Victoria & Abdul (C+ or 2.5/4 stars)
'Victoria & Abdul' (a fact-based dramedy directed by Stephen Frears, Dangerous Liaisons, The Queen, Philomena) chronicles the unique relationship btwn. the elderly Queen Victoria (Judi Dench) & young Indian/Muslim man, Abdul Karim (Ali Fazal) -- 1 of 2 Indians chosen to present the queen with a ceremonial coin during her Golden Jubilee in England. Dench played Victoria in 1997's Mrs. Brown; and exceptional drama that also highlighted a 'unique' relationship with Scottish servant John Brown following the death of her beloved husband, Prince Albert. Is 'V&A' on the same level as John Madden's 1997 film? Succinctly: no. The yr. is 1887, and after some 50 yrs. on the throne, Victoria is old, fat {self-professed}, bored & tired of living; with the endless ceremonies & banquets to oversee.
Locking eyes {scandalous! -- no, I'm serious} the "handsome" Abdul brings her a little joy, so he & his fellow Indian servant, Mohammed (Adeel Akhtar), are told to remain in England to serve the queen at her command. Before long, Abdul offers her an escape, as he introduces her to the language, food & customs of India, a land Victoria has never visited even though she is Empress of India. She gives him the title of 'Munshi' (or 'teacher' in Urdu) and keeps him (& eventually his wife) as part of the royal household. Meanwhile, Victoria's companionship with the "brown," low-born Indian scandalizes every bigot in her inner circle, including her cantankerous, jealous oldest son/eventual King, Bertie (Eddie Izzard); her pompous private secretary, Sir Ponsonby (Tim Pigott-Smith); her rude personal physician, Dr. Reid (Paul Higgins); the stuffy prime minister (Michael Gambon); & even Lady Churchill (purse-lipped Olivia Williams). But much to their chagrin, the queen enjoys Abdul SO much that she ignores their requests to kick him out & continues keeping him by her side. Melodrama ensues.
What. A. Disappointment. I read the critical response to this film {Dench is great, the movie is weak}, but given the pedigree of the director, the cast et al, I figured the critics were off their rocker -- well, I was wrong. How could the filmmakers get this wrong? 1997's Mrs. Brown was stellar. I love historical biopics. I even commend the ornate production design & immaculate costumes. Dench is excellent as the depressed, aging monarch who finds a little joy, but this movie doesn't reveal enough about the fascinating relationship btwn. the queen & her mentor; instead, opting for "crowd-pleasing" comedy beats, hijinks & buffoonery. What they've done here is turn the story into a farce. The actors behave in such a way & yell their lines of dialogue as if they're participating in a spoof.
Characters talk about balls, dicks, vaginas & 'royal colons' -- ridiculous. I thought the gravity of this fascinating story deserved more thoughtful treatment than loud, broad comedy or how most of the secondary characters were portrayed as shallow, backstabbing, one-dimensional villains. And then the final 30 minutes decides to be super-serious & utterly depressing in every way. This movie tried to have its cake and eat it, too: win-over the elderly art house set with saccharin likability, but then try to be some serious historical biopic with deep meaning -- nah, didn't work for me.
I already mentioned the wonder that is Dench. Bollywood star Ali Fazal has an amiable presence, but his portrayal of Abdul felt too subdued. What were his motivations? I felt like I didn't get to know him & all his complexities {he comes off as saintly, yet a few unsavory things are revealed about him}. That's the thing, though -- the script relies too much on silly humor to hide the lack of complexity. And director Stephen Frears continues that woeful trend; for instance, on the issue of racism & colonial rule, it's clear that most white royals considered themselves superior to darker citizens of their empire, yet that theme is not touched upon in any revelatory way -- missed opportunity. So yeah, Dench moved me; the production design & costumes are awards-worthy. But this film felt tonally-confused, too superficial & failed to properly examine certain cultural & historical questions. I just can't believe the drop-off in quality from Mrs. Brown 20 years ago ... to this.
Locking eyes {scandalous! -- no, I'm serious} the "handsome" Abdul brings her a little joy, so he & his fellow Indian servant, Mohammed (Adeel Akhtar), are told to remain in England to serve the queen at her command. Before long, Abdul offers her an escape, as he introduces her to the language, food & customs of India, a land Victoria has never visited even though she is Empress of India. She gives him the title of 'Munshi' (or 'teacher' in Urdu) and keeps him (& eventually his wife) as part of the royal household. Meanwhile, Victoria's companionship with the "brown," low-born Indian scandalizes every bigot in her inner circle, including her cantankerous, jealous oldest son/eventual King, Bertie (Eddie Izzard); her pompous private secretary, Sir Ponsonby (Tim Pigott-Smith); her rude personal physician, Dr. Reid (Paul Higgins); the stuffy prime minister (Michael Gambon); & even Lady Churchill (purse-lipped Olivia Williams). But much to their chagrin, the queen enjoys Abdul SO much that she ignores their requests to kick him out & continues keeping him by her side. Melodrama ensues.
What. A. Disappointment. I read the critical response to this film {Dench is great, the movie is weak}, but given the pedigree of the director, the cast et al, I figured the critics were off their rocker -- well, I was wrong. How could the filmmakers get this wrong? 1997's Mrs. Brown was stellar. I love historical biopics. I even commend the ornate production design & immaculate costumes. Dench is excellent as the depressed, aging monarch who finds a little joy, but this movie doesn't reveal enough about the fascinating relationship btwn. the queen & her mentor; instead, opting for "crowd-pleasing" comedy beats, hijinks & buffoonery. What they've done here is turn the story into a farce. The actors behave in such a way & yell their lines of dialogue as if they're participating in a spoof.
Characters talk about balls, dicks, vaginas & 'royal colons' -- ridiculous. I thought the gravity of this fascinating story deserved more thoughtful treatment than loud, broad comedy or how most of the secondary characters were portrayed as shallow, backstabbing, one-dimensional villains. And then the final 30 minutes decides to be super-serious & utterly depressing in every way. This movie tried to have its cake and eat it, too: win-over the elderly art house set with saccharin likability, but then try to be some serious historical biopic with deep meaning -- nah, didn't work for me.
I already mentioned the wonder that is Dench. Bollywood star Ali Fazal has an amiable presence, but his portrayal of Abdul felt too subdued. What were his motivations? I felt like I didn't get to know him & all his complexities {he comes off as saintly, yet a few unsavory things are revealed about him}. That's the thing, though -- the script relies too much on silly humor to hide the lack of complexity. And director Stephen Frears continues that woeful trend; for instance, on the issue of racism & colonial rule, it's clear that most white royals considered themselves superior to darker citizens of their empire, yet that theme is not touched upon in any revelatory way -- missed opportunity. So yeah, Dench moved me; the production design & costumes are awards-worthy. But this film felt tonally-confused, too superficial & failed to properly examine certain cultural & historical questions. I just can't believe the drop-off in quality from Mrs. Brown 20 years ago ... to this.