Spencer

The film is good. Ignore the 1 star reviewers who hate Kristen based on one film she did over a decade ago. She is a terrific actress, and her repertoire of under the radar films proves it.

She's near perfectly been cast in "Spencer", and the film is just as gripping and successful (if not more) than "Jackie".

This does feel like an interesting spin on the typical royal period piece. Having the royal family as Diana's horror was a unique framing device, but you really feel like you're getting hit over the head with Diana's trauma for 2 hours.

Even as someone who has watched The Crown, you have to bring in a LOT of prior knowledge about this story to understand everything going on. It's heavy on symbolism and not the most subtle, but Stewart's performance is worthy of the hype and is the main thing to watch here.

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free thoughts, please follow my blog to read my full review :)

"I knew absolutely nothing about this movie beforehand. I heard/read extraordinarily positive reactions that definitely elevated my expectations. And my actual knowledge about Princess Diana and her life was and still is extremely basic. Spencer is one of those rare examples where going into it completely blind didn't work in my favor at all. I found myself trying to look for something to grab on to, and despite some genuinely outstanding technical attributes, Steven Knight's (Locked Down) screenplay doesn't offer me enough to hold my attention.

Spencer is undoubtedly a fictional character piece that only stands on its feet due to one of the year's most mesmerizing lead performances. Kristen Stewart (Underwater), an actress who still gets a lot of unfair hate despite her clear evolution to one of the most underrated actors working today, delivers a career-defining portrayal of Princess Diana that viewers will hardly forget about. I can't recall the last time I witnessed an actor completely disappearing into their role. A true masterclass worthy of every single award. The rest of the cast is also superb.

Technically, I also have little to complain about. Pablo Larraín's (Jackie) distinct direction adequately fits the frustrating, claustrophobic story, and I love how Claire Mathon's (Portrait of a Lady on Fire) moves between the intimate close-ups and gorgeous wide shots. As expected, costume and production design look fabulous, but Jonny Greenwood's (You Were Never Really Here) score didn't work for me. The mix of jazz with high-tension sequences becomes too uncanny, distracting the viewers from the narrative, which leads me to my main issue.

For someone with my knowledge and expectations, Spencer becomes one of those "nothing happens" films that usually surprises viewers with its unique storytelling approach. I'm all-in for this type of work, but outside of Stewart's display, I struggled to feel captivated by whatever was going on. A supposedly consistently interesting character study transformed into an overlong, repetitive one-woman show, where I couldn't figure out what it was aiming for. I understand the purpose of making the audience feel how Diana felt during her marriage and living within British Royalty, but Larraín's execution somehow fails to leave me emotionally satisfied.

A second viewing will probably improve and strengthen my opinion about the movie. For now, I feel very mixed about Spencer, but I'll leave this as a positive review trusting that I'll gradually enjoy it more after each viewing."

Rating: B-

From the director of Jackie comes another unconventional biopic, this time focusing on Diana Spencer. More a character study than a full-fledged biographical drama, Spencer unfolds like a psychological horror and attempts to capture her inner turmoil as she finds herself on verge of breakdown while spending the Christmas holidays with the royal family at one of their estates.

Directed by Pablo Larraín, the film is a fictionalised account but still draws its inspiration from real-life events and is more interested in exploring & exploiting the titular character's struggle with her mental health problems as well as the suffocation she felt amidst all the luxury of the British crown. And yet, Larraín fails to add anything new or bring a fresh perspective to what's already common knowledge.

On the technical front however, the film earns its scores. Production design team does put up sumptuous set pieces that neatly serve as interiors of the British royal family's country house. The fluid camerawork, radiant palette & skilful lighting silently enrich the imagery while Jonny Greenwood's sonorous score echoes through every chamber. And Kristen Stewart's excellent performance is what makes it worth viewing.

Overall, Spencer leans more towards an art-house endeavour than a conventional biopic and though it is a technically sound production, the narrative is hollow & emotionally unappealing. It's as if Larraín put all of his effort into making sure the picture looks as beautiful as possible coz the script didn't have much to say. Serving only as a vehicle for Stewart to flex her acting prowess, the film may dazzle some but it left me cold & indifferent.

This is not a traditional biopic, far from it. In fact it all takes place over a three day period during the 1991 version of the annual Royal Family's Christmas at Sandringham Estate. About 10 years after Charles and Diana were married and about six years before Diana would die in the car crash in Paris. It is more of a fictionalized dramatization of what it must have been like for Diana, a caged animal yearning to be free, but confined to the customs and rules of the Royal Family.

There is a conversation in the middle of the movie, Charles explaining to Diana, each member of the Royal Family is two people, the one that reporters and photographers see and the real one. But Diana was unable to fit that mold.

Fine portrayals by all involved, my wife and I enjoyed it at home on DVD from our public library.