Nice frocks, shame about the script

NO MATTER what I say about this film, curiosity is bound to get the better of you. Rubbernecking at accidents is what we all do, after all, which is an unfortunate analogy. But it hasn’t stopped a number of critics calling this movie a car crash.

There have, in fact, been a number of films about Princess Di, but as they’ve been confined to the True Life channel or the discount bucket at Blockbusters, no one bats an eyelid. No one except actress Catherine Oxenberg, who did rather well in Diana and Charles: Unhappily Ever After, and landed a part in Dynasty.

Oscar-nominated for The Impossible last year, Naomi Watts did not need to play a royal to kick-start her career. But I imagine she’s now questioning why she did. Perhaps Helen Mirren’s success as The Queen spurred her on. But no matter how good Watts is as Diana — and in many scenes she is convincing — the film lacks the content and smartly-crafted script that supported Dame Helen. In a desperate attempt to offend no one (except Pakistani heart surgeon Dr Hasnat Khan, who refused to collaborate with the production) the film has not only steered away from featuring the key people in Diana’s life (ex-husband, children). Based on Kate Snell’s book, Diana: Her Last Love, it focuses on a conjured version of her relationship with Khan (Naveen Andrews from Lost), followed by another with Dodi Al Fayed, which evidently would have been far less significant had it not been for the tragic outcome. Dodi was just a way of making Hasnat jealous, or so the film implies, which I assume Mohammed Al Fayed won’t be best pleased about.

I think the people’s princess probably deserves a better cinematic epitaph than this, but the film is not quite as quite as bad as it’s been painted. It’s redeeming feature is seeing the dresses Jacques Azagury made for Diana being worn again by Watts. All were lovingly remade for the actress by the Jewish fashion designer and it’s a shame the same care and attention wasn’t taken with the story.