The acclaimed Netflix drama The Crown that traces the reign of Queen Elizabeth II, returns on Friday. And if the first season was a fairly favorable representation of the British monarchy, the second season throws a hand grenade on what you think you know about royalty.
The first episodes of the show recounted the sweet courtship and the development of bitterness – between Elizabeth (Golden Globe Award winner Claire Foy) and Prince Philip (ex Doctor Who star Matt Smith) . But in the second season, his relationship has been matched by Philip's growing resentment as he struggles to accept that his wife is also his ruler.
The creator and writer of Crown Peter Morgan explores the deterioration of the relationship between Elizabeth and Philip, in part, by touching the rumored infidelity of Philip. It is a movement that can harm Buckingham Palace, but Smith says Newsweek that is important for the Emmy-nominated drama series to portray the realities of the complex relationship of the royal couple.
Before his last season as Prince Felipe, both he and Foy will be replaced by new actors for Seasons 3 and 4-Smith spoke with ] Newsweek about his admiration for non-conformist royalty, what he will miss most about The Crown and an era of past masculinity. [1
Now that you have finished your two seasons of The Crown are you happy to have accepted the role, in retrospect?
Yes, I am, really. It has been really interesting. He is a character in conflict. I think I've grown very fond of him. There is something about Prince Philip who is … In a way, he is one of the great outsiders of life. That has been really interesting to get.
This season is darker in tone. It is not an optimistic representation of the royal family. Did you feel that there was a risk in how the viewers would react?
No. Maybe it's uncomfortable for people to look, but it's not like we're being rude or gratuitous with the facts. There are rumors about the royal family, and there are facts that we know, and then everything is fictionalized and interpreted by us. Then, not really. I learned more about the characters, which I think is interesting, especially as British. The version of the royal family that we think we know [as Britons] is less detailed. I know much more after two seasons of The Crown than before.
Why do you think the British particularly accept a varnished perception of the royal family?
It's a good question, I do not know. Probably because they are the royal family and we treat them with great respect, which is the right thing to do. But as a playwright, you have the responsibility to shed light on the unpleasant and ugly parts of the characters you represent. We, as a society, do not really want to do that because we want to celebrate them in the end, because, I think, as a public and as a nation, we are quite proud of them, really. 
Philip's alleged infidelity is a focal point of The Crown Season 2. What is the motivation for him, do you think? Are you trying to recover some masculinity and independence that you have abandoned as a real consort?
What always struck me in Philip was his masculinity, so to speak, the alpha side of him. It is difficult when you are married to the Queen because that alpha side of you has to be trimmed. The Queen is the Queen.
In today's society, we are celebrating that [maleness] less and less, and that is something that I really admire in Felipe. He found something of his life difficult because that side of him was restricted. I just identify with that. I recognized that as a man it would be difficult for me to kneel before my wife. It would be difficult for me if my wife sent me for five months because of real duty. This power was swept from under him, and as a man it is a difficult place to be, especially in the 50s and 60s.
What do you mean that society loses its recognition of masculinity?
Look, rightly, a character like the Queen, we celebrate that she is at the forefront of style, her career and is in a position of power. That is something wonderful. Maybe it's because the balance has been tipped too long in favor of men. I just think that at this moment, I found things in Philip that people no longer celebrate, which is a feeling of being an alpha male, a sense of competence. There is a sense of pride and a sense of male responsibility. For me, they are qualities that attract me from men, I suppose, for lack of a better description. These are qualities that I recognize in my father. For me, as a man, they are things that I celebrate in other men.
That does not say: "Be a chauvinist fop." That's not what I mean. I mean, the qualities a lion has. Why can not we celebrate Philip for that? I think he's been punished a lot. When you spend a couple of years researching and understanding someone, you can not help but feel very fond of them and strangely enough protective of them.
What has been more difficult, leaving behind the role or leaving behind the work relationship with Claire Foy?
That's a good question. Both, really. I'm going to miss Claire terribly. You see on the screen, she has such an extraordinary ability. However, with that it has such a ridiculous sense. Claire is everything I celebrate about a modern woman. She had a baby on set, she has a great sense of humor, she takes work so seriously. It was a wonderful experience and she became a dear friend.
Besides that, it's also hard to leave Peter Morgan behind, because the quality of the writing is very good and it gives you a real chance as an actor. I always knew it was going to be two years. It's pretty good, actually. If you can achieve it and have three sets of actors that interpret three generations of these people we know, that's unheard of. 
Is there anyone who would like to see Philip take over, and some advice for them?
No, absolutely not. And I would not want to speculate because it's unfair. I would not give you any advice just like I did not give advice to Peter Capaldi [when he took over as Doctor Who]. You will find someone brilliant who will approach him with his own thought processes and personality.
How has royalty lived and seen the magnitude of fame with which they deal with how you deal with your own fame?
It's very different. The level of fame they have is so unique. I can support a good match line: they do not say anything, they do not really get involved, they are not on Twitter or anything, they do not communicate too much. And they preserve an element of mystery. That's what Frank Sinatra did, that's what Marilyn Monroe did. I think the modern era has spawned a version of being famous that is a bit tedious, to be honest with you. It's all about immediacy and loading and sharing, and that bores me. They have a pretty good line about that.
How about dealing with sensationalist culture? You have experienced a bubble of intense fame with Doctor Who and your privacy has been invaded.
It is important to draw a distinction between me and the members of the royal family. The level of invasion they have is much greater than anything we can ever understand. Whatever level of fame you have had is not and can not be comparable to theirs. Being famous is an individual experience. It is very difficult to explain and articulate. But it is a product of what you do. It is a product of being a musician, politician, actor or member of the royal family. There are worse things in life to deal with. He has his good points and his bad points.
Crown Season 2 flows globally on Netflix since Friday.