The Queen (2006)

[1001001]

I just watched this film on BBC America, for what must be the 4th or 5th time. I find it absolutely riveting.

Being an American of Irish decent, I don't hold any particular fondness for the monarchy (although Prince Charles in his recent TV interview was, I thought, quite impressive). I wasn't really even sure why I liked this film so much. It's not my normal cup of tea, as it were.

Still, I always enjoy the movie and find new little things that I had missed. I suppose part of it is seeing the rarified and insular world of the royals. How different their reality must be from the rest of us. And yet they struggle with these matters much like a "regular family": grief, loss, perceived betrayal....all under the glare of worldwide media and almost impossible expectations.

Helen Mirren's performance is certainly Oscar-worthy. She is marvelous in bringing this complicated character to life with dignity and restraint. You really do have a sense of sympathy for her, even as she is completely out of touch with reality. Just an incredible acting job.

One thing I'd like to know, being an outsider: how much of this film is accurate? Are the portrayals of Blair and Prince Charles truthful representations? Did Blair really "order" the Queen to deal with Diana's death more openly and publicly? Was Blair perceived as positively as he is shown to be? And what about Elizabeth's husband? He seems a serious fellow, fiercely protective of his wife, under the guise of tradition and proper behavior.

What are your thoughts?

 

[WillsBabe]

I don't remember a great deal about this film to be honest, other than I really enjoyed it. I do remember being impressed by Phillip - either the actor, or my perception of the real Duke of Edinburgh.

 

[bigdaddy]

Yeah the movie isn't anything I'd normally like, and I don't really remember a lot of it, all I remember is that it's a good movie.

I think it's mostly real, I'm not sure we will ever be told how much of it actually was based on real life and how much wasn't.

 

[danellis]

You really do have a sense of sympathy for her, even as she is completely out of touch with reality. Just an incredible acting job.

One thing I'd like to know, being an outsider: how much of this film is accurate? Are the portrayals of Blair and Prince Charles truthful representations? Did Blair really "order" the Queen to deal with Diana's death more openly and publicly? Was Blair perceived as positively as he is shown to be? And what about Elizabeth's husband? He seems a serious fellow, fiercely protective of his wife, under the guise of tradition and proper behavior.

What are your thoughts?

It was certainly the public belief at the time that Blair ordered Her Maj in the way depicted in the film.

My personal belief if that Elizabeth Windsor is a deeply dutiful person and that she views the world on that basis: It's hard to tell at what stage she realised her subjects weren't.

Phillip's always good fun! He's got a reputation for having a serious case of foot in mouth disease. Instinctively I believe that Phillip has a similar strong sense of duty, and that's what leads to him being so protective of the Queen.

dJE

 

[Owain Taggart]

Yeah, it's a great movie. I remember when news came around that the Queen herself was not very pleased with the way the movie portrayed her, and then came around and applauded Helen Mirren for her performance. There's a sequel airing on HBO right now dealing with the special relationship between Blair and Clinton called The Special Relationship.

 

[1001001]

It was certainly the public belief at the time that Blair ordered Her Maj in the way depicted in the film.

My personal belief if that Elizabeth Windsor is a deeply dutiful person and that she views the world on that basis: It's hard to tell at what stage she realised her subjects weren't.

Phillip's always good fun! He's got a reputation for having a serious case of foot in mouth disease. Instinctively I believe that Phillip has a similar strong sense of duty, and that's what leads to him being so protective of the Queen.

dJE

That's very interesting to me. I'm sure she is bound by duty, and that came across in the film. Like you said, it was basically her discovering just how out of touch she really was.

I thought the line "She's been brought up to believe it's God's will she is who she is" was pretty instructive.

 

[Lookingglassman]

This is the only "chick flick" that I love. I have seen it about 5 times too. I have always been fascinated by Queen Elizabeth (I think she was a hottie when she was younger) and I love Helen Mirren's portrayal of her. Now I gotta go get it on Netflix, you got me thinking about it again!

 

[Marc]

It was certainly the public belief at the time that Blair ordered Her Maj in the way depicted in the film.

My personal belief if that Elizabeth Windsor is a deeply dutiful person and that she views the world on that basis: It's hard to tell at what stage she realised her subjects weren't.

Phillip's always good fun! He's got a reputation for having a serious case of foot in mouth disease. Instinctively I believe that Phillip has a similar strong sense of duty, and that's what leads to him being so protective of the Queen.

dJE

That's very interesting to me. I'm sure she is bound by duty, and that came across in the film. Like you said, it was basically her discovering just how out of touch she really was.

I thought the line "She's been brought up to believe it's God's will she is who she is" was pretty instructive.

The thing that struck me with the film was how Philip who's reknown for having serious foot in mouth issues came across as more understanding than the Queen.

 

[CaptainCanada]

Like you said, it was basically her discovering just how out of touch she really was.

One of the things I find most interesting about the film is that, in retrospect, the reactions of the people seem grossly out of proportion to the event, which makes the Palace seem comparatively sane ("crying their eyes out over someone they never even met. And they say we're crazy", as Philip puts it at one point). For instance, the bit where the public is demanding that the flag be lowered, even though that's not how the flag has ever worked.

 

[1001001]

Like you said, it was basically her discovering just how out of touch she really was.

One of the things I find most interesting about the film is that, in retrospect, the reactions of the people seem grossly out of proportion to the event, which makes the Palace seem comparatively sane ("crying their eyes out over someone they never even met. And they say we're crazy", as Philip puts it at one point). For instance, the bit where the public is demanding that the flag be lowered, even though that's not how the flag has ever worked.

That's a good point. I thought about that too. And I thought they gave that some attention. Remember Charles talking about "the public Diana and the private Diana bearing no resemblance to one another" (or something close to that)? But then again, when he spoke to Elizabeth about using the royal plane to bring Diana home, I thought that was a nice moment. They all seemed genuinely worried about the princes, who they (smartly) left out of the movie almost entirely.

So again, as an outsider, I wonder about Blair. Did he have genuine insight into the mood of the country because he cared, or because he was a shrewd politician? Was he the hero, or did he use this situation? I mean, there are times in the film when it looks almost like a political ad for Blair. But I don't have much insight into British politics.

The film covered so many angles well, I think. Perhaps another reason I like it so much. It seems pretty subtle and nuanced (for the most part).

 

[Sci]

So again, as an outsider, I wonder about Blair. Did he have genuine insight into the mood of the country because he cared, or because he was a shrewd politician? Was he the hero, or did he use this situation? I mean, there are times in the film when it looks almost like a political ad for Blair. But I don't have much insight into British politics.

You're severely mis-reading the film's intended portrayal of Blair, I would argue, and here's why:

The key to understanding Blair's arc in The Queen is the scene where he's fighting with his republican wife. (Understand: When they say someone is republican in Britain, what they mean is that they believe that the Monarchy ought to be abolished and the United Kingdom replaced with a Republic headed by an elected President.) The other key is the scene where Blair reacts to the speech being prepared by his advisers by getting upset at the use of words like "revolution" and language talking about getting rid of privilege.

The arc being portrayed there is one of a successful politician turning his back on the principles he once espoused. In real life, in the past, the U.K. Labour Party was the party of the left -- much further left than it ended up being under Blair. That's what we're seeing in The Queen: A Labour politician who once espoused egalitarian rhetoric, upon taking power, begins to back away from his previous leftist beliefs. He does not want anyone talking about a "revolution," even metaphorically. He does not want to include talk of getting rid of privilege. He does not want to hear people talking about abolishing the Monarchy anymore.

And it's not because he's some great fan of Her Majesty or of the Monarchy itself, either. It's because the Monarchy is part of the system of power that he's now on the top of, and because he recognizes that the British people will one day turn on him, too. This is what the Queen says to him at the end: You did not help me because you cared. You helped me because you realized this could happen to you, too.

The Queen, in a very real way, contains two contrasting arcs, then -- the Queen's arc, as she moves from taking her position as Monarch for granted and grows to understand that her duty now includes being closer and more accountable to the public, no longer being so removed and aloof. The Queen's arc is about her realizing that, to a certain extent, she needs to "democratize" her relationship with the public. And Blair's arc is about a seeming democrat who has come to power and has begun to sell out his belief in egalitarianism, coming to the defense of the Queen because it is a means of securing his own position -- his own privilege.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Like you said, it was basically her discovering just how out of touch she really was.

One of the things I find most interesting about the film is that, in retrospect, the reactions of the people seem grossly out of proportion to the event, which makes the Palace seem comparatively sane ("crying their eyes out over someone they never even met. And they say we're crazy", as Philip puts it at one point). For instance, the bit where the public is demanding that the flag be lowered, even though that's not how the flag has ever worked.

This. Collective insanity reigned.

 

[Deckerd]

Like you said, it was basically her discovering just how out of touch she really was.

One of the things I find most interesting about the film is that, in retrospect, the reactions of the people seem grossly out of proportion to the event, which makes the Palace seem comparatively sane ("crying their eyes out over someone they never even met. And they say we're crazy", as Philip puts it at one point). For instance, the bit where the public is demanding that the flag be lowered, even though that's not how the flag has ever worked.

This. Collective insanity reigned.

I agree too. You'd be amazed at the collective amnesia people have about it now. It was mass hysteria, pure and simple. No wonder The Firm were completely baffled. Everyone including the politicians were caught on the hop to a certain extent by the sheer indulgence that went on. It was very Middle Eastern in a way; all that was missing was the ritual self-beating.

As regards telling the royals what to do: this isn't a new thing. During the War, the PM told them to get their collective arses out onto the streets and earn their fucking keep. Since they are The Firm, they then went off and did it with knobs on.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Loved the movie. Fantastic performances.

 

[danellis]

As regards telling the royals what to do: this isn't a new thing. During the War, the PM told them to get their collective arses out onto the streets and earn their fucking keep. Since they are The Firm, they then went off and did it with knobs on.

I've never heard this story. I assume by "the war" you men WWII?

dJE

 

[1001001]

You're severely mis-reading the film's intended portrayal of Blair, I would argue....

Well, that's why we ask questions!

The key to understanding Blair's arc in The Queen is the scene where he's fighting with his republican wife. (Understand: When they say someone is republican in Britain, what they mean is that they believe that the Monarchy ought to be abolished and the United Kingdom replaced with a Republic headed by an elected President.) The other key is the scene where Blair reacts to the speech being prepared by his advisers by getting upset at the use of words like "revolution" and language talking about getting rid of privilege.

I remember his wife speaking of him "going off to see his girlfriend again" and something about how "all Labour Prime Ministers eventually fall in love with the queen". So I assume this dynamic was not unique to Blair...?

The arc being portrayed there is one of a successful politician turning his back on the principles he once espoused. In real life, in the past, the U.K. Labour Party was the party of the left -- much further left than it ended up being under Blair. That's what we're seeing in The Queen: A Labour politician who once espoused egalitarian rhetoric, upon taking power, begins to back away from his previous leftist beliefs. He does not want anyone talking about a "revolution," even metaphorically. He does not want to include talk of getting rid of privilege. He does not want to hear people talking about abolishing the Monarchy anymore.

And it's not because he's some great fan of Her Majesty or of the Monarchy itself, either. It's because the Monarchy is part of the system of power that he's now on the top of, and because he recognizes that the British people will one day turn on him, too. This is what the Queen says to him at the end: You did not help me because you cared. You helped me because you realized this could happen to you, too.

It certainly seemed to me that the relationship being portrayed in the film was genuine. You don't think he developed empathy for the queen, having seen what her life was really like? Did he mature and soften because he had a new position and new insight into the woman?

I would say that if the reality was nothing more than naked self-preservation, that was seriously downplayed in the movie. That was not what I took away from it.

The Queen, in a very real way, contains two contrasting arcs, then -- the Queen's arc, as she moves from taking her position as Monarch for granted and grows to understand that her duty now includes being closer and more accountable to the public, no longer being so removed and aloof. The Queen's arc is about her realizing that, to a certain extent, she needs to "democratize" her relationship with the public. And Blair's arc is about a seeming democrat who has come to power and has begun to sell out his belief in egalitarianism, coming to the defense of the Queen because it is a means of securing his own position -- his own privilege.

I don't think Blair's motivations were portrayed so negatively in the film. They certainbly addressed this (in the scenes you pointed out earlier) but they did not appear to me to be the main thrust of the movie. JMHO

As for the political reality of England at the time, again I claim ignorance. I remember when Princess Diana died, and all the gnashing of teeth and tearing of garments that followed. We did not get as much of that here, obviously. It was more about a celebrity dying than a royal.

 

[Deckerd]

Well of course that isn't the official line.

 

[1001001]

Well of course that isn't the official line.

Well, I'm just talking about how I perceived the movie. I did not walk away thinking Blair was a opportunist who betrayed his values for self-preservation. That's not what I got from it. But again I emphasize that I ask because I'm operating in somewhat of a vacuum.

Whether or not that's how Blair really was, I don' think that was emphasized in the movie. That may be the perspective of others who went through it, but it was not explicit in the film, I don't think.

 

[Deckerd]

Sorry my response was to danellis, you just got in the way. As you were.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Well of course that isn't the official line.

Well, I'm just talking about how I perceived the movie. I did not walk away thinking Blair was a opportunist who betrayed his values for self-preservation. That's not what I got from it. But again I emphasize that I ask because I'm operating in somewhat of a vacuum.

Whether or not that's how Blair really was, I don' think that was emphasized in the movie. That may be the perspective of others who went through it, but it was not explicit in the film, I don't think.

Part of the key to understanding Blair is that he started trying to fulfill his political ambitions as a Young Conservative. He then saw the ailing Labour party as a vehicle that he could use more effectively. I think he's an opportunist who doesn't realise that he is.