Spencer

Sometimes the movies we watch are not ones that we necessarily enjoy. 

This is fairly true for my experience with Spencer, an unconventional historical biopic of Princess Diana set over the course of the Royal's 3-day Christmas tradition holiday at their Sandringham estate in 1991.  

Knowing very little about the Princess Diana tragedy when it occurred - I was 7 at the time - I'm somewhat intrigued to find out more. I remember the Princess Diana Beenie Baby and Elton John's famous song, and that my mom was sad about it, but otherwise I wasn't quite sure what the big deal was. As the years have gone on and the world has come to recognize that the British Royals are...well...less than perfect, elements from their past get brought back up. With Diana's tragic death (and all the suspicion that surrounds it) being one of the biggest events in their last 50 years, it's no wonder that it's still a hot topic all these years later.

Spencer is interesting then, picking a very specific time period that was both equally far into Diana's tenure with the Royals and also quite far away from her death. The film, set in 1991, is about 6 years before that time in 1997. In a lot of ways, part of me wanted something more standard, to learn more about the woman, her life, and her final days as opposed to a mild-horror film set over a minute moment in time. 

Even still though, it's hard not to admire Spencer for its ambition and even harder to not recognize one of the best performances of the year, easily, with Kristen Stewart's Diana. 

It's hard for me to criticize Spencer for the creative choices it makes, even if I wish it was something more. The most harmful aspect of the narrow view however is that I was left with more questions than I had answers to. Did that really happen? Did Diana really do that? How much of this is true? In some ways the film almost leans too much into its horror "roots" that it makes certain elements feel fantastical and too obviously dramatic (and likely didn't happen). In some regards, that's a strength of the film and Diana is so unhinged that it makes it unpredictable (whereas a biopic would have been very predictable), but it also feels like it hides the truth behind a veil of entertainment and I'm still not sure how I feel about that. 

The pinnacle of Christmas sweater fashion

Christmas Day church, but make
it funeral fashion?

It's elements of horror, that suggest Diana felt claustrophobic and was experiencing something akin to "death by 1000 cuts" works well - aside from the aforementioned distortion of likely reality. Spencer is not a feel-good film, and certainly not one that paints the Royals in any sort of good light. It also doesn't shy away from some of its more controversial elements suggesting that Diana had eating disorders, potentially harmed herself, and was might have been on the cusp of being suicidal. Given how ridiculous the Royal family was to her (especially in the film) that's not a surprise, but a lot of this was also news to me. 

As one would expect from director Pablo Larrain, (who also directed Jackie) the film is gorgeous and well made. I wasn't the biggest fan of the "Instagram filter" of brightness used throughout the movie, especially outdoors, but otherwise, this is a striking film. Because it's only over 3 days, it moves slowly and methodically, but it also knows when to ratchet up the tension and horror moments. Particularly striking is any cinematography with Diana - in one of her many striking and colorful dresses - against the drab British architecture. 

And of course, I'd be doing my job really poorly if I didn't praise [loudly] Kristen Stewart's performance which is A) the best part of this film and B) the reason you should see it. It's one of those performances that veers into "eerie" territory with how accurately she captures, displays, and looks like the woman she's imitating. Aside from these mannerisms though, it's still an incredible, raw performance, requiring a broad range of emotion from her. She's equally good being courteous and stiff with the Royals as she is losing her s**t alone and away from others. If the rest of the film only partially satisfied me, her performance was what kept me going from moment to moment. 

Spencer is one of those weird films that I feel disconnected from. Many elements worked well, but I feel like I wanted it to be much more than its narrow view provides. Chalk that up to "artistic differences", but I also feel like I won't be the only one who was looking for more. In that regard then, I feel as if Spencer - while still a good movie with a fantastic performance - is more for the arthouse crowd. 

CONS

• Very, very narrow scope of Diana's life
• Horror theme has its strengths (more on that in Pros), but it also makes the film unbelievable, almost too much so for a "based on true story" tale
• Quite slow and likely could have used a trimming
• The original score doesn't hurt it, but I [shockingly] wasn't a fan of this one
• Weird "instagram" filter present, especially outdoors

PROS

• The horror elements also make this unpredictable, providing some excitement even if we all know the story
• Reveals a lot about Royal life, why Diana felt the way she did, and more. Very interesting even if some of it may be hard to believe
• Great, sometimes stunning cinematography. Moments where Diana's fashion is vibrant against backdrops are memorable
• WOW. Kristen Stewart's performance is enough for me to recommend the film alone. She embodies Diana
• Despite the slowness, it's an enjoyable one-time view

Rath's Review Score | 7/10