Skip to main content

Kristen Stewart Performs Astonishingly in Dynamic New Diana Movie


“A fable based on a real tragedy” is how Pablo Larraín’s Spencer introduces itself amid a pale English countryside shot in diluted colours to better convey its’ setting of the early 1990s -a technique it will continue to keep up for the duration of the film. It casts a kind of a sheen over the movie that resembles in some way the colour quality of 90s videotape, but also evokes a sense of dreamlike fancy -as though it were a distant memory or unclear history. Diana Spencer (Kristen Stewart) often considers herself against the judgment of history and the legacy of the British royal family. She wonders what will be made of her, the scandal that always seems to surround her, after she’s gone. One can only speculate what the real Princess of Wales might have thought about the possibility of evaluations such as this one.
Spencer feels like a conscious spiritual sequel to Larraín’s 2016 Jackie, about the life and mental state of Jackie Kennedy in the immediate aftermath of the assassination of her husband. Spencer is similarly set over a brief window: Christmas weekend at Sandringham Estate in Norfolk, just across from where Diana grew up, in 1991 -the height of public scrutiny into her marriage with Prince Charles (Jack Farthing) and his affairs. The film immediately emphasizes the pressure placed on her during this time, as staff await her belated arrival with extreme judgement. Her choice to drive her own car and her confusion en route is contrasted against the preparation being made in the kitchens of Sandringham, ornate and immaculate desserts that symbolize the air of perfection expected of Royals. And which she quite clearly cannot live up to. Just before arriving, she spontaneously decides to cross a field over her old family property to retrieve a coat on a scarecrow that once belonged to her father, to the bafflement of the head chef (Sean Harris) who has come to retrieve her. It’s both an image of affable subversion in her stately role and a sign of her unhealthy mental state, which will continue to be tried through the weekend.
Once at Sandringham, Larraín’s atmosphere becomes noticeably more claustrophobic, long regal hallways giving way to more undisturbed regalia that could pass for a stately British version of the Overlook; and the camera often close-in on Diana navigating this environment with discomfort and even a slight distaste. She is a prisoner in this world and has virtually no agency of her own –her every decision made for her by the acolytes of the Royal institution, represented most starkly in a composite character Major Gregory, played tremendously by Timothy Spall. Larraín makes you keenly feel this restraint and the effect it has on Diana’s psyche through deliberate employment of disorienting cinematography, cacophonous music, and of course honing in on the nuances in Stewart’s performance, which is certainly one of her best.
It may well be the apex of Stewart’s career journey, after so long in the shadow of Twilight. This is a role which she doesn’t only play well, but “disappears” into, as is the common credit. Aided by that film grain and costumes that are recognizable Diana staples, she transforms into the Princess of Wales in both appearance and expression -it’s remarkable! She boasts one of the better English accents attempted by an American in recent years as well, and proves more than capable of conveying the sheer strain and mental anguish Diana was no doubt under during this time. And her scenes with the young Princes William and Harry (she of course sees Charles very little) are adorable. It’s one of the most impressive performances of the year, and one of the most satisfying –in that it will break the minds of so many of those who still deny or underwrite Stewart’s talents due to those vampire movies when she wins an Oscar. There’s no doubt anymore she’s one of the most compelling actresses of her generation.
And it’s clear that she relates to Diana –in fact some have already noted the parallels in their stories, particularly in how they’ve been perceived by the public. At one point Diana notes to Charles the double standard in how the paparazzi seem way more focused on her when it comes to exploiting the cracks in their marriage. She is demonized, ostracized in the press, while he gets comparatively little attention. Yet she’s constantly challenging them and her Sandringham caretakers, insisting on having her curtains open and going for an evening stroll on the grounds. It paints a picture of a Diana in revolt of the Royal Family, disinterested anymore in her marriage and possibly willing to sabotage the Crown itself. But then, Larraín keeps the clarity of this ambiguous to his audience, couching her more dramatic actions and experiences in surreal, distressing reveries that are some of the films’ most affecting moments. The careful planting of a book on Anne Boleyn causes her to see the mirror in hers and Annes’ stories, to the point she has visions of the sixteenth century Queen. In one harrowing hallucination she imagines herself eating the pearls of a necklace that Charles had gifted her -the same necklace he’d gifted Camilla. The effect of such sequences isn’t so much that they blur Diana’s reality, but they provide a window into the recesses of her conscious. We experience the paranoia that her favourite dresser and sole confidant Maggie (Sally Hawkins) is spreading rumours, the immense insecurity in her place within the Royal Family, and the depression that her life must be this  soulless. By the time she genuinely puts herself in danger in the films’ climax, you’re in complete understanding of why.
Yet there’s a sweet optimism to the ending, in spite of all we know both presented in this movie and the history that hangs over it, one that shows Diana in her best light -and of course it’s away from the royal system and with only the love of the people that matter. “All I Need is a Miracle”, she sings, and Larraín would have you believe she could get one. Spencer comes at a pertinent time of royal interest, where one of the biggest TV shows around is built on re-examining their legacy, the Windsor family is showing signs of dissolution, and the institution of the Crown itself is less popular than ever. There is a Prince enshrouded in scandal and a Duchess who has inherited her mother-in-law’s role as the new family scapegoat; to the point she and her Prince have severed certain ties -even royals don’t so much care for royalty anymore. Spencer knows it is entering into a larger, possibly contentious conversation, and it’s certainly not unbiased in doing so. But while it may posit and speculate in its’ portrait of the late Miss Spencer, its’ truths are stark and bleak. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day