Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

parsifalssister Although some of the reviewers find the film lacking, I was overjoyed to see a somewhat different point of view from the Wallis versions. I caught two this week. While I have no historical perspective of either side, those films and this make for a somewhat balanced perspective of the tragic and comedic episode in the lives of the brothers, David and Bertie.The Bertie I meet here is absolutely charming, with a supportive wife, and rather bright daughters. And the Wallis Simpson here is absolutely loathsome. It is here and here alone her possible shallowness and spite are raised against (Queen) Elizabeth, the Royals in general, and fleshes out her own self importance not seen elsewhere. She appears unlikeable, unsupportable and unattractive in all ways.Clearly, history will be forthcoming when more of the Windsor family have left the stage, but this wee film made possible to uncover some of the distinct differences between the two Kings and brothers. Bertie, George VI, comes off rather well, all things considered and David (Edward VIII) comes out smelling like Henry VIII without his massive fangs.Another reviewer seemed to object to the introduction of Queen Wilhelmina and President Roosevelt, but I for one as a former resident, loved seeing the engaging Dutch Queen's presence as an escaped Royal because up until now I was rather ashamed she had abandoned ship. And it didn't hurt but rather help to get a peek into a possible personal conversation between the King and the American President about war and politics. I rather wonder if Edward VIII would have stuck it out with his Duchess during air- raids and bombs, and as neither of them seemed likely to have children together, they wouldn't have to face the choices Bertie and Elizabeth faced.The film moves slowly, but it enabled me to catch my breath and reflect on the possibilities of this being history not fiction or a film. I felt proud of this formerly stuttering King, his understanding and down to earth Queen and the English people. Perhaps I am sentimental, or even foolish to think they behaved thus, and naive to get caught up, tears in my eyes, as the plot unfolded, but if I am I say I feel satisfied with this tiny entry into this particular part of English history even without all the dirty laundry that accompanied the era, the abdicated and the vileness of broken promises. Perhaps one day we'll see a more fleshed out Bertie and Elizabeth or the truth about the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, but until then I'm rather satisfied with this one.

e-d-nelson I first became acquainted with this little docu-drama at some grocery store DVD stand and saw an ad for it on television many years ago. It seemed interesting but was never something I looked into until recently.I checked out the reviews here first, and while I'm not quite finished watching it yet, I do say I have to agree with the majority; I am not well-versed in this particular part of history, but it does sound like there's probably plenty of inaccuracies, everything is rather glossed over, and oftentimes manages to be less compelling and more bland.Which is not to say I do not like this film, because I do. It has a few admirable successes: all of the leads are superbly well acted, I do genuinely care about what is going on and occasionally get excited, the cinematography is quite good and I think the period set and costume pieces are lovely. In that respect, it's done its job.However, possibly as a result of being a commissioned piece, the bleeding-heart patriotism and jingoism gets extremely tedious in places, particularly WWII, but in other places as well. I think the mini-series format might have been a better choice since it would have allowed for greater exploration of complex events, but given how the material was being handled, I doubt it would have changed things overly much or made a much more complex portrayal of the characters present.While I'm definitely not going to run out and buy this on DVD - it's cute, but it's hardly worth that - it did make me more interested in the subject, so if I get some spare time I'd like to research that. So it is good for that, but judging it on its own merits, it is a little disappointing.

irish23 If you want historical accuracy, look elsewhere. Fact, distortion, omission, and plain fiction are so interwoven in this picture that I almost wanted to see a disclaimer at the start of the film.However! If you can chuck all that aside and just focus on the film itself, it's a charming, sweet, no-brainer movie with uplifting moments tossed in.The portrayal of the struggles between David and Bertie, who'd always been close, after the arrival of Wallis, is the most "poison pill" version I've seen. David is portrayed as a flat-out cad, while Wallis is a scheming, grasping "rhymes-with-'itch.'" The devastation of Bertie and the poise of Elizabeth are in sharp contrast to the "bad couple."This is just one example of how the writers used elements to highlight the tremendous tension between public and private royal life in the 20th century, and how personal feelings *must* be sacrificed to duty. Obviously, this dynamic still plays out in the 21st century.What shines through above all in this picture is the love between Bertie and Elizabeth. As such, it is a charming romance film with some lovely costumes and sets, and some moving historical references thrown in. The steadfastness of B & E's relationship, and how it allowed both of them to survive some of the most crushing episodes of their lives, is inspiring to watch. And then one wants to grab a book to find out what *really* happened. :-)

Kevin Dennis (ksdennis) The film is missing some of Elizabeth's most famous remarks, even though they are alluded to, such as (and these are facsimiles): "I can now look the east end in the face." and "They {the Princesses} won't leave without me. I won't leave without the King. And the King will never leave." etc.It flies through history as a series of vignettes, arguably not necessarily the most important ones. It explains little about the psychology of the major characters, especially George VI's stutter, how instrumental his wife was helping him during his reign, her deep antipathy for Wallis, and Wallis's lack of understanding of her surroundings, England and the court. Wallis is portrayed with a complete lack of sympathy. ("Edward and Mrs. Simpson" this isn't!)The movie seems to contain glaring inaccuracies. If a royal highness by marriage, Wallis couldn't have passed this title on to any subsequent husband and, surely, the King would know this. The title was withheld - against custom and precedent - for many other reasons which are not explored at all. This is unfortunate.Nevertheless, the performances are wonderful, especially James Wilby as George VI; Juliet Aubrey as Elizabeth;, Alan Bates as George V; Eileen Atkins as Queen Mary; and Charles Edwards as an Edward VIII with a complete lack of appreciation that with great advantages from birth come great obligations.For the knowledgeable viewer, it's like looking through bits of a sentimental picture book. It's comfort food: sentimental, warm, and lacking in much nutritional value. Remember, however, the subjects (George VI and Queen Elizabeth) were, and remain, tremendously popular and this view may be very much a reflection of its time. And, having no idea of what really went on behind the walls of the royal residences, it is fun to have the illusion of being able to look.