A Royal Night Out (2015) User Reviews

A likable fiction

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 22 May 2015]

It is VE Day, and Britain is celebrating, with much partying in the streets. The two young princesses Elizabeth and Margaret see an opportunity to go out and party with everybody else, a once in a lifetime opportunity, never to be repeated. With the King's permission, and against the better judgement of their mother, out they go with two young army officers as chaperones. And then they lose their escorts... and get separated...

It is true that the two princesses did go out on the night of VE Day, but this film is not so much what happened, but more what could have happened but almost certainly didn't, particularly given that the longer it goes on, the less likely it becomes.

For all that, it is good fun. Think The Hangover, reimagined in 1945 London with two rather naive and unworldly young women, one rather prim and the other up for pretty nearly anything. The period feel is effective (albeit you sometimes have the feeling that, had the camera pulled back another few feet, present day would have intruded rather rudely). The girls playing the fictionalised princesses are both excellent, with Sarah Gadon having a distinct look of the young Princess Elizabeth about her. Bel Powley lets us see the Margaret who grew up to be fond of a drink or two (and other pleasures) but who, at this point, is simply innocent but keen to explore. And there were times when, as a Brit, I found it very moving.

Ultimately, it's a bit of fluff, but it's a very enjoyable one.

Romanticized Retelling of an Actual Event

[l_rawjalaurence · 7/10 · 27 August 2016]

On 8 May 1945, the official end of War in Europe was celebrated, and London went wild. Spontaneous parties broke out in the streets, celebrations continued long into the night, and the bars, clubs and other areas devoted to pleasure did a roaring trade.

In Buckingham Palace the young Princesses Elizabeth (Sarah Gadon), than aged nineteen, and sister Margaret (Bel Powley) yearn to join the celebrations, but their stuffed-shirt mother Elizabeth (Emily Watson) and King George VI (Rupert Everett) are particularly reluctant to allow their daughters the freedom to do so. Eventually they agree, so long as the girls are accompanied by two chaperons, Lieutenants Pryce and Burridge (Jack Laskey, Jack Gordon), from Chelsea Barracks.

There begins a wild night of partying, celebration, and chasing, as the two Princesses lose their chaperons and end up moving from place to place - from Piccadilly, to Soho, and thence to Chelsea Barracks - being exposed to aspects of London life that they have never previously experienced, including making the tea. During their one night of freedom they learn something about what ordinary people think of the Royal Family and their role in society.

Based on a true story, and with more than a nod towards classics such as William Wyler's ROMAN HOLIDAY (1953), where a princess (Audrey Hepburn) enjoys a similar night off the leash of protocol, A ROYAL NIGHT OUT tells a picaresque tale, as Princess Margaret gets blind drunk and has to be rescued by her sister, who eventually reveals her true identity when things threaten to get a little out of hand. There are some amusing moments, especially when the Princesses try to communicate with ordinary Londoners in their marked RP accents, thereby proving just how sheltered an existence they have hitherto led.

Gadon and Powley give creditable impersonations of the young princesses, although Powley's accent veers towards the Sloane Ranger rather than the upper-class gell of the Forties. Everett's George VI bears more than a passing resemblance, both vocally and facially, to the current Prince Charles, while his spouse comes across as a snob with a perpetual desire to drown her sorrows in a gin and tonic.

Director Julian Jarrold makes some important points about the ways in which Princess Elizabeth (especially) learned a lot about her people as a result of this night. What a shame, therefore, that when she acceded to the throne, she should become so remote that she failed to understand Princess Diana's extraordinary popular appeal. But that judgment is made with the benefit of hindsight. As a lighthearted piece of entertainment, A ROYAL NIGHT OUT is definitely worth looking at.

in a nutshell....

[jfreer-88748 · 7/10 · 18 May 2015]

They certainly didn't let the truth get in the way of telling a good story when they wrote this one and I imagine apart from the fact that the Princess' went outside of the Palace to join in the VE celebrations I think that's about where it ends.

In saying that the movie is light and fluffy and watchable and more a good rainy day movie to watch at home. I think my 70 year old mum would love this movie as would my 12 year old daughter as it is a cute and light movie; enjoyable to watch; sweet and romantic. I thought "P1 and P2" were great actors and made the movie for me and probably they are the main reason I would give this movie a 3/5 rather than a 2.

A watchable light movie with a fairytale storyline.

The future Queen mingles on VE day in 1945.

[TxMike · 26 February 2017]

I found this movie on Netflix streaming movies. My wife was not interested in seeing it.

The premise is based in fact, on VE day in May 1945 the two young Princesses, Elizabeth (19) and Margaret (15), who had been home- schooled and never out of sight during WW2, asked to be allowed to go out into the crowds in London, to mingle, to see how all the commoners were reacting to the victory over Nazi Germany. Their mum was against it but Elizabeth (future Queen, and still Queen today) was persistent and their dad, King George, gave permission.

In this fictional expansion of that rather quiet event two soldiers are sent along to make sure the sisters would be safe. However the girls soon gave them the slip and had many experiences overnight, some in particularly shady parts of London.

We know today that Elizabeth was then, and remained, "feisty". Her character here is depicted that way. As history records she married two years later, and less than 7 years after VE Day she became Queen of England when her dad, King George, died.

It is a small movie but interesting to see how things might have been for the royal family back then. Sarah Gadon, a Canadian, is very good as Elizabeth. Bel Powley is her younger sister Margaret. Emily Watson is good as their mother, the Queen. And I didn't actually recognize that Rupert Everett played King George.

Overall an interesting and entertaining 90 minutes.

A very proper comedy about a "wild" tale of two princesses

[subxerogravity · 6/10 · 7 December 2015]

Princess Elisabeth and Princess Margert convince the King and Queen to let them celebrate VE day with a night out on the town among the people which turns out to be a crazy ride all over London, or at least that was the point.

But the ride couldn't get too crazy now could it. After all, this might be a fictional tale, but it's about the future Queen.

This movie tries too hard to keep the subject matter upscale. I never seen anything so uppity.

Don't get me wrong, A Royal Night Out definitely has it's charm and fun, but it all moved along to dull to convince me that they really had that good of a time on their night out.

Party all Night

[kosmasp · 6/10 · 9 May 2016]

Not exactly of course, but then again this might not accurate on how things went down either. Depicting historical figures and a historical event (end of WWII, British crown and so forth) might not be something people are too interested to watch. But then if you like a feel good movie overall and a fish out of water story (loyalty mixing it up with common folk), then you might be right here.

Having said that, there is still some tough issues that want to be answered, but even when this gets darker, it never loses focus on the lightness that makes it work. So this isn't too critical or too dramatic, but it is entertaining, while being predictable in giving us the clichés we expect. Having said, costumes and settings are generally good and the acting is decent too

Providing that it is not taken too seriously, A Royal Night Out is enjoyable enough fluff

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 24 January 2016]

Was not sure at first about seeing A Royal Night Out, despite having some talented people involved it did seem like it will have slightly tired concept too stretched out. Seeing it with Mum and Dad, this viewer is glad that she gave it a chance, for it is an enjoyable film once you accept that it does play loose with the truth and is almost like a 'what if?' (yes suspension of disbelief is needed here).

There is an awful lot good with A Royal Night Out. The period detail is not just evocative but it looks splendid too, the costumes are so beautifully tailored, the hair and make-up handsomely rendered and the sets and scenery so meticulous that it does feel like one is there in London just after World War II. The film is beautifully shot too. The soundtrack also captures the period brilliantly too, some great period favourites lovingly arranged and it's nicely scored too. On the most part, A Royal Night Out is very nicely scripted, with some poignant drama (like the king preparing and giving the speech) and great lightweight humour with the lion's share of the best lines coming from Margaret.

A Royal Night Out's story moves along at a good pace and is on the most part interesting and entertaining, there is great fun to be had in Margaret's oblivious association with criminals (again once you don't take things seriously and take it as meaning to be totally accurate) and throughout there is a quite believable (if occasionally a little too quaint in the middle act) sense of time and place. It is solidly directed, and very well played by a more than game cast, headed by the very charming and sensitive Sarah Gadon and the scene-stealing Bel Powley.

Jack Reynor is dashing and sympathetic, sharing a lovely rapport with Gadon, while Rupert Everett brings a touching vulnerability that is both surprising and delightful and Emily Watson is firm but compassionate as the Queen Mother. Roger Allam is also fun to spot, but sadly with little screen time.

For all its worthwhile things, A Royal Night Out's script occasionally feels a tad patronising and some of the humour a little awkward. The story does entertain for what it is, but by the last act it does start to feel rather stretched with the pacing getting a bit draggy and the storytelling on the thin side.

Overall, however, entertaining and nicely done film if taken for what it is. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Visually beautiful but "so what?"

[manders_steve · 6/10 · 23 June 2015]

This visually intricate film imagines the supposedly true story of English Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret's incognito adventures outside Buckingham Palace on the night of Victory in Europe Day, 8 May 1945. Elizabeth would have been 19 and Margaret 14 when the escapade into the night celebrating the end of six years of death, maiming and privation occurred. It gave some shallow insights into royal life behind the elaborate gates, rattling around in all those rooms with countless aides to assist in most ways, and how ill prepared the princesses appeared to be to deal with the much wider variety of situations and people they encountered.

Jack Reynor as Jack, the chap that Princess Elizabeth comes to depend on was my standout performance, and it's hard to fault Sarah Gadon (Princess Elizabeth) and Bel Powley (Margaret). A few scenes were touchingly awkward, such as the frosty breakfast of the morning after, but overall it left me with a bit of the "so what?" It's easy enough watching, didn't drag, and had a bit of tension from wondering what might go wrong, but for me it was just a bit too Nice and Sweet.

Very entertaining

[cammic · 8/10 · 13 May 2015]

This is not a documentary so don't expect it to be accurate or even the slightest bit true. It is based very loosely around Princess Elizabeth and Margaret going out into the crowds at Buckingham Palace on the night peace was declared (VE Day)....that's where the similarity stops. Rupert Everett as the King is such a bad choice, but again, it's not meant to be taken seriously. I liked the character portrayed as Princess Margaret and also the Queen Mother... they are likable and funny. The whole story is quite well written and very funny in places...as long as you don't take it too seriously and try to work out fact from fiction. All in all I thought it was very entertaining.....

light weight mixed with some dark situations

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 2 February 2017]

It's VE 1945 in London. Princesses Elizabeth (Sarah Gadon) and Margaret (Bel Powley) are eager to be out with the people. The King (Rupert Everett) is worried about his speech and reluctantly allows the girls to go out until 1am. To the girls' dismay, the Queen (Emily Watson) assigns them military chaperons and organizes a stuffy party. Margaret sneaks out and Elizabeth is desperate to find her with the help of bitter anti-establishment airman Jack Hodges (Jack Reynor) who is out AWOL.

This movie reminds me of 'Adventures in Babysitting' in both good and bad ways. It's a couple of clueless teens getting into trouble in the big city. It's light weight but mixed with some very dark situations. Margaret is cartoonishly idiotic. Elizabeth's cluelessness is a little more annoying and pompous. While Margaret is fake stupid, Elizabeth's posh attitude is too broad and feels unreal. The romance hits a few speed bumps but it gets to the right places. Sarah Gadon is charismatic but she's a little old to play the teenager future queen. This rom-com works well at times and less so at other times.

Jack Reynor the Saving Grace

[TimMeade · 5/10 · 17 May 2015]

On VE Night 1945, the Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret Rose were allowed to leave Buckingham Palace, mingle incognito with the crowd to watch their parents accept acclaim from the balcony, then return to their cloistered world. That's it. Nothing more. But it happened.

Undoubtedly, that sure wouldn't make an interesting film. So A Royal Night Out concocts an entire fiction of the princesses slipping their chaperones from the stuffy ball they had been allowed to attend and escape into the celebrating crowds to find excitement amongst their subjects.

If you can allow yourself to believe that the army officers, charged personally by The King to look after the heir presumptive and her younger sister would abandon their duty to engage in carnal pursuits; if you can believe that the 14 year old Margaret Rose could end up in a knocking shop and lose consciousness after being given a Mickey Finn; if you can believe the coincidences allowing Princess Elizabeth to continually find her airman minder Jack amidst the throbbing thousands; if you can believe that both princesses went back to a working class house in Battersea to clean up and have a cup of tea before returning to the Palace, then you might just get some enjoyment from this lightweight piece of nonsense. If, on the other hand, you find it all too tiring and ridiculous, then it is a film to be given a wide berth.

The film's one redeeming feature was Jack Reynor as the RAF corporal, Jack, who most reluctantly finds himself looking after Princess Elizabeth. He has seen the horrors of the war and having been busted down for seeking compassionate leave after witnessing the slow death of a mate on return from a mission, sees no reason to celebrate; he has no time for the Royal Family and has no idea the young woman who has attached herself limpet-like to him is heir to a dynasty he does not support. Despite the paucity of good material, his screen presence and charisma shine through, and he gives a depth of character performance out of kilter with the rest of the film. He is a young actor to watch.

Oh, and a note to the film-makers. A Pink Gin consists of a slug of gin with just a dash of Angostura bitters giving it the slightest blush of pink. It is not a garishly opaque quarter pint drink looking like Barbara Cartland's face.

An enjoyable film painstakingly and lovingly realised. Highly recommended.

[geoffgee · 8/10 · 20 May 2015]

I'd been looking forward to A Royal Night Out's release since first seeing the trailer a few weeks ago. Now, after seeing the film, I'm happy to report that I wasn't disappointed. The action begins slowly, but once the royal sisters become enmeshed in London's VE night revelries I found myself being carried along by events in ways that were at times funny, at times exciting, at times emotionally moving - even at times with feelings of national pride - but always with interest and anticipation. One 'bonus' I hadn't expected was that the story would also feature elements of a very touching love story. This latter, for me, endowed the story with a certain 'fairy tale' quality. (But it is a film of fiction ... so, why not??) The three leads - Elisabeth, Margaret and Jack - are all excellent. Supporting actors and actresses of the cast provide additional variety and entertainment and play their parts with apparent enthusiasm. A lot of work obviously went into recreating the crowd, traffic and London scenes of 1945 and clothing styles seemed authentic to me. All in all a worthwhile undertaking painstakingly and lovingly realised. Go see this film. My bet is you'll be glad you did. Highly recommended. 8/10.

Gadon "saves" The Queen - as the main reason for seeing this film!

[jrarichards · 7/10 · 9 July 2015]

This is "a true story" to the extent that: a) there was a Second World War, b) that War was won by us Brits, c) London and the UK understandably went a bit mad when that victory was secured (notwithstanding some further unpleasant months fighting the Japanese, and otherwise suffering at their hands), d) amidst all the genuine joy and relief there were some around more than happy and ready to make money out of the first moments of peacetime, just as they had profited from the War itself, e) Her Majesty as the then Princess Elizabeth (or "Lilibet", if you will) was a pretty good-looking woman in the early and mid 40s, when she was still under 20 years old, and f) Our Queen – in uniform like so very, very many others – really did mingle with the crowds on VE night. And so to this film, which does a fair job of capturing that night unique in all of history, even though it follows a fantasised story that does what it can to conceal the fact that Princess Margaret was 14 as the War ended, and so largely incapable of the behaviour Bel Powley does her enthusiastic best to portray. This story raises the odd laugh as it descends towards farce or slapstick, hence those laughs will be tempered by feelings of disbelief – and rightly so given non-authentic military (or 1940s) behaviour in a few places. The film also introduces us to characters plausible (Roger Allam good value as often, in this case in a spiv-cum-brothel-keeper role of "Lord Stan") and implausible (the Guards Regiments may have had a chinless wonder and incompetent or two among their officers down the years, but these had been mightily "thinned down" by 1945, let's face it). Ironically, and as surprisingly often seems to happen with films of this kind, characters played roughly speaking as they must have been in real life seem hard to believe – Rupert Everett and Emily Watson just "aren't" King George and our late great Queen Mother, much as we would like them to be so! This is of minor importance, given their brief times on screen – and the King at least is portrayed sympathetically in any case. Far more serious (in my view) is the failure of (Irish) male lead Jack Reynor to generate a fully cohesive, real-life person out of his RAF Corporal character – also called Jack. Ironically, his mother (encountered only briefly) seems truer to life than does her beloved son. Which leaves us with one key character who was able to make or break the film, and in my view does – if only just – "make" it. When Canadian Sarah Gadon first appears on screen one's immediate reaction is – "she looks/is nothing like HMQ". Yet by the time of the film's final close-ups, her beauty and poise really succeed in conjuring up something of that personage so very familiar (yet still unknown) to countless millions of us. In the meantime, Gadon has shown us "a fish out of water gasping for air" more than once in a capital and a country that (we in the audience all know) she will begin reigning over in just 7 short years – and will still be doing that at the moment of our taking seats in the cinema in the entirely different world of June-July 2015! That is such a magical reality – so worthy of disbelief and yet so obviously true – that it would be hard to really mess this role up, admittedly. Nevertheless, Gadon does the job well, making us think about how much Her Majesty has given up and did give up – in order to do the job, reminding us that what we today know as a supremely-dutiful and accomplished statesperson (and an immensely, incredibly resilient woman) was (very) young, very pretty and very socially-awkward once, and did want to kick her heels a bit, even though at every stage her actions were tempered by knowledge of the privilege/lifelong burden that was just around the corner. At several moments we are reminded of these truths with almost painful clarity in the film, which in this way (and thanks primarily to Sarah Gadon) drags itself kicking and screaming out of the real pastiche and failure it might otherwise have been.

A cartoon night out.

[PippinInOz · 1/10 · 15 May 2016]

I understand that there is a market for cutesy, escapist films about the imaginary past. Most of us film lovers also appreciate that you adjust and accept the style of film as it begins, however:

Even accounting for these things, this is really awful. The story is so wonderful in and of itself there was a genuine opportunity here to make an earthy, human film about not only Royalty but also the exhilaration felt in London (where the film is set) by people of all backgrounds.

Instead of a moving and witty testament to a remarkable moment and two young princesses who were allowed to rub shoulders with the 'masses' for one night, we get a thoroughly cartoon-ish version of both Londoners and the Royal family. One dimensional characters abound here.

Lazy and a waste of talent and time.

lovely movie

[tbhamfog · 17 January 2016]

Firstly i have ticked the spoilers box just encase i give anything away. I have just watched this movie and i have to say it is a lovely heart warming movie. the kind of movie the British do so well. I got to the end of this film wanting to think the events depicted are true. After-all any queen is still a human being and as adolescents we have all gone of track, so to speak. I enjoyed seeing a film about a queen in a modern era, in a world we can relate to and is recent. The kiss we almost see to the end of the film was the icing on the cake for me, knowing that people with a royal duty have a certain behavior to maintain in public and that it is a job i loved the way that scene was shot, we don't see anything but the guard at the gate does and is sworn to secrecy.

I can't help but watch this film and think about the princes William & Harry.

To me Harry is Margret and William is the queen

Long story short didn't expect to love this movie

I love this movie

Sweet British film

Sarah Gadon is perfect

[michaelmross-662-822108 · 7/10 · 1 January 2021]

She is "to the manner born" and adorable. An affecting performance by her makes this film a pleasant experience to watch. Her 12-hour transition from suppressed girl to self-awareness is even matched by her hairstyle.

Just fun

[kimmgould · 7/10 · 7 June 2021]

That was really fun. So many good one-liners. Great characters. The princesses were perfectly cast. Some good Glenn Miller music.

My favourite bit was when someone asked Elizabeth to make a pot of tea 🤣🤣🤣. Her facial expression was priceless, she didn't know where to start.

Predictable, fluffy and inconsequential but ultimately a nice, feel-good affair.

[Pjtaylor-96-138044 · 6/10 · 15 April 2018]

Despite its historical inaccuracies and general fluffy feel, this straight-forward forties party piece plays it pretty close to the formula but is ultimately a quite fun, fast and free-flowingly light-hearted affair that keeps things above board but doesn't really dip under the surface of its real-life protagonist or her famous family, though it never really set out to. Ultimately, 'A Royal Night Out (2015)' seems kind of pointless but also kind of refreshing; it certainly portrays a unique perspective. The message seems to be that even the most 'Royal' are only human, too, and they just want to have fun like the rest of us. Then there's moments where the piece tries to stick a slight 'what-if' character-study type situation onto the surface - and only the surface - which feels very superficial, incredibly obvious and slightly inauthentic, considering the story itself is only loosely based around a rather mundane seeming event. In the end, though, it's a nice flick that's a feel-good experience throughout and, whether or not it's got anything substantial to say, that can only be good thing. 6/10

see below

[tassos-79995 · 7/10 · 16 October 2017]

I borrowed the DVD of this movie from my public library and saw it yesterday evening. I did not have high expectations, I assumed it would be just another silly romantic comedy. However, it turned out better than expected, and I was able to watch and enjoy the whole thing to the end.

Obviously, this is a fairy tale, what actually happened is that the two princesses were allowed out in a group of 16 that left at 10 PM and returned at 1 AM, with none of the ridiculous and preposterous shenanigans of the movie.

But it is better than your average 'romantic comedy" which I usually borrow, watch for 5 minutes, and if it is unbearably lame, I put it back in the box and return it.

The plot is, of course, preposterous, and while Margaret was the wild one and her antics might be expected, Elizabeth's behavior was most unrealistic. Also very unrealistic and inaccurate were the choices of the young actresses playing the two princesses, esp. the one playing Elizabeth, who looked little like the actress playing her (eye color, build etc)

If the scriptwriter, director and esp the producer made some effort towards realism, I'd give it an 8. As is, a 7.

A Pleasurable Historical Fantasy

[atlasmb · 8/10 · 8 March 2017]

This period piece is about one magical night in the lives of Princesses Elizabeth (Sarah Gadon) and Margaret (Bel Powley). It is a fantasy that really captures the imagination. The two royals surely must have been overly protected---from danger, from scandal, from their own teenage whims. But "A Royal Night Out" imagines an adventure on VE Day, when all of London was celebrating and the girls might have yearned to be common enough to join in.

The era is certainly captured by costumes, manners and scenery, allowing the viewer to indulge freely in the illusion. The two young women are delightful. And the general tone of the scenes carries the emotions along, feeling exactly like the overwhelming release that came with victory after years of sacrifice, fear, and stiff upper lips. The scene when the king appears at Buckingham Palace is stirring.

Recommended for history buffs, fans of period pieces and those who might find romance in a childish fantasy that--though it is only about one night--is also a coming of age story. I saw this film before its general release with no knowledge of its subject, and I was pleasantly surprised.

Slight but fun

[summeriris · 7/10 · 19 May 2015]

This film is really very funny, I don't know how else it could be described. It's not history and it's nowhere near accurate, but the jokes are delivered well and some are really laugh out loud funny. I would say take the plot with a pinch of salt and prepare your self for a fairy tale. Bel Powley is a hoot as P.No2, Sarah Gadon is the lovely P.No1 who finds a guardian angel in Jack Reynor. Rupert Everett made for a rather charming King George but I did wonder where Queen Elizabeth's (the Queen Mum) famous charm went. Emily Watson didn't really display much of it. All in all if you want to watch a really great staging of London celebrating VE Day 1945 and get some understanding of how stifling life in Buckingham Palace would have been for two very young girls. you could do a heck of a lot worse.

A film empty of any content playing to an empty theatre

[postmortem-books · 1/10 · 16 May 2015]

I had a pretty good guess what this would be like from the trailers but the full-length film delivers the awfulness in spades. Why any film director would even think, in their wildest dreams, that there was an entertainment to be made from the thinnest of true life facts is beyond me and that so much effort and money could be lobbed into a swirling vortex that pumps out this candy floss froth is truly astonishing. From the fake sets through the fake accents to the not very good lookey-likey of George VI (Rupert Everett spectacularly fails in what must have amounted to 1 days work) this film has already been dealt a death blow in my local cinema. On a Saturday night there were just a grand total of 10 people in attendance - and 2 of those walked out half-way through. Its a "Carry On Princess" - but without the laughs or the saving grace of double entendres.

A jolly jape....what fun

[Figgy66-915-598470 · 8/10 · 16 May 2015]

16 May 2015 Film of Choice at The Plaza Dorchester Tonight - A Royal Night Out. On 8 May 1945 all of Britain was celebration Victory in Europe and behind the doors of Buckingham Palace two daughters were asking their parents if they might be allowed to join in. The two daughters were Princess Elizabeth, heir to the Throne and her sister Princess Margaret. This store is rumoured to be based partly on fact and I would very much like to have heard it was all true. With Rupert Everett starring as King George and Emily Watson playing his wife Queen Elizabeth this film is a rather jolly jape depicting what could have happened if the two princesses had been allowed out on the town for the whole night. Everett and Watson were uncanny as the King and Queen, and the girls bore more than a little resemblance to the Princesses ....although costume, deportment and hairstyle helped enormously. The plot was a little like I imagine that day to be, uproariously out of control but most joyful. My favourite line in the whole film was when Lilibet was asking Jack the airman to assist her to make the most of 'an opportunity to be ordinary on the most extraordinary day of her life'. I wonder if the Queen has seen this and if so, was she a little wistful.

Sarah Gadon is good but Bel Powley isn't pretty enough

[phd_travel · 7/10 · 11 February 2016]

Sarah Gadon is a pretty Princess Elizabeth and her accent and acting are good. Unfortunately Bel Powley is too plump and unattractive for Princess Margaret. The real Princess Margaret was actually slim and the prettier one when she was young. So casting wise this movie was 50% right and 50% wrong. Rupert Everett is unrecognizable is King George VI. Emily Watson is okay as the Queen but still comes across a bit unregal.

The story itself is a fascinating fantasy with Roman Holiday fun of princesses going incognito into VE Day celebrations in London. It's a bit darker with more sleaze and groping.

Worth a watch for the interesting story.

Incredibly flimsy Royal propaganda

[philpriestley · 3/10 · 6 January 2016]

I'm a UK republican (not to be confused with a US republican of course) and I don't believe in the institution of Royalty. I acknowledge that this might discolour my appreciation of the film.

If you have a fondness for the institution of 'our' Royal family you might enjoy this film more than I did.

It's a completely fictional story about something that never happened at a peak point of flag waving nationalism. You can probably track the decline of British image of empire and royalty and traditionalism from there ironically.

Of course the (now) Queen never went out with Princess Margaret in the fashion that has been portrayed and I'm sure that the truth would offer no form of cinematic fascination at all. So instead they play the 'what if' game of allowing the two princesses to slip their chaperons and made off into the London night.

The whole thing is a bit pantomime though to be fair.

It is difficult to explain the different contrasting portrayals of the (in this) idiot Margaret and the sensible and instinctively capable Elizabeth. Other than for comic purposes of course. Margaret is also (for dramatic purposes) the more 'plain' of the two in appearance - which suits the narrative of 'the chosen one' being Elizabeth.

In truth I'd punt on Margaret being the sharper and more worldly of the two - she seemed that way in her life - and to be frank she was always the more beautiful too.

The Royal family are also portrayed in the comic realm of being quite 'normal' except of course for the fact that dad can call the army in to look after his girls when they go out. The footmen etc the 'we don't carry money' gag (used more than once) - all used without a sense of shame.

The whole of London society is portrayed as high or low born with either 'cock-er-ney' good charm but either inside a pub or a brothel, or snobbish officership inside the Ritz etc. It's quite two dimensional. Of course everyone is united in their love of the King and his family and there is a picture of them propped on every mantel piece - no matter who owns the mantel.

This is misty-eyed revisionism for a purpose. It can't possibly be true - no more than it is now. Hardened Soho gangster and pimp puts a protective wing around the young Margaret - neither with sexual motives nor anything more cynical in mind than getting his prostitutes into a secret party at the Chelsea barracks.

To be fair the film does allow the main male 'low born' character to reflect on the bitterness that more than just himself in isolation must have felt (and still do) about the concept of Royalty. Regardless you do get the impression that, in the end, he saw the error of his ways and learned to love the Royal family too (because after all, aren't they smashing?).

It's predictable. It's soft. It's modestly entertaining (or at least will pass the time). It's also instantly forgettable without any outstanding performances or messages.