Defending 'Diana': What Went Wrong with the Royal Biopic?
A closer look at why the critics hate Diana
It’s fair to say that Diana has been ‘panned’ by the critics; they didn’t enjoy it, and while they tried to retain a modicum of respect – it is about Princess Diana of course, a national hero – it was difficult to disguise their disdain. But what exactly went wrong? What made The Times call it “atrocious and intrusive”?
Naomi Watts as Diana.
A lot of the vitriol can be found pointing towards Stephen Jeffreys, the man who adapted Kate Snell’s book. The screenplay has taken a fair bit of heat, with many outlets bemoaning its sincerity. The Times congratulated the film’s star, Naomi Watts for “doing her level best with a squirmingly embarrassing script,” adding that "this film is still atrocious and intrusive.”
The Guardian said: “This is due to an excruciatingly well-intentioned, reverential and sentimental biopic about her troubled final years, laced with bizarre cardboard dialogue - a tabloid fantasy of how famous and important people speak in private.”
Naomi Watts Did Her Best as Princess Diana
Watts, who attended the film’s premiere recently, was on the defensive when it came to her movie. Asked if she felt the film would offend Diana's sons, she said: "Hopefully if they get to see the film, they will feel that we have done it in a respectful and sensitive way. We try to honour the depiction of her character in the best possible way." She claimed in an earlier interview that she "found herself constantly asking for (Diana's) permission to carry on" in the film. "I felt like I was spending a lot of time with her. There was one particular moment when I felt her permission was granted," she told the Mail on Sunday. (via Fox)