Diana

Synopsis: A portrait of Diana, Princess of Wales (Naomi Watts) following the last two years of her life and with a focus upon her passionate affair with London-based Pakistani heart surgeon, Hasnat Khan (Naveen Andrews). 

Oliver Hirshbiegel’s film has been comprehensively panned in both the UK and the US but I must confess to not understanding why. In a brave performance Watts may not look that much like Diana but she does get enough of her, above all the warm loving public persona that made her “Queen of Hearts”, to be effective. The film’s production values are strong too - the many public functions of which Diana was the star, along with the gowns and the adoring crowds are well recreated. Where the film really succeeds for me, is the capturing of the  impossibility of trying to blend a life in the public eye with an authentic private life. Thus it takes on the feel of forbidden love meets Greek tragedy.

There are no doubt many interpretations of Diana’s tragic life that could be adapted to film. This is just one of the many, and certainly doesn’t purport to be her entire story (it was based on Kate Snell’s book, "Diana: Her Last Love"). Part of the problem I believe is that the first film to come out about the Princess hones in on such a narrow aspect of her life when a more thoroughgoing historical overview would have been more appropriate. But as a love story it worked for me. Hirshbiegel (universally praised for Downfall, his 2004 account of Hitler’s last days, is perhaps an unusual choice for director, but he gives us a strong love story.

Despite excluding many of the real-life characters and aspects of this royal debacle, the film captures compellingly just how intrusive the paparazzi were in the life of the hounded princess. Dr Khan’s problem is that he cannot reconcile the idea of being a dedicated surgeon with the idea of being always in the public eye. And being a Muslim complicates the matter further (it seems that the final romance with Dodi Fayed was more a rebound affair designed to make the good doctor jealous).

The way the two leads play off each other convinces me enough of the reasons for their attraction and the love that develops. It also presents a credible enough emotion that I actually felt for the pair, in a deeper way than the Mills & Boon labelling which has been applied to the film. Diana’s naiveté, along with her knack for manipulating the media when she wanted to, is also well conveyed.

How much of it is true to historical fact is a fair question and perhaps this also is an issue for reviewers who feel that the reality of Diana’s life has been subsumed by the conventions of the romance genre. For me the film is well enough made, not so badly acted, and touchingly depicts the overall feeling of an isolated woman, desperate for normality, her children, from whom she is separated, and simply craving love. But perhaps I am being too indulgent on it as a biopic.  See it for yourself and make up your own mind.

Want more about this film?

Want something different?