The Woman He Loved

How true "The Woman He Loved" is debatable. So why do I say the truth is debatable? Well, in recent years, several documentaries have claimed that King Edward VIII did NOT abdicate in order to marry an American divorcee as was publicly announced but because he was so pro-Germany that he could not be trusted to look after the best interests of Britain as WWII approached. This more recent interpretation seems reasonable, as Edward really did admire the Third Reich...to the point of making some very bad decisions. And, many in government did distrust him...so they sent him off to the Caribbean (where he was made governor of the Bahamas) to get him out of the way instead of allowing him to remain in his own country during the war. This film clearly is meant to promote the commonly repeated theme that he was incredibly in love with Wallace and he sacrificed everything for this love.

So why would I watch this film even though I am inclined to believe the new image of the couple? Well, Olivia de Havilland is in the film...and it's her last film appearance. That is what I really wanted to see. Sadly, she was barely in the film at all.

The story begins with the death of Edward in the early 1970s and then bounces back and forth from that time to 1936-7 when she and Edward were a couple. It really doesn't focus much on their life post-marriage.

For me, this was a tough film to love. I have always thought the couple were selfish and foolish....so I really didn't buy into the who romance angle. It also didn't help that Anthony Andrews was stiff and Jane Seymour, in a few scenes, looked positively grotesque with the odd facial appliances they added to her face. Overall, a film that bored me a bit and whitewashed Edward's love of the Reich...and it's really not even part of the story, which it surely should have been.

Seymour--weird facial prostethics. Ghoulish.

Begins with his death.

King Edward VIII (Anthony Andrews) abdicated the British throne in 1936 & married 'the woman he loved' Wallis Simpson (Jane Seymour) in France in 1937. Yep, how things have changed! Nevertheless Wallis Simpson's letters prove that the man she really loved was Ernest Simpson (Tom Wilkinson), not the Prince of Wales, whom, according to recent biographers, she never wanted to spouse. Andrews, inexpressive and hammy, isn't good as Edward VIII. Seymour, just okay. Comparing a number of versions of this story, this is probably the weakest. ¨Edward and Mrs. Simpson¨ is definitely the best.

A bad rehashing of the Edward VIII story with Jane Seymour glamming it up. CBS wanted another "lavish" mini-series so they just $$$$ all over the place.

First they scored Anthony Andrews, Seymour's leading man from 1982's "The Scarlett Pimpernel" - they sparked well there, despite CBS' best efforts. Here, he doesn't act; he simply imitates Edward VIII - and badly. It's embarrassing to watch.

Then, they scored two other actors: Robert Hardy yet again reprising Winston Churchill - somebody had seen him in 1981's "Winston Churchill: the Wilderness Years." He was the man himself in that production; here we see him only sitting and painting.

And then - for me this was the corker - CBS got David Waller to reprise his role as Stanley Baldwin from "Edward & Mrs. Simpson" - the 1980 British production that did this story right the first time. I saw that one, that was meaty work for everybody involved; here, Waller looked like somebody who just found out he was at the wrong party.

Anthony Andrews is terrible as Edward V111. Wooden, emotionless and unconvincing. Jane Seymour was just okay. Seen a few versions of this story and this was definitely the worse.

Anthony Andrews imitates Edward, Duke of Windsor (but slightly better than Edward Fox did in 'Edward and Mrs Simpson'), while Jane Seymour is a fairly OK Wallis Simpson, a little bit scheming and a little bit vulnerable. She's backed up by Aunt Bessie (Olivia de Havilland, note-perfect but hardly stretched), while he is supported by Winston Churchill (Robert Hardy, good as ever).

It's the usual story often presented in true TV-movie style, very glossy and very referential to the Royals. So nothing really scandalous or new here, and sadly the film remains flatly unemotional so there is no engagement with the plight of Wallis or Edward.

So it is a reasonable effort, watchable television, but nothing fabulous. 'Edward and Mrs Simpson', having the luxury of more time to tell the story, is better; 'Wallis and Edward', getting the casting and pacing wrong, is worse.