

 

Royals ... self importance to themselves and ignorant subjects ... IMHO

Chiefs were the King's, don't forget it.....:cowboy:

Posted
36 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Incas & Aztecs _'S of the (USA) Border' maybe, but not present USA native Americans ... just a chief of the tribe/clan.  No major silliness or drama.

 

Royals ... self importance to themselves and ignorant subjects ... IMHO

adding IMHO adds no defense to your remarks labeling the Royals subjects ignorant.

  • Like 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

adding IMHO adds no defense to your remarks labeling the Royals subjects ignorant.

I like to add IMHO to my replies that don't have sources or links that verify my statement/opinion.   This way they almost don't get deleted for 'unsubstantiated' info being posted ????

Posted
1 hour ago, Skallywag said:

As an American this makes no sense.  He became King in September.  A bit late for any ceremony now isn't it???   <deleted> he has the money to throw himself a party anytime he wants....5555

He does have the money and he is having a party. The Crown is a net contributor to the UK economy. The money for the coronation will come from the Crown.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

adding IMHO adds no defense to your remarks labeling the Royals subjects ignorant.

I took from KhunLA's post that he does not think that all subjects are ignorant, only those who confer mythical importance to the royal family. As one of Brian's subjects, I tend to agree with him.

Posted
4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I took from KhunLA's post that he does not think that all subjects are ignorant, only those who confer mythical importance to the royal family. As one of Brian's subjects, I tend to agree with him.

I'll let him speak for himself

Posted
5 hours ago, Skallywag said:

As an American this makes no sense.  He became King in September.  A bit late for any ceremony now isn't it???   <deleted> he has the money to throw himself a party anytime he wants....5555

Charles Having a party on the day the Queen died , would be rather inappropriate 

  • Like 2
Posted
44 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Another headline aiming to trigger more keyboard combat!

 

Why not wait to see who says yes before writing the party off? 

 

 

 

 

Take that minus Robbie Williams are the headline act...

Posted
6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I am extremely disappointed in Charles. I had hoped that he would do the right thing and not seek the crown so William can save the monarchy from insignificance. IMO it's sad that Charles is so determined to be crowned that he can't see that HE ( IMO ) is the threat to the monarchy surviving.

Also, he's doing to William what was done to him and making William wait and wait to become King.

IMO Charles should retire to southern France and live out his last days in the sun. He and his wife are never going to be popular, IMO.

Maybe they should all retire to live out their days eldewhere. 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Take that minus Robbie Williams are the headline act...

Lionel Ritchie should get them dancing on the ceiling,all night long.

Posted
3 hours ago, nauseus said:

Another headline aiming to trigger more keyboard combat!

 

Why not wait to see who says yes before writing the party off?

Because the people who said no is still a news story.

  • Sad 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, farmerjo said:

Lionel Ritchie should get them dancing on the ceiling,all night long.

At 73, maybe but one suspects the days of all night long are over. 
 

Im sure anyone who can be bothered to watch will let us know how he did. 

Posted
10 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I hear Garry Glitter is available, sit him next to Andy and they can chat about the 'good old days'.

That's horrible ...... funny though!!

 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Announcements





×
×
  • Create New...