Regardless of how you feel about Diana or the Royals, I thought the film was a mess and boring. There were no new insights or anything really. All of the "descent into madness" scenes also got old quickly.
I just don't think there was any point to this film.
Looked very cheap and like a Telemovie too.
Well, it has a point (Diana is stifled by the royal family and needs to reconnect with her true self) but it doesn't execute its premise well. I found the movie meandering, pretentious, and dull. I cannot believe people love Stewart's performance-- I generally like her as an actress, but her acting here felt like an impersonation-- I never bought her as Diana.
A shame, because I was excited to see it-- it looked Kubrickesque and stylish. At the very least, the costumes were on point.
My problem with Diana was always that she herself was rather privileged. She would have known something of their lifestyle and how it all works.
I thought her acting was terrible too and choosing an American to play her seemed like a desperate attempt to make the film popular State side.
I was curious to watch it as well but as you say it comes off as a weird art film.
The Major was the most interesting character. I think they tried too hard to make the Royals look bad and it came off as a caricature.
Oh that's easy: pointless Oscar Bait. All the producer needs to do is suck up to and bribe the right people at the snooty Academy (Weinstein used to do this) and the pointless awards are in the bag.
shareYeah, the forgotten Shakespeare in Love winning over Saving Private Ryan. Tell me some money didn't cross palms there!
shareI think the point was to show the fashions of 1991, most of which were so wrong for the season and setting that they looked ludicrous. I mean, wearing a lightweight yellow spring suit and heels out on the grounds, when it's freezing cold and you're going to be waking on wet grass and muddy paths?
Doesn't anyone associated with this film understand ANYTHING about fashion?
To inject feminist nonsense
share