Monday, February 19, 2007

The queen of the Oscars?

Movies.com writer Dave Wright put it well: "The Queen is a very cool, very funny movie about death and grief and good manners, but it's kind of small and British...." It's very interesting, but a little bit dry. That said, I understand that a lot of the movie hinged on the fact that the queen did not believe in showing her emotions. The film succeeded in showing a stark contrast between the emotion of the British people and the reaction of the queen. It demonstrated well how living her life under a hundreds-of-years-old set of rules impacted how the queen handled an unprecedented situation, but in doing so lost a lot of potential emotion in the film. It was more about the politics, and about the eventual transition from the old ways to the new. I have to say, I found it a little disappointing that the most emotional part of the movie for me was the actual footage from the events surrounding Princess Di's death. I also understand that the film wasn't made to pander to an audience, and I respect that. However, there is a difference between pandering to an audience and captivating them. I wasn't really captivated.

This situation reminds me a lot of Capote. The movie was not what I would call vibrant, but the lead performance was acclaimed. I don't know that I quite agree with the rave reviews Mirren has been getting, but she was very good. Hers is just not a role I would consider a lock for an Oscar - or maybe it is just this year. Honestly, would Mirren stand a chance against last year's field? I have to think that the winning role in the best acting categories should be more of a role that really grabs the audience, like Reese Witherspoon's. For example, would Mirren have even gotten a nomination against the nominees of 2004 (Charlize Theron for Monster, Naomi Watts for 21 Grams, Samantha Morton for In America, Diane Keaton for Something's Gotta Give, and Keisha Castle-Hughes for Whale Rider)? I have my doubts.

Also, I must mention that I am in love with the performance of Michael Sheen as Tony Blair. Now that was captivating, and I'm sad that he isn't getting more attention for it.

Regardless, the Queen is an important movie to see. It's well done and while not the most exciting, still good. It also makes for the first time I've watched a movie about an historical event that I was actually alive for (which was nice). That said, it's definitely a one-timer.

No comments: