I saw her Elizabeth I not so long ago and I was bowled over by her fearlessness, I was moved, transported, amused. Now, Elizabeth II, the living Queen. Helen Mirren accomplishes the impossible. She lets us know the Queen, her Queen, without passing judgment. Just being her. I found myself understanding her dilemma in human terms. Something that she had done so brilliantly with Elizabeth I, she humanized her or rather she allows us to find the human creature behind the iconic façade.
The difficulty of not falling into a caricature or a simple impersonation may have seemed insurmountable but here she is. Perfect, real, extraordinary. Long Live Helen Mirren!
It was almost with a sense of foreboding that I went to see “The Queen” (at a pleasantly quiet Monday afternoon showing). Media reviewers have been unanimous in their highest praise for the film (as far as I’ve seen), and I didn’t necessarily regard that as a reassuring sign : “the film is either truly exceptional, or some pressure is sweeping all the reviewers towards such a conclusion”, I thought. I’ve also had deep views concerning the monarchy, Princess Diana and the general politics of the time which I sincerely hoped the film would cover. It did. I left the cinema stunned. “The Queen” is an exceptional film.
Praise goes, of course, to Helen Mirren for her superb performance as Her Majesty. Praise too to all of the actors. I believe all were realistic (even accurate) portrayals. There was certainly an accurate re-enactment of the atmosphere of society at the time (real television reportage blends in well with the film). Thankfully, there are moments of subtle humour.
Without using this space to air my own political views, in review of “The Queen”, I’d just like to add how life (and death) has never been a black-and-white, clear-cut matter : there are unavoidable grey areas. There’s a constant need to consider the situations and points of views of others : “The Queen” serves a real purpose in reminding us of that. Both “sides” to the argument were given a fair hearing in this film.
The paparazzi kissed the princess that fateful week in 1997, but all the English people wanted was their Queen. Stephen Frears’ competent, well written, expertly cast and intimate look into the Royal Family and British government in the aftermath of Princess Diana’s death is a straightforward, no-nonsense stunner.
Operating both as a comedy of manners where the newly elected Prime Minister Tony Blair (an excellent Michael Sheen) must save the Royal Family from themselves before the Monarchy is tossed aside completely by an angry, guilt-ridden public desperately wanting a statement, a word of comfort, or at very least the presence in London of their Queen Elizabeth II (played masterfully by Helen Mirren, who is as cold and stubborn here as she was conflicted and passionate as Elizabeth I in the HBO miniseries of the same name earlier this year), and also as a surprisingly touching testament to the British people’s love affair with Princess Diana and more importantly the Monarchy, “The Queen” succeeds splendidly on multiple levels.
Frears combines archival footage of a grieving public and newscasts with intertwining splices of historical recreations and fictionalized riffs on what it must’ve been like inside the Royal Chambers. The writers get the mannerisms of the Royals down perfect, as people with stiff upper lips who declare their outrage with words like “quite” and “that’s not how it’s done!” One miscalculation is when the writers try to create a connection between Blair’s love for his deceased mother and his newfound sense of protectionism over Elizabeth. It’s only surface level, and Freudian, and seems rather out of place in an otherwise totally British film. The rest of the Royals serve as a sideshow, with Prince Charles wimpy and ineffective in the presence of his mother, Prince Phillip (James Cromwell) a rowdy lout, and the Queen Mother (Sylvia Sims) providing equal parts comic relief and aristocratic wisdom to her daughter.
In the end, “The Queen” is a film that sneaks up on you, funnier and more touching than you imagined, and anchored by a classic turn from a consummate British actress as a Queen who desires to understand her people and do them proud while honoring the traditions of her lineage.
Apropriately dry character study, which details Queen Elizabeth’s recent popularity crisis in the wake of Princess Diana’s untimely death, may not be the engaging drama of sublime proportions many Americans had hoped for, but still maintains a level of political and social intrigue that rivals anything personally substantial England has imported in recent memory. Using the disastrous Al-Fayed/Diana auto-crash and subsequent royal reaction as a springboard, the reliable Stephen Frears shows the glaring disconnect found amongst a detached and privileged elite against the outrage of a mourning public with compelling results.
Although more subtle, witty, and lightly conceived then I was hoping for, The Queen nevertheless remains a captivating and illuminating piece of contemporary English history for the screen, all held together of course by Helen Mirren’s masterful performance, and also a powerfully ambiguous and provocatively perceptive (though underwhelming in it’s praise) screenplay. It is in these acute moments, which try to envision the tense reality behind closed doors of a notoriously unemotional family, that the unique charm and relevance of a movie such as The Queen begins to take hold. Whatever historical events the film likes to point out, such as the focus of The Queen’s involvement with new prime minister Tony Bliar in combating this controversy, comes second to Mirren’s quieter moments of old-fashioned introspection.
At it’s heart, The Queen remains a politically engaging and mildly amusing character study, echoing the hunger for a more inviting social climate through the doomed analysis of England’s first family. The movie may play a few cards in favor of a royal idealism that betrayed the social climate of the time, but the gently fascinating combination of old-world values meeting new-world situations remains as captivating a political British movie as any to arrive on shelves in America for years.
I saw her Elizabeth I not so long ago and I was bowled over by her fearlessness, I was moved, transported, amused. Now, Elizabeth II, the living Queen. Helen Mirren accomplishes the impossible. She lets us know the Queen, her Queen, without passing judgment. Just being her. I found myself understanding her dilemma in human terms. Something that she had done so brilliantly with Elizabeth I, she humanized her or rather she allows us to find the human creature behind the iconic façade.
The difficulty of not falling into a caricature or a simple impersonation may have seemed insurmountable but here she is. Perfect, real, extraordinary. Long Live Helen Mirren!
It was almost with a sense of foreboding that I went to see “The Queen” (at a pleasantly quiet Monday afternoon showing). Media reviewers have been unanimous in their highest praise for the film (as far as I’ve seen), and I didn’t necessarily regard that as a reassuring sign : “the film is either truly exceptional, or some pressure is sweeping all the reviewers towards such a conclusion”, I thought. I’ve also had deep views concerning the monarchy, Princess Diana and the general politics of the time which I sincerely hoped the film would cover. It did. I left the cinema stunned. “The Queen” is an exceptional film.
Praise goes, of course, to Helen Mirren for her superb performance as Her Majesty. Praise too to all of the actors. I believe all were realistic (even accurate) portrayals. There was certainly an accurate re-enactment of the atmosphere of society at the time (real television reportage blends in well with the film). Thankfully, there are moments of subtle humour.
Without using this space to air my own political views, in review of “The Queen”, I’d just like to add how life (and death) has never been a black-and-white, clear-cut matter : there are unavoidable grey areas. There’s a constant need to consider the situations and points of views of others : “The Queen” serves a real purpose in reminding us of that. Both “sides” to the argument were given a fair hearing in this film.
The paparazzi kissed the princess that fateful week in 1997, but all the English people wanted was their Queen. Stephen Frears’ competent, well written, expertly cast and intimate look into the Royal Family and British government in the aftermath of Princess Diana’s death is a straightforward, no-nonsense stunner.
Operating both as a comedy of manners where the newly elected Prime Minister Tony Blair (an excellent Michael Sheen) must save the Royal Family from themselves before the Monarchy is tossed aside completely by an angry, guilt-ridden public desperately wanting a statement, a word of comfort, or at very least the presence in London of their Queen Elizabeth II (played masterfully by Helen Mirren, who is as cold and stubborn here as she was conflicted and passionate as Elizabeth I in the HBO miniseries of the same name earlier this year), and also as a surprisingly touching testament to the British people’s love affair with Princess Diana and more importantly the Monarchy, “The Queen” succeeds splendidly on multiple levels.
Frears combines archival footage of a grieving public and newscasts with intertwining splices of historical recreations and fictionalized riffs on what it must’ve been like inside the Royal Chambers. The writers get the mannerisms of the Royals down perfect, as people with stiff upper lips who declare their outrage with words like “quite” and “that’s not how it’s done!” One miscalculation is when the writers try to create a connection between Blair’s love for his deceased mother and his newfound sense of protectionism over Elizabeth. It’s only surface level, and Freudian, and seems rather out of place in an otherwise totally British film. The rest of the Royals serve as a sideshow, with Prince Charles wimpy and ineffective in the presence of his mother, Prince Phillip (James Cromwell) a rowdy lout, and the Queen Mother (Sylvia Sims) providing equal parts comic relief and aristocratic wisdom to her daughter.
In the end, “The Queen” is a film that sneaks up on you, funnier and more touching than you imagined, and anchored by a classic turn from a consummate British actress as a Queen who desires to understand her people and do them proud while honoring the traditions of her lineage.
Apropriately dry character study, which details Queen Elizabeth’s recent popularity crisis in the wake of Princess Diana’s untimely death, may not be the engaging drama of sublime proportions many Americans had hoped for, but still maintains a level of political and social intrigue that rivals anything personally substantial England has imported in recent memory. Using the disastrous Al-Fayed/Diana auto-crash and subsequent royal reaction as a springboard, the reliable Stephen Frears shows the glaring disconnect found amongst a detached and privileged elite against the outrage of a mourning public with compelling results.
Although more subtle, witty, and lightly conceived then I was hoping for, The Queen nevertheless remains a captivating and illuminating piece of contemporary English history for the screen, all held together of course by Helen Mirren’s masterful performance, and also a powerfully ambiguous and provocatively perceptive (though underwhelming in it’s praise) screenplay. It is in these acute moments, which try to envision the tense reality behind closed doors of a notoriously unemotional family, that the unique charm and relevance of a movie such as The Queen begins to take hold. Whatever historical events the film likes to point out, such as the focus of The Queen’s involvement with new prime minister Tony Bliar in combating this controversy, comes second to Mirren’s quieter moments of old-fashioned introspection.
At it’s heart, The Queen remains a politically engaging and mildly amusing character study, echoing the hunger for a more inviting social climate through the doomed analysis of England’s first family. The movie may play a few cards in favor of a royal idealism that betrayed the social climate of the time, but the gently fascinating combination of old-world values meeting new-world situations remains as captivating a political British movie as any to arrive on shelves in America for years.