PDA

View Full Version : Stephen Frears' THE QUEEN



mouton
10-21-2006, 11:55 AM
THE QUEEN
Written by Peter Morgan
Directed by Stephen Frears


In August of 1997, Diana, the former Princess of Wales, was killed in a car accident. An international sense of grief overtook the modern world. She was charitable, a humanitarian, and a beautiful one at that. She was adored by millions for being flawed, for never rising above the level of the people or appearing entitled. She was modern royalty, a royalty that connected with the masses instead of one that looked down at its people from a pedestal. And while the families of the world grieved the loss of an icon with an outpouring of emotion, one family chose to keep the loss to themselves, a private family matter. That family was the Royal Family. Director Stephen Frears (MRS. HENDERSON PRESENTS) bravely crosses the gates of Buckingham Palace to show the millions who watched from outside what might have been going on inside during the week following Diana’s death in this intimate and delicate portrayal of THE QUEEN.

Frears shows both respect and restraint in his telling of this tale. No one character, including Diana, is over glorified, making all points of view and perspectives relevant and reasonable. For all his nobility, Frears’ directorial efforts are surpassed by a sensitive and balanced script by writer Peter Morgan (and by the delightfully enigmatic performance by Helen Mirren as The Queen, but more on that later). Morgan’s script came together from a collection of interviews and discreet contacts. The remaining details were filled in by his imagination. The result draws many lines, leaving opposing forces on each side of the gate. Two months prior to Diana’s death, Prime Minister Tony Blair (Michael Sheen) was elected to office with a landslide win. He represented the modern man and the people hoped his youth would bring England a desperate revolution. England though, will always be caught between the old and the new as long as the Monarchy exists. The Monarchy by nature cannot be modern. It is steeped in tradition, some that even the family laugh at. But though they may laugh at them, they are always upheld. What the Queen does not see coming is that her allegiance to tradition has brought her and her family so far removed from her people that they no longer understand them. As the Royal Family continued to say nothing regarding Diana’s death, the public pointed their anger for their loss directly at them, insinuating that they had no compassion, no hearts. But as much as the Queen did not consider their feelings, the people did not consider hers. Different people grieve in different fashions and Morgan’s script shows the Queen’s decision to not speak publicly about Diana’s death not as a cold decision, but one that placed her family first, especially her grandsons. The very public death was also a very private matter. The closed gate between both parties never allowed either to fully comprehend the other.

By now you have heard how good Mirren is as The Queen. Trust me, you will continue to hear this until the moment she walks up to the stage to accept her Oscar (or at the very least, a BAFTA). Mirren’s humane performance is often hilarious and always insightful. In one moment, she is sarcastically dismissing the newly elected Blair; in another she is lost but determined to understand, her eyes fixed on a television interview of Diana talking about the way the Royal Family treated her. From her side of the gate, she has given her entire life to her people; they will always love her for it and respect her decisions. Mirren’s eyes are always searching for understanding, while maintaining her dignity and exhibiting restraint. At first it seems she is searching to understand why the reaction to Diana’s death is so massive. To her, Diana had always been trouble and had brought so much shame upon her family. As her search continues though, she is striving to make sense of the disdain and contempt she feels growing in her people. It is not that she is no longer connected to them; it is just that she doesn’t see where they are coming from anymore. How could she? She knows a very different side of Diana’s story than they do. In one very simple yet overwhelming scene, The Queen gets her four-wheel drive vehicle stuck in a stream. She is alone, surrounded by nature and waiting for someone to come pick her up. In that moment, she is overtaken. She says nothing but her mind’s thoughts echo the daunting position she is in. The mother of her grandsons is dead; her people have turned on her; she is the bloody Queen of England and she is stuck in a stream! It is all too much and she bursts into tears. She is only human after all.

I must admit, I did not get swept up in the worldwide grief over Diana’s death. Of course, I saw the enormous size of it but I was just not taken in by it. Even with my detached position, it is impossible to avoid being taken in to it when watching THE QUEEN. It is also not possible to support but one side thanks to Frears and Morgan. Being placed on both sides only allows for the possibility of tapping in to both expressions of grief. The grief is only heightened by the inability for both sides to empathize with the other. There is no way to know for certain how the Royal Family actually grieved the death of Diana but when THE QUEEN impartially opens the gates that have since been closed, one might hope this telling is close to the truth, if only because this possible truth will certainly heal.

Chris Knipp
11-10-2006, 06:34 AM
I can't say I find anything to disagree with in your excelllent review. As you probably know I reviewed this in connection with the New York Film Festival, for which it was the gala opening night presentation. Here's my review.


Originally posted by Chris Knipp
STEPHEN FREARS: THE QUEEN (2006)


A tart tribute to two big Brits

Stephen Frears’ The Queen, written by Peter Morgan (The Last King of Scotland) and starring Helen Mirren, is a glittering, compelling, solemnly anxious news comedy about the week in late summer, 1997, when Tony Blair, fresh in office as new-Liberal Prime Minister, "saved" the British royal family, or saved it from itself, when Lady Di died in Paris. Partly the Queen, Prince Philip, and Prince Charles, all in their own ways, loathed Diana for what she had done to them, which the public, conditioned by the mass media to adore her, could not know about. Partly the Queen wanted to shelter the boys, Diana’s sons, from the noise of publicity, which would only aggravate their grief. Partly, and perhaps most of all, she was being the way she was raised, keeping things to herself, maintaining the immemorial English stiff upper lip. But also as Peter French has said about this film, the royal family "are shown to be morally and socially blinkered." Tony Blair reluctantly taught the Queen to see their absence of public response to the death, her insistence at first that it was a "private, family matter," was a disastrous policy that had to be reversed.

Diana had skillfully manipulated the media to form an image of herself combining Demi Moore and Mother Teresa. And she was still associated with the royal family, and appeared as wronged by them. You don’t turn your back on that. You eat humble pie and play catch-up. But a monarch isn’t tutored in such strategies.

No flag flew at half mast over Buckingham Palace, because that flagpole was used only for the royal flag, to show if anyone was home, and they were all at Balmoral, being private in their grief, avoiding publicity, and protecting the boys.

The Queen as seen here and imagined with enthusiasm by Morgan is not as witty as Alan Bennett’s Queen, in her last onscreen recreation, in A Question of Attribution (directed by John Schlesinger, 1992), nor does the estimable Ms. Mirren (who’s nonetheless very fine) have the buoyancy of Prunella Scales in Schlesinger’s film. But she is witheringly cold toward Tony Blair, all foolish smiles on his first official visit to the Palace. (Blair’s played by Michael Sheen, who’s experienced at this game.) As Peter Bradshaw wrote in The Guardian, "Mirren's Queen meets him with the unreadable smile of a chess grandmaster, facing a nervous tyro. She begins by reminding him that she has worked with 10 prime ministers, beginning with Winston Churchill, 'sitting where you are now'. As put-downs go, that's like pulling a lever and watching a chandelier fall on your opponent's head." And, of course, fun for us.

Fully recognizing the crucial importance of the British monarchy, this film is tartly reserved about both sides of the game. The royal family don’t like "call me Tony." And Blair’s wife Cherie is a bit ungainly in her blatantly anti-monarchy attitudes. But when Blair sees how Elizabeth’s coldness and invisibility is angering the fans of Dady Di – the media queen, the "People’s Princess" -- alienating her own subjects en masse, he steps in and persuades them to leave Balmoral and look at the thousands of flowers for Di piled in front of the Palance with their humiliating notes; then deliver a "tribute" to Di on TV. The formal grandeur of the film inherent in its subject matter – the Prime Minister and the royal family – is offset by its ironies and by the intimacy of the tennis match that develops in communications back and forth by telephone.

This movie is ultimately kind to Blair and to the Queen. It makes us feel sorry for Elizabeth, whom Blair comes to defend (against some of his cockier associates, not to mention his wife) with ardor. In Peter Morgan’s second imagined interview with Blair the Queen coolly observes that he confuses "humility" with "humiliation" (he hasn’t seen the nasty notes on the bunches of flowers for Diana); and she sees his kindness as merely due to seeing that what has happened to her could happen to him as quickly. As for Blair, the Brits may have little use for him now, but the filmmakers acted out of the belief that this week when he averted disaster on behalf of the monarchy was his "finest hour."

Frears has had a varied career, with high points second to few, concentrated in the decade of the Eighties after he came off doing a lot of television. These, his own finest hours, include the brilliant My Beautiful Laundrette, Prick Up Your Ears, Dangerous Liaisons, and The Grifters. For a while there it looked like he could do anything, then more as if he would; but he’s admirably willing to try new, as well as dirty, pretty, things, The Queen is dignified, but contemporary. It’s bustling and grand. Loud music and vivid performances help. Mirren’s Elizabeth is more of the Queen and less of the Queen than Prunella Scales’ briefer performance. Bennett’s Queen was very clever. Morgan’s is sad and noble. The Queen shows where the Brits are now, and the effect of Lady Di. QEII, like QEI and Victoria before her, has had an extraordinarily long and successful reign, half a century (obviously Mirren is younger than the actual Queen). But with these events, with this crucial week, the days of her generation essentially ended.

There’s a symbolic fourteen-point stag at Balmoral the men are interested in. James Cromwell’s brusque, lordly Prince Philip will do nothing but take the boys hunting, to get them outside. In the end a corporate banker kills the stag on a neighbor’s property, and only Elizabeth sees it, when she’s stranded in a jeep she’s driven into the mud, and crying.

For all its ceremony and noise, loneliness and wit, mostly The Queen simply tells a story, the new story of English royalty at the end of the twentieth century. It was a story worth telling, and it’s told well. A fitting opening night event for the New York Film Festival, in combines ceremonial elegance, good writing, and a superb lead performance by Helen Mirren.

oscar jubis
11-11-2006, 12:49 AM
*Two things I liked about the film:
1)The seamless integration of fiction and news footage.
2)The central character as written by Peter Morgan and performed by Ms. Mirren.

*Mr. Morgan has a decent chance of getting nominated by our Academy in both screenplay categories (his script for The Last King of Scotland is an "adapted screenplay") in the same year. Correct me if I am wrong but I think it's never happened before. My complaint is that, given their ample screen time, other royals are rather one-dimensional as written by Morgan. Is Prince Phillip this odious and HM The Queen Mother this shallow? And this Prince Charles is such a paranoid wimp!

*Overall, The Queen is a fine movie. But I'm having difficulty accepting The Queen as the anointed best movie of 2006 (well, to be exact, it's the "best reviewed film of the year" according to metacritic).

*"Partly the Queen, Prince Philip, and Prince Charles, all in their own ways, loathed Diana for what she had done to them, which the public, conditioned by the mass media to adore her, could not know about." (Chris Knipp)
Would you mind elaborating a bit, Chris?

Chris Knipp
11-11-2006, 09:57 AM
Well, you would have to review the whole history of Lady Di as seen from a critical rather than idolatrous standpoint. Clearly the royal family did not like her blunt criticisms of her husband's conduct and the way she presented them to the media (even though he was guilty of indirectly replying); nor would they care for her whole existence as a sensationalized media figure more like a film star than conservative British royalty; her autobiographical confessions à la The Jerry Springer Show on AMerican television; her increasing self-dramatizing. All that sort of behavior is clearly the antithesis of the old royal style as examplified by QEII, which insisted upon hushing things up and smoothing things over. Diana's style and behavior aroused resentment in the Queen, Charles, and Philip. I can't prove to you that they deeply resented her for this, but it seems very logical that they did and the film suggests as much. For the masses Diana became a pop icon who could do no wrong, or whose errors were sympathsized with, and the harm Diana did to the royal family was ill perceived.

I think it's an excellent movie and perhaps one of the year's most entertaining in English, but I'm not thinking of it as the best by any means. I don't know about Morgan's possible two nominations being (possibly) unique. Both are successful pieces of writing but neither is terribly original but rather a collage of available material.

oscar jubis
11-11-2006, 01:15 PM
I am more critical of Prince Charles and a lot more sympathetic towards Lady Di than you are (based on your response) but I accept your opinion and I thank you for sharing it.

Originally posted by Chris Knipp
I think it's an excellent movie and perhaps one of the year's most entertaining in English, but I'm not thinking of it as the best by any means.

There are several films I like roughly as much as The Queen, including The Last King of Scotland. My favorite English-language film is Half Nelson but we've discussed that one sufficiently. I'm glad you like it a little bit more (or dislike it a little bit less) now than when you wrote your SFFF review of it. Anyway there are many promising films I haven't seen or have yet to open, and I will do some re-assessment as time permits.

Two other favorites of 2006 are shorts (including one starring Isabella Rossellini, Johann's favorite film from the Vancouver fest). I haven't decided whether to list them separately as shorts or list them along with the other fiction films of the year.

mouton
11-18-2006, 10:03 AM
Hey Chris.

It does seem like The Queen is headed towards an Oscar nomination for Best Picture. Given what I've seen this year, I certainly would not mind seeing it there. I found it to be tight and tidy. I was amused by the behind-the-scenes mishaps and moved by Mirren's performance and Morgan's imagined plight. Everything felt natural to me ... that the Royal Family would have disdain for Diana and be torn up about that; that they would want to shelter the boys from pain; and that they would also be out of step with the impact her death had on the world. I also agree with Oscar (which I think may be a first) about the seamless blending of archival and new footage.

It certainly has heaped up much praise and I feel it is definitely one of Frears' best works. I would be happy to crown this film as a contender in my year end list.

Chris Knipp
11-18-2006, 04:45 PM
mouton and Oscar,

I don't think I was trying to praise or blame Lady Di. She did some good things, perhaps more than the royal family have done., and I was not defending Charles, just trying to explain why the family resented her behavior.

As for The Queen, it's excellent. I also liked Little Children. I expressed a willingness to reassess Half Nelson, but I haven't had that opportunity. The best is saved for last, so we must see what the US distirutors bring out between now and the end of the year. From the NY Film Festival, the American film that seemed most exceptional to me was David Lynch's Inland Empire. That has to be on my 10 Best US list. The Last King of Scotland has flaws as a movie, though it contains an exceptional performance and Whittaker must be nominated for Best Actor for it, unquestionably.

What about The Departed? I find it a little more disappointing than most do ( I agree with some of tabuno's criticisms), but it is still very well done.

For the rest, I've seen so much this year I have to go over my complete log , which is on my desktop at home so I won't be able to scan through it and bring it up to date till right after Thanksgiving.

Chris Knipp
11-18-2006, 05:11 PM
I hope people will get to see Nicholas Hynter's (and Alan Bennett's) The History Boys. It and Bug are two outstanding play adaptations on film this year, and The History Boys is one of the most intelligent films in English this year. It opens in the US in a couple of days I think but I don't know what the distribution will be like.

mouton
11-18-2006, 05:14 PM
The previews are running here in Montreal so I'm sure it will be hitting us shortly. I'm anxious for it ans even more so now that you've mentioned you liked it. I really wanted to catch it on Broadway but it closed a few days before I last hit NYC.

Chris Knipp
11-19-2006, 03:47 AM
It may get more play in Canada due to the UK tie-in. Hope you get to see it soon, I think you'll love it. I hope it gets widely seen in the US too. The play was amazing. As I said, I saw it three times. Brilliant and big fun.

bix171
02-24-2007, 06:14 PM
Pretty funny, actually. Stephen Frears' imagining of the week following Princess Diana's death works wonderfully well in the black comedy genre the English are celebrated for, with its pointed commentary about Great Britain's facination with the pageantry of death and its equally morbid ambivalence towards the royal family. Written by self-proclaimed anti-monarchist Peter Morgan, it attempts to humanize Queen Elizabeth and, as such, is sympathetic to her--to a point: for all the admirable qualities the Queen displays (she drives her own Range Rover all over her country estate and can diagnose its needed repairs when she attempts to ford a shallow stream) and humane impulses she embodies (her main concern is for a hunted stag, which suitably serves as a symbol for a monarchy pursued by a hostile press and scrutinized by her turning subjects), far too often the dunderheadedness of her decisions, goaded by her selfish and calculating (and highly amusing) family, overwhem her sincere love of country and duty. To that end, Frears and Morgan work overtime to credit--in the film's most insightful irony--Labour's newly-elected Prime Minister, Tony Blair (a very good Michael Sheen) with saving the monarchy for the nation and from itself; the film ends with a newly-found detente between Blair and the Queen, an improbable and implausible happy ending. Much has been made of Helen Mirren's dead-on stylization of Elizabeth and it really is something to behold; as an interpretation of the private life of one of the most private persons in the world, Mirren makes everything we'd think we'd want to know about her seem plausible without demeaning her in the slightest. (The filmmakers' sensitivity is highlighted by filming Elizabeth's one breakdown with her back to the camera.) It's a transcendant performance, as close to made-in-heaven acting as we're likely to see. As a director, Frears once again shows that his primary gift is finding truly interesting material to work with.