"The Queen" (2006) - Film about Elizabeth II and the Death of Diana


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I bought a copy of it the other day and I must say, it was better than I expected. From the previews, it looked alright but turned out to be rather enjoyable. Helen Mirren played her majesty perfectly, in my opinion.
 
I watched it last night for the first time. I thought that Helen mirren had QE down to a T. Unfortunately I also think they had DofE perfectly as well. If so, I can see where a lot of the BRF 'issues' have come from in the last two generations. I particualaly enjoyed the exchange where Philip says 'and the wives should just toe the line' and Elizabeth say 'really philip?' in an extremely ironic tone
 
I love this movie very much. I think that Helen did a wonderful job. I am glad that she got her Oscar. I am going to listen to the commentaries. I am wondering if the royal house really didn't like Diana? Does anybody know why? I was just wondering. If the questions are too bold then plz ignore them. Thanks.
 
HRH_Liz said:
I love this movie very much. I think that Helen did a wonderful job. I am glad that she got her Oscar. I am going to listen to the commentaries. I am wondering if the royal house really didn't like Diana? Does anybody know why? I was just wondering. If the questions are too bold then plz ignore them. Thanks.

Hello HRH Liz, I think the Queen had some fondness for Diana. After all, she enthusiastically approved of Diana as a daughter-in-law and allowed Diana to join her for dinner unannounced when Diana was feeling lonely when the Queen didn't offer that same privilege to her own children.

However, I believe, that Diana caused Her Majesty a great deal of pain. When she first helped release the Andrew Morton book that was criticial of the Royal Family and she lied about it by saying that she took no part in it when it was later released that she had taped interviews for it, Diana caused a great deal of anxiety about the Royal Family in general, and when Diana secretly taped the Panorama interview where she was critical of the Royal Family and cast doubts on Charles' ability to reign, the nation was thrown into a monarchy in crisis. This was the monarchy that the Queen held very dear to her heart and had worked unfailingly and unceasingly to defend and support.

I imagine it was quite hard on Her Majesty to see the very real prospect of all her life's work going down the tubes after one single interview with a girl she had always been very fond of and had approved of joining the inner bosom of her family. I think the Queen can be quite understanding and forgiving but she would have to be totally superhuman and totally forgiving if she didn't feel any resentment towards Diana in that difficult time.

I do think the Queen softened a little bit towards Diana when she realized that the monarchy could become stronger and better after it all but when Diana died, only two years after the fateful Panorama interview that Diana did behind the backs of the Queen and the royal household, I think the wounds for Her Majesty were still a little fresh.

The Queen's hurt was perfectly understandable to me.
 
it said that Queen Elizabeth II, didn't watch this movie. I dunno why...
 
Having read Dame Helen's reasons for declining the invitation I believe that Her Majesty would have understood and appreciated why Dame Helen couldn't accept. The Queen is a hard-working woman herself and would know that work commitments, on whom a large number of other people are depending, cannot easily be discarded.

To me, this is a mere beat-up to try and reflect an intolerant and pompous light on Her Majesty. Such piffle!
 
I bought my "copy" from iTunes. I must say it is better each time I watch it. It is pretty close to perfect as far as royal movies go. I think the producers should consider making a "prequel", like a movie about the Queen when she became "The Queen", 1952-1953, from Accession to Coronation, that would be awesome.
 
This movie seems so close to reality that sometimes it's hard to tell the difference with fiction. It's, I think, one of the greatest film made about the royal family. Even after rewatching it, I can't find a mistake or a weird thing in it. Helen Mirren is just tremendous !
 
If they were to make my proposed prequel about the Accession-to-Coronation, I wonder who could play the young new Queen and her young handsome husband. :rolleyes:
 
I have yet to break the plastic from my dvd! Oh, the shame.:ohmy:
 
I think part of the charm of this movie and cetainly the credibility comes from the actors.
Helen just simply was the Queen and Cromwell looked extremely like the elderly Philipp, as for Blair (he played himself, didn't he?;))
So I fear a movie about the young QEII even by the same producers and direction team, but obviously other actors might not have the same effect.

I loved the movie too and I found it particularly good, that they refrained from portraying the boys, as this would have only served some tear jerking.

I also liked the way Cromwell portrayed the stiff and stuffy Philipp, for once IMO it became obvious, that he cared deeply for the boys (not so much for their mother) but was stuck in his generation of stiff upper lip and boys don't cry. (So he took them out for deer stalking, good one on the day mommy died...)
 
I'd see Gillian Anderson as the Queen. I think she'd look great.
ImageShack - Hosting :: uytrezlu2.jpg

For Philip I really don't know ...

She no doubt has the ability to do it, but isn't she too old? For a Coronation story, the Queen was only 25. I think Gillian anderson is a lot older than that.
I think it would be tough, indeed, to find someone young enough who could master the performance. I thought of Natalie Portman, what do you think? I don't know. She is a bit over the age by several years but looks very much younger than she is, and certainly she is a terrific actress who proved already she can do a good British accent with Closer.
 
She no doubt has the ability to do it, but isn't she too old? For a Coronation story, the Queen was only 25. I think Gillian anderson is a lot older than that.
I think it would be tough, indeed, to find someone young enough who could master the performance. I thought of Natalie Portman, what do you think? I don't know. She is a bit over the age by several years but looks very much younger than she is, and certainly she is a terrific actress who proved already she can do a good British accent with Closer.

I think Nathalie Portman would be really good too. It's quite difficult to find a good actress but not too old to play THE Queen. Helen Mirren did great but she has past the 25' a long time ago :rolleyes:.
 
It's on ITV1 tomorrow apparantly. I'll give it a second watching and might watch it all the way through.
 
Dear Beatrix Fan,

You will forgive me, but since I happen to be a Fan of BeatrixFan, and have watched with enormous enjoyment and delight "The Queen" three times, and am well aware that you have all kinds of reservations about it I would be most intrested in hearing, after you endure seeing the whole thing and getting through the ordeal just exacatly what you think then.

Not that I will agree with you. I think the portrayal of the Queen Mother was, for example, total idiocy. And is Philip really the total pompous ass he comes across as??? The scene with Charles calling Blair, or rather his man doing the dirty work, is just an embarrasment. I would have hoped he would have had more pride and self respect than to do such a thing.

That said the movie is wonderful. Of course the British people, or at least some of them behaved worse than spoiled children. I still say they decided to have a collective nervous breakdown. And I am not so sure that much of the reaction of the royal family was not fully justified. After all Diana never was the saint that many thought her to be. As was quite accurately noted, I forget by whom-Charles or Philip?-the public saw one side of her and the RF saw quite another.

So there you are. And I have gone and opened by big mouth-this disease of loggorrhea that I have-and stirred the pot again. Cheers.
 
I think I am the only person on the planet to have NOT liked the movie. I thought it was intrusive, disrespectful and bothersome. It was not necessary to make a motion picture for profit off the discomfort and private family angst and anguish of Her Majesty.
 
Last edited:
I think I am the only person on the planet to have NOT liked the movie. I thought it was intrusive, disrespectful and bothersome. It was not necessary to make a motion picture for profit off the discomfort and private family angst and anguish of Her Majesty.
You are definitely not the only person on the planet, a great many people, not on these forums, think it is laughably inaccurate and it worries them that royalty 'fans' could mistake it for anything other than a work of fiction. :flowers:
 
We will really never know. I am sure that they made some effort to find out and there always seems to be a willing insider who spills the beans, to their great discomfort. I don't beleive in mass "nervous breakdowns". It was a reaction to a beautiful, very young, popular woman's death. Whether that ruffles the feathers of the stiff upper lip set, too bad. It happened. The 10th Anniversary Memorial was broadcast throughtout the world. If nobody was interested and I mean a great many were, obviously, they wouldn't have done it. These stations are commercial enterprizes. They had to have had a big audience. The film also garnered it share of viewers. Long after the "hysteria". Perhaps, they really didn't care. They did, of course, care about their grandson, that goes without saying, but they wanted this torn out of their side. Interesting, now they have joined the parade.
 
I need to watch that movie. I finally watched Notes on a Scandal last night, and I'm surprised that any performance last year could have beaten out Judi Dench for the Oscar. Helen Mirren must have given the best performance ever, or else the Oscar was based on something other than acting ability.
 
Well, Elspeth, I didn't see the Judi Dench performance, but I did see the other. Mirren did a very nice job, but Oscar quality???
 
..... there always seems to be a willing insider who spills the beans, to their great discomfort.
Experience has proved to me, that they are safe in saying an unnamed source/friend/servant etc because they are rarely challenged. They also cover themselves by telling everyone it is based on real events, in reality 99.99% of the time, it is based on the imagination of the writer, with one or two 'facts'.
 
And how do you know this? Based on what secret info that you have.
 
It was a reaction to a beautiful, very young, popular woman's death. Whether that ruffles the feathers of the stiff upper lip set, too bad. It happened.

If it causes the downfall of the 1000 year old British monarchy then that would be a grave loss not easily replaceable.
 
I cannot imagine that the whole monarchy will fall, because a 36 year old woman, died in a terrible accident and the world mourned. Life goes on. If the monarchy is built on such weak and shifting sands it won't be much of a loss. If it has value and is strong and the people of England wish them to be there it will stay. Diana's death and popularity will not change that. There seems to be this idea that, by some supernatural power, the Princess will destroy the monarchy. Ridiculous. She is gone. They are here. As I am not a British citizen, how I feel about the retention of the monarchy has little value. If the majority of the good citizens of Great Britain want to continue this style of government, it is for them to decide. Why would anyone think Diana's ghost will destory them?
 
And how do you know this? Based on what secret info that you have.
It is hardly 'secret information' and it is not only personal knowledge or experience of the press or 'writers' using only a part of the 'story', based on an unnamed source.

Look at this film with a little logic - HM is supposedly up in the hills, her vehicle has broken down, she wades up a bank and then sits crying until she notices a 14 pointer, which she shoo's away. How romantic... how humane.... then apply logic. If she was alone, what insider could know what happened and if HM had broken down on the estate anywhere remotely close to the guns, the first thing anyone would have done, was to notify the Gillies out with the shooting party, to ensure that no accidents could happen!

Look at the scenes of Charles telling his 'man' to ring Blair, the phone calls that were supposed to have happened, who said what, where and when. Logic says that IF any of that happened, everyone concerned would have ensured they could not be overheard.

In Campbells book and on all the interviews he has done to promote it, he has stated unequivocally, that it was not (as portrayed in the film and many press reports) he who coined the pp phrase.

Read any statements that have been put out by celebrities, to refute stories coming from unnamed/close friends/sources.
 
You never know when you have the truth or it is embelished. Yes, I am sure there is license here, but there are also several books dealing with the death of Diana, they cannot all contain totally false statements, otherwise there would have been libel suits. Ghillies may talk, too. The faceless servants seem to talk. I have seen that for the right buck almost anyone will talk.
 
It is hardly 'secret information' and it is not only personal knowledge or experience of the press or 'writers' using only a part of the 'story', based on an unnamed source.

Look at this film with a little logic - HM is supposedly up in the hills, her vehicle has broken down, she wades up a bank and then sits crying until she notices a 14 pointer, which she shoo's away. How romantic... how humane.... then apply logic. If she was alone, what insider could know what happened and if HM had broken down on the estate anywhere remotely close to the guns, the first thing anyone would have done, was to notify the Gillies out with the shooting party, to ensure that no accidents could happen!

Look at the scenes of Charles telling his 'man' to ring Blair, the phone calls that were supposed to have happened, who said what, where and when. Logic says that IF any of that happened, everyone concerned would have ensured they could not be overheard.

In Campbells book and on all the interviews he has done to promote it, he has stated unequivocally, that it was not (as portrayed in the film and many press reports) he who coined the pp phrase.

Read any statements that have been put out by celebrities, to refute stories coming from unnamed/close friends/sources.

Well of course we can't prove it and I don't believe everything in that film like the details you mentionned, but I believe in the feelings and emotions Stephen Frears wanted to put in this movie. The thing with the car breaking down is just to symbolize that the Queen doesn't cry in front of everybody, she needs to be alone. And it also shows the humanity in her.:flowers:
 
Back
Top Bottom