- Mary Carlisle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Prem Gill is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joel Berger is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
Royal Pains
'The Queen' and all her kooky clan, even the corgis.
Masterful Mirren
The Queen, Stephen Frear's new film about crisis in Britain's Royal Family, is a great movie. But is it great history? And should we expect that much when cinema depicts living public figures and events of the recent past?
For all the many titillating scandals that have plagued the Windsors over recent years, it was the death of Princess Diana on Aug. 31, 1997, that precipitated the most serious crisis. As a hurricane of popular grief swirled around them, the Royals remained private and aloof, reinforcing the widespread belief that they were only too pleased to be rid of the pesky princess. Prime Minister Tony Blair pleaded privately for an official response, but Queen Elizabeth stuck to protocol and remained in the family's Scottish vacation hideaway. Soon, the stunned monarch was watching her subjects turn against her like so many rabid corgis.
If these events form the heart of Frear's movie, Helen Mirren is the real centre of it. Fresh from her portrayal of the first Queen Elizabeth in a British-made miniseries, (with Jeremy Irons) Mirren nails Queen Elizabeth II in what must be called a command performance. The corgis are great, too. James Cromwell has the thankless task of portraying Prince "Tits on a Boar" Philip, while Alex Jennings squirms through the film as Prince Charles. Michael Sheen and Helen McCrory play Tony and Cherie Blair, hilariously struggling with the terrifying details of royal etiquette on their first time in The Presence. (Diana herself is shown only in news footage.)
Fact or fiction
British audiences may get a few hidden chuckles from Peter Morgan's script. Morgan also wrote a movie called The Deal, depicting the secret pact between Blair and Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown to swap places in the Prime Minister's seat, a deal not yet honoured by Blair. Brown is mentioned only once in The Queen, when Prime Minister Blair is informed that his partner/rival is on the phone. "Tell him to wait," Blair replies.
Not too much longer, Tony.
With so many recent historical films being costume period pieces with a loose connection to fact -- anyone else dreading Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette? -- it is fascinating to watch a dramatic chronicle of events most of us recall, starring figures who have yet to quit the public stage. But this bold approach highlights a responsibility moviemakers generally fail to acknowledge -- a commitment to truth.
Truthiness
In the same way that many people now get their vitamins from fruit drinks and their news from late night talk shows, a lot of folks get their history from Hollywood. Not a good thing -- generally only 10 per cent real fruit juice. Mel Gibson has ridden roughshod over historical truth in flicks like Braveheart and the egregious American Revolution epic The Patriot. Steven Spielberg rewrote modern history in Munich. Just entertainment, the filmmakers protest. But people believe it.
The Queen is by no means irresponsible in this regard. Frears and Morgan drew on numerous insider accounts to paint their picture of the palace. Details like Prince Charles' fear of being shot by angry mourners clearly came from inside reports.
But other scenes are obvious inventions. Unless Her Majesty got drunk and chatted to the gang down the pub, the Queen's encounter with a mighty stag out in the Scottish heather is a dramatic conceit. And private conversations with Princes Charles and Philip have been imagined by Morgan, albeit to make valid points about Windsor family relationships.
Still, The Queen has the ring of truth to it. Helped along by Mirren's amazing personification of the British monarch, the movie captures the feel of a month that would launch a million commemorative collectible Diana figurines. Drama is not documentary, and frequently makes a poor teacher. But as popular history goes, The Queen is as good as we can expect. ![]()



15
Login or register to post comments
DPL
5 years ago
Comments on "Royal Pains"
Fabulous actor is Helen. Was a great cop in the series Prime Witness. Really great in the movie about women shedding their clothes to collect money for a friend. The woman is about the only actor we could think of to be the Queen. Way to go Helen. Even the Brit papers liked her performance. and some of those papers don't like anybody
Gerhardius
5 years ago
While living in London I was drawn into the original series and it became my only TV related vice, aside from soccer, when I was there. Recently I purchased the series on DVD and my wife loves it. I was not as interested in the subsequent editions of the series as it seemed to lose that unique character, but Prime Suspect is very good.
southdeltawalker
5 years ago
Can hardly wait to see this....but the link to "The Deal" goes to some american Wall St. thriller not a film about Blair and Brown. Does anyone know about the British made "The Deal"?
thanks.
Working Man
5 years ago
Hellen Miran has always been a favourite of mine. Her perfomance in The Cook, the Thief, his Wife and Her Lover was truly fanatastic, though not for the squeamish!
I'm looking forward to seeing her latest film, too.
lynn
5 years ago
Ohhh...the poles must be reversing, I completely and unabashedly ;-) agree with you, Working Man. Mirren is brilliant in The Cook, the Thief, his Wife and Her Lover... and in most everything she does.
There is something about British actresses...Julie Christie, Charlotte Rampling, Peggy Ashcroft, among my favourites...
nightbloom
5 years ago
Good review - I'm going to see it this weekend...also for Hellen Miran rather than any lingering "Diana kitsch" on my part. Will report back =)
Went to see "Marie Antoinette" last night. I didn't read any advance reviews, so the film wasn't what I was expecting. Coppola missed the mark with this one, although it wasn't a total loss. The authentic sets (were they actually able to film inside Versailles?) were a feast for the eyes, as were the sumptuous costumes. Beautiful. The claustrophobia of court culture was authentically portrayed, and the ritualized nature of the court was captured very well. Court ritual was, of course, the Sun King's way of disempowering the aristocracy after the Fronde, so by the late 18th century it had evolved to absurd degrees.
Unfortunately, there was virtually no character development in this film whatsoever, although Antoinette herself (and Louis, by extension) were humanised somewhat - no small task after 200 years of bad press. Very little politics were contained in the film either. I think Coppola was aiming to reproduce the oblique mood of Lost in Translation...which didn't translate very well after all. But there was something about the lavish stasis of life inside Versailles that, when the crowds finally do come to gates (roaring in the background throughout the persevering but now visibly hollow court ritual) it produced a visceral anxiety for the family. Nothing is shown after the Royal Family's removal from Versailles, however, though the lead-up is authentic enough to make the unshown conclusion believable and inevitable. It became unnecessary for the camera to follow them all the way to the guillotine.
I'm still glad I saw it, and the whole audience stayed 'til the end. One thing that proved a terrible distraction was that (in the copy of the film which this theatre had received) there were not less than a dozen scenes in which the microphone was clearly visible. That's the kiss of death for any scene, let alone a dozen in a row. The audience lost it at that.Not sure why that happens, or why those cuts ever make it to the public.
The acting was okay, but not terrific. Dunst gets into the role, though, after a few shakey scenes at the beginning just prior to her character's arrival in France.
Fii
5 years ago
Geez, my mum will be all over this one...
nightbloom
5 years ago
Saw 'The Queen' at a matinée - Very good. Everything just right - nothing overdone. Mirren does an excellent job.
I agree about the British actresses (and actors) - I think it has something to do with the Shakespearean stage training they all go through.
Mel Gibson's 'Apocalypto' was previewed prior to the feature. Notwithstanding his ongoing personal nonsense, this film looks stunning at first glance.
Alcibiades
5 years ago
I got the feeling Coppola was making a point, in both Lost in Translation and Marie 'A' about the frozen in aspic aspect of the the American aristocracy and/or American culture in general. In 'LIT' in the sense that other cultures don't exist for Americans and in 'MA' in the way other classes don't - w/in the culture itself.
You have to remember her Coppola's roots too.
Haven't seen the Queen yet - Helen Mirren is ne plus ultra.
There may still be hope for you working man - if you can just get past the idea that's it's not all about YOU!
NO?
Steve Burgess
5 years ago
Nightbloom--That visible mic problem could be a projection issue. I once saw a screening where the film was not centred on the screen properly--it was running off the bottom-- and I was rather stunned to see all the mikes and booms visible at the top of the frame. I wouldn't have thought they would be there on film just above the screen line, but maybe so.
nightbloom
5 years ago
That's probably it - the feature did start with the image too low, and with the bottom of the frame appearing at the top of the screen. It was manually adjusted by the projectionist about two minutes into the film, and seemed to be centred properly after that, but perhaps not sufficiently.
Alcibiades
5 years ago
This certainly doesn't belong here, but I had to bring it to your attention nightbloom:
The Pope seems to be bunking in with some strange bedfellows eh!
charlesdemers
5 years ago
For what it's worth, nightbloom, the only film that I have ever seen wherein the boom mic was visible at the top of the shot was... Lost in Translation. My guess is that it is a combination of poor projection -- I still remember standing on the picket lines with the projectionists and everyone telling them a monkey could do their job -- and Coppolla as a filmmaker not leaving enough of a buffer in her shots. Marie Antoinette was poop, I thought; actually extroardinarily conservative, although I could see why Coppolla would have such sympathy for an aristocrat born to power and privilege.
My fiancée is super excited to see The Queen, and I've heard nothing but good things, including this review, Steve. Still, I'll have to sit in those damned Park Theatre seats... ever since the Ridge re-did theirs, the Park's are by far the worst in town.
pender paul
5 years ago
It is a passable review, but why do we even care about the queen and her family? It seems the only thing they have going for them is wealth. The sooner Canada cuts all ties with Britain and the monarchy the better. Having new Canadians swear an oath to a foreigner just blows me away! And having to look at her mug on our currency, at the post office and on the ferries is an insult. And if the above is treason, then so be it.
grw
5 years ago
The boom mic in shots is always the fault of the theatre, even if the managers there don't admit it -- or realize it. It's a projection issue. And while I think monkeys can do the job, they still have to be trained monkeys. They have no idea. But you could ask for your money back. At the very least, they should give you free tickets to a future show. That kind of thing is unacceptable.