Why isn't 'Spencer' like any other Diana movie?

Why isn’t ‘Spencer’ like any other Diana movie?

Cinema – “A tale taken from a true tragedy”, Lady Dee’s autobiographical introduction sets the tone. Spencer, directed by Pablo Larrain and available since Monday, January 17 on Amazon Prime Video, tells the story of Princess Diana’s life on December 24, 25 and 26, 1991. As for the film dedicated to Jackie Kennedy-Onassis, this biography is unparalleled. in a Spencer Pablo Larrain decided to show a particularly dark stage in the life of Lady Di, almost turning his story into a thriller.

Diana, played by Kristen Stewart, married Prince Charles (Jack Farthing) in 1981, but the relationship between the pair soured in the 1990s, when the betrayal of the heir to the throne became unbearable for Diana Spencer – her maiden name, Ed. Then parting between the spouses becomes imminent and the princess becomes suspicious and anxious. Amazed by the weight of protocol and the icy atmosphere of Sandringham Palace, these three days of festivities take the form of a nightmare for Mrs. D.

Non-intimidating CV

Spencer It begins in the castle kitchens as a war scene. Chefs open large chests to carry weapons to the front, which contain food reserves for the Christmas weekend. The metaphor is almost too obvious: these food supplies for Diana are the weapons she owes a little more every day. The Princess of Wales suffers from bulimia, an eating disorder that vividly echoes the hell she lives inside the royal family: she can’t stand anything anymore, she vomits everything.

At the same time, the biographical show plays with the code of horror films. The colors are dark, the ambiance is chilling and (literally) chilling. Diana Spencer is photographed in both trail and chain shots, walking up and down the vast corridors of Sandringham Palace. And as in shining, This spooky castle, with its haunting corridors, seems to be getting close to it.

This heavy atmosphere is accentuated by the loud silence of the characters. The Queen (Stella Jonnet) and Charles are evident in their absence. They were almost transferred to additional roles, in two hours of the film, the two heroes breathe only two sharp sentences. All of their words illustrate the stress Diana is under, and how trapped she is in this present made up of the lore of the past.

Everything oppresses him. The princess is nursed, her clothes and meals are selected, and she returns almost immediately to the toilet bowl. The pearl necklace Prince Charles gave her, the same one he gave to his mistress Camilla Shand, is suffocating her so much that she even tries to tear it off. The curtains in her room were sewn so delicately that she could not open them: behold, bereft of the window and from the outside, they symbolized her breath.

Throughout the film, the viewer did not deliver any of the distress and oppression that Diana feels, which contributed to the uniqueness of this film. Pablo Larrain notes: “We did not attempt to reproduce an exact copy of Diana. We wanted to use cinematic tools such as time, space and silence to create a world that recreates the balance between mystery and fragility of character.”

A certain view of Diana’s life

in a Spencer Diana was lost, literally. From the first minutes of the movie, I was surprised: “Where the fuck am I?” I lost my way to Sandringham Palace. To accentuate this feeling, Pablo Larren painted on screen his hallucinations that lose the viewer as much as Diana. Anne Boleyn, wife of Henry VIII, imagines herself beheaded on the orders of her husband after being accused of adultery.

“In the collective imagination, the royal families are likened to fairy tales: they lived happily and had many children … But this does not work with Diana’s story: something broke, because it was broken, everyone felt sorry for her,” explains Pablo Larren.

This interpretation of Mrs. Dee is a director’s bias. Diana had no hallucinations, and nothing indicated that her doubts and anxieties were expressed with such violence. Spencer He paints a different, rougher picture of Diana. Where in the series the crown, Diana weak, in Pablo Larren’s Autobiography is a combative. “It’s the story of a princess who decided not to become a queen but chose to build her own identity. It’s an upside-down fairy tale,” says the director.

Pablo Larren does not show the well-known Diana to the public: loving, likable, sober and generous, he chose to present a darker face that borders on stamina and madness. So upset that the director leaves doubt until the end about the rewriting of history and a possible passage into the act. The princess would end up spreading her wings, but in a more realistic way.

“I wanted to explore Diana’s way, how she vacillated between skepticism and determination, and ultimately chose freedom, not for herself but for her children, as Pablo Larren identifies. It was a decision that defined his legacy: honesty and humanity, which remains unique.”

See also on The HuffPost: Harry and William unveil a statue of Lady Diana in London

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.