The movie “The Young Victoria” boasts a core cast of very well-known British actors, so my expectations were relatively high. Did it disappoint, you ask? The answer is, “Not really.”
Taken at face value, I really enjoyed the film. The cast was indeed very good, living up to about 93% of their potential, I’d say. Emily Blunt (“The Devil Wears Prada,” “Sunshine Cleaning,” and a really great episode of “The Simpsons,” in which Blunt’s character and Lisa Simpson become Grobanites and go to a magical land called “Equalia,” where Josh Groban music plays all the time), in the title role, was charming and feisty. Rupert Friend (“Pride and Prejudice”) as Prince Albert was warm and encouraging, befitting his friendly face - and name - much more than that dastardly Mr. Wickham...even if his accent did come and go. Paul Bettany (“A Knight’s Tale,” “The Da Vinci Code”...among others. I love him!), was definitely cool and calculating, yet gentlemanly, as the Whig PM and Victoria’s first advisor. Mark Strong (“Stardust,” “Sherlock Holmes”) was the typical brooding bad guy, but hey, it works for him. (Gotta love an actor that embraces the fact that he could probably never play a “good” guy...) Miranda Richardson (“Phantom of the Opera,” “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”) was the somewhat detached and manipulated mother of Victoria, but I feel her character could have had more depth. Perhaps her role wasn’t written that way. It almost works. Jim Broadbent (“Moulin Rouge,” “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe,” “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”) made me giggle in his role as the ailing (and slightly tipsy) King William IV, Victoria’s predecessor. He was kind and uncle-y, which is good, since William was Victoria’s uncle. Harriet Walter (“Sense and Sensibility,” “Atonement”), as Queen Adelaide, was the voice of reason and experience to counter Victoria’s youth and naïveté. I liked her character a lot, however scarce her screen time may have been.
Aside from the cast, the story itself was just a brief glimpse at the life and reign of Queen Victoria. From the beginning, I was intrigued by this woman of whom I knew very little (my area of “expertise” is somewhat farther in the past than her time). The political games people play with other people in order to advance their own purposes was quite clear throughout, but a lot of heart was put in it as well. Victoria and Albert were, above all things, young people in extraordinary circumstances. Victoria muses at the beginning of the film, “What girl does not want to grow up a princess?” But the strains of a restricted lifestyle and being used as a pawn can be frustrating and wearying. Albert puts it cleverly: “Then you had better master the rules of the game until you play it better than they can.”
(Insert tangent on well-written lines: Queen Adelaide says to Victoria, “He's a politician. And politicians, whatever their creed, always resent the monarchy. They pass through, you stay.” And one for the heartstrings: Albert to Victoria, “You're the only wife I've got or ever will have. You are my whole existence, and I will love you until my very last breath.” *End tangent.)
The story was well supported by exquisite sets, extravagant costumes (Emily Blunt’s insured for £10,000 EACH), and a magnificent score by Ilan Eshkeri (“Stardust”). The only outright problem I really had with the movie was the ending...to me, it seemed like production said, “The movie’s gone on for this long, let’s wrap it up,” and indeed they did...in like three minutes. I know the movie is “The YOUNG Victoria,” and I suppose it would have been difficult to choose a breaking-off point, but I would have liked a little more (runtime: 100 minutes). Yet hopes for a sequel (which would probably be ill-advised anyway) were dashed by the all-encompassing written-out summary of what happened for the rest of Victoria’s reign intermixed with brief glimpses of the characters. You know, the kind of summary that any movie based on historical facts is apt to have. Oh well. I enjoyed the film immensely.
I do have to say it’s more of a gripping romance/drama than an intense portrayal of a monarchy (ie: “Elizabeth” and “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”). This is perhaps because, as far as I can tell, there was not a whole lot of political turmoil at the time. Whereas Elizabeth had to deal with accused plots to overturn her sister, violent religious instability during the Inquisition, and wars with Spain (Armada, anyone?...Can you tell where my aforementioned “expertise” rests?), Victoria ruled during an era of economic growth, becoming Britain’s longest ruling monarch (63 years). By the Victoria’s time, however, the monarch was not the sole ruler of the realm anymore, as was the case with Elizabeth, but more akin to the figurehead and symbol of Britain with which we are familiar now. All of this could make for a dull movie, but “The Young Victoria” is gratifying enough, and serious enough (it’s kind of nice to see a movie about a monarch without any explicit sex or nudity) to be a real winner. Emily Blunt has already received a nomination for Best Actress in a Motion Picture - Drama for the Golden Globes...and for the British Independent Film Awards, the Broadcast Film Critics Association Awards, and the Satellite Awards. I hope the Price Waterhouse Coopers guys are paying attention.
**Shout out to Mrs. Heidi Thulin, for getting us those free tickets to the advance sceening!
