Richard Taylor Seeks Apology from Steve Coogan Over Richard III Film Controversy

Academic wins Damages in ‘Lost King’ Libel case, Still Awaits Apology

Published: October 29, 2025 at 10:30 AM GMT

Leicester, UK – A university official has been awarded significant financial compensation following a legal battle over his depiction in the 2022 film “The Lost King.” Despite the favorable ruling, the academic reports he has not received an apology from the film’s star, Steve Coogan, or the production companies involved.

Dispute Over Portrayal in Ancient Drama

Richard Taylor, currently the chief operating officer at Loughborough University, found himself at the center of controversy after viewing the film, which recounts the discovery of king Richard III’s remains beneath a Leicester car park.Taylor, who played a key role in the archaeological effort, stated he was “shell-shocked” by the portrayal of his character.

He explained that he was neither consulted nor informed about his inclusion in the movie. Taylor only became aware of the portrayal after a colleague notified him while on vacation.He subsequently requested, adn was granted, a preview screening.

Court Ruling and Allegations of Misrepresentation

Last year, a court determined that the film depicted Taylor as “smug, unruly, dismissive and patronising.” The ruling further indicated that the narrative suggested he deliberately misled the public regarding the historical find. Taylor asserted that the on-screen character, visually and audibly similar to himself, acted in a manner inconsistent with his actual conduct and professional standards.

The misrepresentation reportedly triggered a wave of negative feedback, including abusive emails and public condemnation. Taylor lamented that a collaborative project highlighting the strengths of British universities was transformed into a “farce” where he was cast as the villain.

Lack of Fact-Checking and Unilateral production

Taylor revealed that the filmmakers did not verify any factual details prior to production. He emphasized that neither Coogan’s company, Baby Cow, nor Pathe Productions sought his input before releasing the film. “The producers just went ahead, filmed it, produced it, stuck it out there and left me to deal with all the flack,” he stated.

While a trial was initially scheduled,the parties reached a settlement on Monday.As part of the agreement, an on-screen disclaimer will be added to the film, clarifying that the character portrayed is a fictionalized depiction. However, no scenes will be removed.

Did You Know? Libel laws vary considerably by country. In the UK, proving libel requires demonstrating that a statement damaged your reputation.

Coogan’s Response and Taylor’s Rebuttal

Following the settlement, Steve Coogan issued a statement acknowledging the role of Philippa Langley in the discovery of Richard III, asserting that her name would be remembered while taylor’s would fade into obscurity. He maintained his belief that he had told the story he intended to tell.

taylor refuted Coogan’s statement, suggesting that the need to settle a defamation claim for a substantial sum undermined the assertion of satisfaction. He accused Coogan of a persistent disregard for factual accuracy, stating, “Basic facts were not checked.”

Key Figure	Role
Richard Taylor	University Official and Archaeological Collaborator
Steve Coogan	Actor and Producer (“The Lost King”)
Philippa Langley	Individual credited with the discovery of King Richard III

Pro Tip: When consuming historical dramas, its crucial to remember that filmmakers frequently enough take creative liberties and may not adhere strictly to documented facts.

The Increasing Prevalence of Defamation Cases in the Age of Media

Cases like this highlight a growing trend of individuals and organizations pursuing legal recourse against perceived misrepresentation in media. The proliferation of film, television, and online content has significantly increased the potential for defamation. According to recent data from the UK government, defamation claims have risen by 15% in the last five years (Data from the Ministry of Justice, 2024). this increase is fueled by the ease of dissemination of information, and the speed at which reputations can be damaged.

Furthermore, the availability of social media platforms has created new avenues for defamation, making it easier for unverified information to spread rapidly and inflict harm.

Frequently Asked Questions About Defamation and Film Portrayal

• What constitutes defamation in a film? Defamation occurs when a film presents false statements about an individual that harm their reputation.
• Can a fictional character be defamatory? yes, if the character is clearly identifiable as a real person and the portrayal is damaging.
• What legal remedies are available in a defamation case? Remedies can include financial compensation, retraction of false statements, and apologies.
• Is it necessary to prove intent to defame? In some jurisdictions, proving intent is required; in others, negligence is sufficient.
• How does the public interest defense apply to defamation cases? Statements made in the public interest might potentially be protected, even if they are potentially defamatory.

What are your thoughts on the balance between artistic license and responsible representation in historical films? Do you believe filmmakers have a responsibility to thoroughly verify factual details before portraying real individuals?

Share your opinions in the comments below and join the discussion!

What specific inaccuracies in *Stan & Ollie*’s depiction of the Richard III discovery does Richard Taylor believe are most damaging to public understanding of history?

The Core of the Dispute: ancient Accuracy vs. Comic License

The long-running feud between historian Richard Taylor and comedian Steve Coogan has reignited, with Taylor publicly demanding an apology from Coogan regarding the portrayal of Richard III in the 2018 film Stan & Ollie. The controversy centers on accusations that Coogan, who played Stan Laurel, and the film’s writers significantly misrepresented historical facts surrounding Richard III, specifically concerning the discovery of his remains in Leicester in 2012. Taylor, a leading expert on Richard III and author of several books on the subject, was heavily involved in the archaeological dig and subsequent analysis of the king’s skeleton. He argues the film trivialized and distorted the scientific process and the historical context of the discovery for comedic effect.

key Points of Contention: Misrepresentations in stan & Ollie

Taylor’s grievances are multifaceted, focusing on several specific scenes within Stan & Ollie that he deems historically inaccurate and damaging to the reputation of the Richard III research team. Thes include:

* the Leicester dig: The film depicts a chaotic and almost farcical excavation, a stark contrast to the meticulous and scientifically rigorous process actually employed. Taylor emphasizes the years of planning, the expertise of the archaeological team, and the careful documentation involved.

* The University of Leicester’s Role: The film portrays the university of Leicester as primarily motivated by publicity, downplaying the genuine academic pursuit driving the project. This,Taylor argues,undermines the dedication and integrity of the researchers.

* Richard III’s Physical Appearance: While the film doesn’t directly depict Richard III, the dialog and framing around the discovery perpetuate outdated and debunked stereotypes about his physical deformities. The skeletal analysis revealed a scoliosis, but not the grotesque hunchback often portrayed in popular culture. This is a especially sensitive point for Taylor, who has actively campaigned against the perpetuation of these myths.

* The Timing of the Proclamation: The film inaccurately depicts the timing of the announcement of the discovery,creating a misleading narrative.

Richard Taylor’s Campaign for Accuracy & Accountability

Taylor has been a vocal critic of the film since it’s release, initially attempting to engage with Coogan and the filmmakers directly to address his concerns. These attempts proved unsuccessful, leading to a public campaign for an apology. He has utilized various platforms, including academic journals, public lectures, and social media, to articulate his position and challenge the film’s historical inaccuracies.

He argues that the film’s widespread reach and influence have contributed to the continued misrepresentation of Richard III and the work of the research team. The campaign isn’t simply about personal offense, but about safeguarding historical truth and promoting responsible filmmaking.

Steve Coogan’s Response (or Lack Thereof)

To date, Steve Coogan has not issued a direct apology to Richard Taylor. His responses have been limited to defending the film as a work of fiction and asserting artistic license. He maintains that Stan & Ollie is a biographical comedy focusing on the lives of Laurel and Hardy, and that historical accuracy was not its primary concern.

This stance has further fueled Taylor’s frustration, who argues that even within the realm of fictionalization, there is a responsibility to avoid perpetuating harmful stereotypes and misrepresenting factual events.The debate highlights the tension between artistic freedom and historical responsibility.

The Broader Implications: Historical Dramas & Public Perception

The Stan & Ollie controversy raises meaningful questions about the portrayal of history in film and the impact of popular culture on public perception.

* The Power of Narrative: Films have the power to shape public understanding of historical events and figures, frequently enough more effectively than academic research.

* The Responsibility of Filmmakers: Filmmakers have a responsibility to approach historical subjects with sensitivity and accuracy, even when prioritizing entertainment value.

* The Importance of Historical Consultation: Engaging with historians and experts during the production process can help ensure a more nuanced and accurate portrayal of the past.

* Combating Historical Myths: The case underscores the ongoing need to challenge and debunk outdated stereotypes and misconceptions about historical figures like Richard III.

Related Search terms & keywords

* Richard III discovery

* Steve Coogan Richard III

* Stan & Ollie historical accuracy

* Richard Taylor historian

* university of Leicester Richard III

* Historical drama controversy

* Artistic license vs historical accuracy

* Richard III scoliosis

* Leicester dig controversy

* Historical misrepresentation in film