I have no idea if what screenwriter Peter Morgan and director Stephen Frears presented in the fascinating, alternately dramatic and biting film "The Queen" is even close to what the Windsors are like in real life. More often than not, I view Queen Elizabeth II in press and video not knowing a thing about her. The movie could have easily been a skit making fun of the royal family, i.e.: Spitting Image, The Kids in the Hall, etc. But Morgan and Frears took the high road but not without some very darkly funny lines and observations set during the week when Princess Diana was killed in a car crash and the royal family's reaction the week after the news.
Helen Mirren's complex and believable portrayal of a Queen and a royal family in crisis was outstanding. What really impressed me is how underplayed the performance was. It certainly would have been out of character for Queen Elizabeth II to chew the scenery. Mirren's work, which justifiably received many acting awards, is a great current example of an under-the-surface performance. Just like the Queen herself, keep a stiff upper lip and don't allow your emotions to show in public. Somehow, Mirren made Queen Elizabeth II human which was not an easy task. Despite anyone's negative feelings for the film itself (excluding myself), Mirren's performance should be studied by acting fans for years.
I was also fascinated by the relationship dynamics throughout the movie. From the Queen's back-and-forth meetings with the young, new Prime Minister Tony Blair (well-played by Michael Sheen) to her husband Prince Philip (James Cromwell), her mother (Sylvia Syms) and even the relationship she has with the public.
At a running time of just under 1 hour and 40 minutes, "The Queen" ponders several questions: After the death of Diana, despite protocol issues, were the actions of the Windsors justified? Was the general public justified in criticizing the actions of the Windsors? As a world, do we expect too much from people in higher profiles? With the press and the internet, do we have the right to know the private life of a public figure? Frears, Morgan, Mirren and the rest of the production crew for "The Queen" did a masterful job of capturing one of the world's most private public figures.
Helen Mirren's complex and believable portrayal of a Queen and a royal family in crisis was outstanding. What really impressed me is how underplayed the performance was. It certainly would have been out of character for Queen Elizabeth II to chew the scenery. Mirren's work, which justifiably received many acting awards, is a great current example of an under-the-surface performance. Just like the Queen herself, keep a stiff upper lip and don't allow your emotions to show in public. Somehow, Mirren made Queen Elizabeth II human which was not an easy task. Despite anyone's negative feelings for the film itself (excluding myself), Mirren's performance should be studied by acting fans for years.
I was also fascinated by the relationship dynamics throughout the movie. From the Queen's back-and-forth meetings with the young, new Prime Minister Tony Blair (well-played by Michael Sheen) to her husband Prince Philip (James Cromwell), her mother (Sylvia Syms) and even the relationship she has with the public.
At a running time of just under 1 hour and 40 minutes, "The Queen" ponders several questions: After the death of Diana, despite protocol issues, were the actions of the Windsors justified? Was the general public justified in criticizing the actions of the Windsors? As a world, do we expect too much from people in higher profiles? With the press and the internet, do we have the right to know the private life of a public figure? Frears, Morgan, Mirren and the rest of the production crew for "The Queen" did a masterful job of capturing one of the world's most private public figures.