The Young Victoria

I should first set my stall out before diving into a review of this movie. I am neither a royalist nor indeed a fan of costume dramas, so by rights I should have avoided The Young Victoria like the plague. However the presence of Emily Blunt, who stole every scene from Anne Hathaway's drippy Andy in The Devil Wears Prada, encouraged me to sweep aside any misgivings and give this movie a try. And I am very glad I did.

Blunt plays our longest reigning monarch to date in a movie which chronicles her early years, from a cosseted childhood as heir to throne to her coronation and marriage to her beloved Prince Albert. We witness Victoria endure the scheming of her mother the Duchess of Kent (Miranda Richardson, most definitely no longer Queenie) and her mother's private secretary (a devilish Mark Strong, who seems to be forging a strong Hollywood career bytaking on such characters), both of whom want her to establish a Regency on the grounds that she's too young to succeed her uncle William IV, played to addled perfection by Jim Broadbent; the scurrilous whispers around her relationship with her favourite Lord Melbourne, Prime Minister at the time; and a number of assassination attempts. Already the parallels to Shekhar Kapur's Elizabeth movies are hard to ignore. However, this historical drama prefers to dwell on the period in miniature with little in the way of high drama, preferring instead to focus on the romance unfolding between Victoria and Albert rather than any wider historical events. It's straightforward, literal interpretation of history is perhaps down to the presence of Sarah Ferguson, who, bizarrely, shares producer credits with no less than Martin Scorsese (trivia fans look out for a cameo from Princess Beatrice as a lady in waiting in one of the movie's opening shots).

Whatever, the movie is absolutely charming and rather moving it's own way. Blunt is very well cast as Victoria; her profile lends itself well to the period and she injects the character with just the right balance of spunk and girlishness to make her likeable without being irritating or sickly - something another young actress who springs to mind may not have been able to pull off. Yes, I do mean Kiera Knightley, whose brand of plucky posh I really can't stomach, so I'm glad the casting directors saw further than the most lucrative choice and plumped for Blunt in the title role. This leads me nicely into appraising Knightley's current squeeze and Blunt's co-star Rupert Friend, who plays Prince Albert (snigger, sorry) with a quiet confidence and intelligence that captivates us just as immediately as the real prince must have Victoria: chafing at the bit to be treated as more than just her consort, his influence on her and their growing mutual respect is touching to follow. As a somewhat shallow aside, Friend is also rather notable for outprettying Blunt, who hasn't exactly done too badly for herself in the looks department either. He looks delicious - even with the dodgy tache. Together, the pair create sparks which don't need gratuitous love scenes or overwrought speeches to underscore their affection and are totally believable as young lovers, even if most of their courtship is epistolary or under the watchful eyes of courtiers. Ooh repressed passions. How very Victorian. I think there's definitely an argument for renaming the movie Victoria and Albert on the basis of their chemistry, which is sensual and fresh and devoid of the tragedy we come to expect from most dramas about royal romances. The rest of the cast don't do badly either, and by 'the rest' I mean principally the fantastic Paul Bettany as 'the great seducer' Lord Melbourne, who is both calculating and oddly irresistible. Bettany's one of our finest character actors and it never fails to amaze me that he isn't given more credit for his work (see: A Knight's Tale for his scene stealing turn as Chaucer, or the otherwise execrable The Da Vinci Code for his performance as Silas).

The direction is also pretty flawless. Yes we have the mandatory camera swoops over perfectly manicured palace grounds and driveways, but there are some quirky moments thrown in (the introduction of key political figures is pacey and kinetic and there's a lovely treatment of the sparkling rows of wine glasses used at the King's birthday function). Just as Blunt herself captures something both old and new in the queen, so the overall effect of the movie is one of tradition (royalty, the conventions of the genre) mingling with modernity: perhaps the only way to treat a monarch whose reign oversaw such great social changes. Both lavish and intimate, this film may not be the most dramatic thing you'll see this year, for all the events it covers, but it is thoroughly enchanting and will make a star of Blunt which is no bad thing at all.

Comments

[Sarah]

Yay! I'm surprised, but pleased, to find that you enjoyed this :) It really is very good and I totally agree about Rupert Friend, who does outshine poor Emily in the prettyness department! Hopefully his success in this will mean more Rupert on our screens in future :)