Secret Wedding Rehearsal video for William and Kate... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kav0FEhtLug&feature=player_embedded Gotta love East 17....

I wasn't certain if it was for real until I saw the Prince of Wales getting down. Even HRH was in the mood. Wonder if the actual wedding will be the usual staid affair? (Love to be a fly on the wall for the numerous meetings before this was done.)

If you look closely, you can tell the members of the royal family are not right, although it's very well done. William appears to be far too small when he enters. I believe the real William is much taller. I don't know Kate's family well enough to say how good the lookalikes are. It's fun, though!

Hopefully, William will have better luck than his mother did.

T- Mobile did a great job. I had a good chuckle once I realized they were all "actors". I am looking forward to the event and seeing where their lives go.

It's probably more interesting than the real thing. Although, I vaguely remember the first one. We were out camping somewhere around Modesto and just had a radio. It was all over the radio and I couldn't figure out what all the fuss was about To be honest, I still don't understand what all the fuss is about. If I were them, I'd elope rather than have the press all over it.

I confess, that would be rather more entertaining, in many respects, than what I'm likely to see when I haul myself out of bed at an obscenely early hour (for me) on April 29 to watch the real thing. Having to be in a wedding on that scale, with that much fuss and media attention, would be a nightmare for me, but I enjoy watching other people, who are not me, do it. (But then, if I ever got married, City Hall on a Tuesday morning would be my plan...) For all that monarchy seems pretty irrelevant now, I can still respect the visible symbols of ~1000 years of more-or-less institutional/political continuity. Not too many places have that. Plus, growing up in Canada, there was more emphasis on it, though it's lessened over the years, I believe. All through elementary school, I remember there always being a formal picture of Queen Elizabeth in the classroom, usually above the blackboard. My mother even let me skip an afternoon of school in grade 7 to go with a friend and her mother into Halifax to watch Prince Charles and Diana plant a ceremonial tree on the Halifax Common.

I've managed to watch this act on the telly just yesterday and I chuckled all the way!! Becky made a good statement ... hopefully, this marriage (the union and not the ceremony) would be better than the one of William's mother! Things seem to have really changed with the years, even though all the fuss around the English royal family, together with all the commercial activity, hasn't changed at all!

People still follow them, but it's more of a celebrity thing, I think (at least, over here). Interestingly, in Canada, people seem more informed about the royal family, but in the US, people are less informed, but more interested! Weird...

Originally posted by Transmute Jun Interestingly, in Canada, people seem more informed about the royal family, but in the US, people are less informed, but more interested! Weird...

I wonder if that has something to do with the fact Canada, while independent, still considers itself under the monarchy, but the US completely severed all governmental ties? We're curious, but it doesn't affect us type of thing.

Its well done! Funny to watch, great find TJ.

Originally posted by amethyst

Originally posted by Transmute Jun Interestingly, in Canada, people seem more informed about the royal family, but in the US, people are less informed, but more interested! Weird...

I wonder if that has something to do with the fact Canada, while independent, still considers itself under the monarchy, but the US completely severed all governmental ties? We're curious, but it doesn't affect us type of thing.

It is a bit different. Unlike the US President, the Prime Minister of Canada is not, technically, the head of state -that's Queen Elizabeth. Except she's represented in Canada, by a stand-in known as the Governor General (currently David Johnston). However, the Queen always appoints as Governor General the person recommended by the Prime Minister, and the Governor General always signs off on any legislation that's passed the House of Commons and the Senate. On occasion, the role of the Governor General gets more interesting-and-less-ceremonial... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Canadian_parliamentary_dispute At any rate, I guess there's always a dim awareness, in Canada, that the British Royals are, albeit very distantly, a part of the overall governmental structure. And the Queen is on every coin, after all.

In Australia the Governor Generals role was downgraded after Whitlim Government was sacked in the 1970's and Aussie's were not impressed about that at all. She's still represented by the chosen person currently, but the office doesn't hold the same power any more. Eventually I think it will become less and less. (We love our British connections, here thats for sure, but not to have them or other countries ordering us around like puppets on a string or dictating to us.) Disclaimer; My personal opinion, from observations and responses to things in local history. LB- Your link didn't work for me, it came up as an error in Wiki.

Hmm, so I guess the 11am ceremony in London will be happening at around 8pm in your part of the world, Ebony? That's sure a favourable time difference you Australians have there! If I want to watch it live, I'm going to have to be tuning in at 6am my time -NOT my preferred time to watch anything on TV.

I think so, I haven't looked into it yet, but I'm going to record it so the my little girls (Whos just turned 4 & 3,) can watch it the next day. My eldest daughter especially is facinated with Princesses and brides so I figure she's love seeing a real Princess getting married with a horse draw carriage like Cinderella. My little girl has asked me at times to google pictures of brides and Princess for her!!! kids learn fast about computers...

Hopefully this one is about love...and not about alliances and politics. Now that I am pretending to be a mature adult (sometimes) I understand that (my opinion) his mothers marriage seemed to be more about politics, it's an age old traditions to cement alliances between different families and countries (been around for centures and still is used), stengthen ties and produce heirs, from an outsider view it may seem cold and calculating, but, it is what it is and for the most part it seems to work (as long as both parties know what it's about in the first place), ...duty to family and country...(shades of Gatchaman... duty befor personal needs) But..then there was Edward VIII who abdicated in 1936 to marry Wallis Simpson a divorced American, they stayed married for about 35years till his death separated them..nice to think sometimes love wins out on duty Anyway as an Aussie I like the fact that we are still part of monarchy (my opinion, this is always a hot potato subject over here), we are still a fairly young country( 1770s), still have a lot of growing to do , and even though we are a fairly large country we are isolated by water and have limited resources, infrastructure and limited amount of living space, so can't hold a very large population (it's hard to live in the middle unless you have UBER great survival skills, mostly desert and little water or shelter and our citys are outgrowing out infrastructue at a very fast rate, the Brissy floods were a good example of this) Anyhow (my opinion) I'm not ready to be a Republic, (have yet to hear a good reason for this or what the impact will be) I love my Flag, my official nation anthem and the unofficial ones, this country, these people, Kiwis, Taswegian and the "she'll be right" attitude we have. I may not have my eyes glued to the telli, but I'll be channel surfing to the ceremonly between adds. ..end small rant...

I heard on the news this morning that YESTERDAY the Queen and Prince Phillip finally met Kate's parents. What is it, less than 2 weeks before the wedding? And how long ahve William and Kate been dating? And they never met her parents? My guess is that Kate isn't 'high class' enough for them, but they're accepting her because they understand that they can't afford another 'bad marriage' scandal in the royal family.

Wow, that does seem odd. I suppose it's not so rare for grandparents to not have met the parents of their grandson's girlfriend-then-fiance until the wedding, but when the grandparents are the Queen and Prince Philip... you'd think they'd have met the Middletons somewhere over the past several years. I imagine that Prince Charles, at least, has met them long before this -or I'd hope so! I wouldn't be surprised, though, if the Queen had been hoping or expecting William to marry someone from a family with more "prestigious" lineage. Then again, maybe it's possible that the Middletons are determined not to be perceived as "pushy social climbers trying to ride their daughter's coattails" and have themselves avoided chances to meet them. Now that I think about it, no one in my family has ever met anyone in my BF's family, though he's met my family and I've met his. Though that's largely due to geographical distance. Guess it would take a wedding to bring it off!

Littlewolf- You're so right that is a hot topic here in Aussie, honestly, the last deal we got for a republic was lousy anyway, no wonder most people basically said "Ahhh...NO! We're not dumb... Yes its nice all the publicity we're having here for it, i noticed Kate stayed at home during his visit a month ago to flood affect zones. Maybe they're trying to not to repeat to much of his parents...or, she was desperatley needed for a dress fitting, and of course all the bridemaids drama needed sorting.... and then there was her parents and the "Meet the royals" crickey.... (Meet the Fockers movies bounces into my thoughts at this time...)

This one is NOT a joke. Fashion faux pas at the wedding... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1381892/Royal-wedding-2011-Princess-Beatrice-Eugenie-fashion-flops-again.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Yeah, that bow hat was crazy! Now *here's* an example of what the Royal Wedding should be! LOL T Mobile Royal Wedding

I'm curious, and could be way off base, but I wonder if all the commotion over this wedding is because it is one of the British Royals or if it is because it is one of Diana's boys? I have to wonder if such fuss would be made if it were one of Fergie's kids? (Didn't that wedding get a lot less press?)

So who WATCH the big event? I woke up later than I expected and saw the last 5-10 minutes as the couple were heading off to sign the register and then as they left the cathedral.

I slept through the whole thing.

Not surprising really when you have such a time difference. It would have been, what .... 3:00 for you?

Not really sure. I was told the local theater was opening up sometime around 1 to show it to interested folks.

Originally posted by amethyst I slept through the whole thing.

I wish I done the same thing It was shown allll day during classes..since the begging to the end.. Not to be mean, but people actually stay up to watch it early

I could have watched the wedding from the very beginning till the end in broad daylight ... but, I didn't! I couldn't miss going to my hairdresser just to watch the wedding, couldn't I?!! But, I'm enjoying watching or hearing the aftermath effects at random! One thing I'm sure of ... I'm happy to have chosen a modest hat for an upcoming important morning occasion of mine instead of one of those fascinators!

I watched it, nothing much else of TV, wanted to see what the dress was like , plus had a good book to read in the quiet bits

I woke up at 5 am so i decided to check out the end... but the whole thing was over already. Not that it mattered, because I was able to see as many recaps as I wanted with all the highlights, all day long on TV!

That is what I found, the recaps were enough for me. Any more and I probably would have gotten sick of seeing it. Especially since everything on TV for that last week seemed to be Royalty focused.

Originally posted by Vodka Not to be mean, but people actually stay up to watch it early

That's what I was told. Personally, I don't see it, but some people are more fascinated by it than others.

Originally posted by amethyst I'm curious, and could be way off base, but I wonder if all the commotion over this wedding is because it is one of the British Royals or if it is because it is one of Diana's boys? I have to wonder if such fuss would be made if it were one of Fergie's kids? (Didn't that wedding get a lot less press?)

I think the fuss is because William is the second in line for the throne, but it does help that he's Diana's son and is marrying a commoner - hence her title of Duchess vice Princess.

I'm not 100% sure but I think that Kate's not now a "Princess," the way Diana became a Princess when she married Charles, because William is not the "Prince of Wales" and immediate heir to the throne, whereas Charles is. Camilla is technically "Princess of Wales' now that she's married to Charles, but she's choosing not to use that title and is instead using "Duchess of Cornwall" (because "Duke of Cornwall" is one of Charles' lesser titles.) I believe that princes who are not the "Prince of Wales" are nearly always made dukes (often when they marry) and are thereafter known as "Duke of such and such" rather than "Prince," the way that Andrew and Fergie were referred to as "the Duke and Duchess of York" (a title given him when he got married to Fergie) and Fergie never became "Princess Sarah." So, I think that's why William and Kate are now "Duke and Duchess of Cambridge," and not "Prince and Princess." She does have the "HRH" designation now, though, which is apparently the big thing.

Wow! You guys know a lot more than I do. All I really know is that Philip is not a king for some reason (not sure why) even though he is married to the queen. And I thought that issue with Camilla had more to do with Charles' divorce from Diana than personal reasons. Didn't she get to keep her title with the divorce?

Amethyst, I think the reason Phillip cannot be King is because if he were King he would hold a higher rank than the Queen. If marrying Elizabeth he had become King he would have had more authority than the Queen, which would not be "right" since he is marrying into the Royal line, not born into it. I guess it is something that comes from the dark ages of our history. Does this make more sense now? As for the title Camilla took on(Duchess of Cornwall), personally if I were in that position, I would not want to take on the title of a recently dead person, especially when that person was so highly known as Diana was.

Originally posted by amethyst And I thought that issue with Camilla had more to do with Charles' divorce from Diana than personal reasons. Didn't she get to keep her title with the divorce?

I believe that, after Charles and Diana divorced, she was permitted to keep the "Princess of Wales" title, but lost the "HRH." If she'd still been alive when Charles married Camilla, I'm not sure what the situation would have been -it would have been awfully strange and unprecedented for there to be two "Princesses of Wales," even if only one of them was the HRH. Apparently it's Camilla's choice not to be referred to as "Princess of Wales" as she's well aware that's a title most of the world still associates with Diana, as CD says. Yes, a man doesn't get to be "King" by marrying a Queen, even though the wife of a King automatically gets to be "Queen." I believe CD is right, that it's due to no one wanting the spouse of a ruling Queen to be perceived as outranking her. Same reason, I imagine, that Queen Victoria's husband was never "King Albert." As it happens, Prince Philip is usually referred to as "Duke of Edinburgh" -a title he was given when he married Elizabeth.

I'm not sure on this, but I *think* that if Catharine wanted, she could be 'Princess William' instead of Duchess of Cornwall. Basically, it's like saying 'Mrs. Prince William', and is actually considered a lesser title than Duchess.

I don't think Catherine can be called Princess William, partly because one is rarely called by a persons given name - eg. William. It is always their "local" that they are called by. Thus Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, that is the highest rank the two hold at this time. But also because William, although he IS a Prince, will not be referred to as Prince, or should not be referred to as Prince, until Charles becomes King.

Our Catherine would know, don't know if she's lurking about. I believe Kate will be Princess when Wiliam becomes King - she can't be Queen because she's a commoner. A rich commoner, but still a commoner.

She'll be a Princess as soon as the Queen dies and Charles becomes King. Then, William will be the "Prince of Wales" and Kate will be "Princess of Wales." She can be "Queen Catherine," and she will be when Charles dies and William becomes King. Technically, even Diana was a "commoner," though her father was an Earl, as it means, in this context, "non-royal." Traditionally, British monarchs nearly always married foreign royalty (King Henry VIII being a notable exception, after his first wife) and it's really only in the 20th C that they started marrying "commoners."

I was when I saw this, and just had to share!

A clever bit of photoshopping!

That is great TJ. I love the comparison to Beatrice and Eugenie.

Hahaha...I love this! I had it on my Facebook page...very clever!

That's an awesome match!