W.E.
(15)
HH
Dir: Madonna
With: Andrea Riseborough, James D'Arcy
Running time: 119 minutes
FIRST, the Bernard Matthews news: despite the two stars, it's not a turkey. There are some fine performances, a couple of inspired moments, and the soundtrack, as you might expect, is a belter.
The problem is that W.E., made by the woman who once delighted in pushing the limits of acceptability, is an astonishingly, tush-achingly, tame film. A movie that seems like it was made by someone out to prove what a good, dutiful girl she was as a filmmaker rather than a director out to shake up a wearily familiar tale.
Madonna has assembled all the components of a movie – a story (two stories in fact), dialogue, setting, actors – but she puts them together in such an uninspired way. Instead of an outrageously lavish or radical retelling of the Wallis and Edward yarn, which might have at least been a giggle, Madonna has made something disappointingly ordinary.
Her take on the story is that this is a tale of a grand love affair in which the object of the king's affection, the woman for whom he gave up the throne, ends up with the sticky end of the lollipop. Andrea Riseborough duly plays Wallis (inset) as a whipsmart operator and clothes-closet feminist, with James D'Arcy playing Edward VIII as the naive prince who sometimes struggled against the confines of his role. Both actors do heroically well to add nuance and wit to dialogue that creaks like a Windsor Palace door.
As the story of Wallis and Edward plays out, another tale is taking place in modern-day Manhattan. Wally Winthrop (Abbie Cornish) is an unhappy rich girl, trapped in a bad marriage. Wally, who has recently given up her job at Sotheby's to be a full-time wife, handily has a Wallis Simpson obsession and Sotheby's, even more conveniently, is having a sale of Windsor goods and chattels.
Can Wally find a happy ending? All is revealed in a clunky fashion over the next two hours, with a couple of risible moments, the appearance of an actor playing Mohammed Al-Fayed chief among them, thrown in. What doesn't raise a laugh in America is sure to raise eyebrows and sniggers in bolshier old Britain.
Occasionally, as in a scene where Wallis dances for her prince while Pretty Vacant plays on the (excellent) soundtrack by Abel Korzeniowski, we get a glimpse of what might have been had Madonna given in more to her inner Sofia Coppola, as seen in the latter's version of Marie Antoinette, and been less reverential towards her characters. Elsewhere, it's match cuts a go-go with Wallis in the 1930s, for instance, putting down her cocktail shaker and Wally in modern times picking it up at Sotheby's auction. All very predictable. Even the sex scenes, such as they are, are about as racy as a lingerie ad.
The two stories of Wallis and Wally are supposed to add an extra dimension to the tale, but they only succeed in slowing an already sluggish film. It would have been better to stay with Simpson and Edward in the 1930s and let rip than continually pause to delve into Wally's dreary modern woes. However you cut it, trying for a baby really doesn't have the same dramatic wow factor as bringing the monarchy to the brink of collapse.
But that's W.E., seeing a smaller picture when it should have gone big, opting for the glossy, pop star take on Wallis and Edward when it should have gone punk and political.
ACTING AT THE COURT OF QUEEN MADGE: PAGES 18 & 19
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article