Customer Reviews

Wallis & Edward

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This "Wallis and Edward" story is totally unlike any I have seen. I'm fascinated by the story, or I wouldn't be buying all the versions. I would have liked it to be longer, of course, with more detail, but the length (less than 2 hours) could be considered an advantage.

This version presents things the way Wallis may have viewed them. Very unusual is the idea that she didn't want to divorce Ernest Simpson at all, she considered they had a good "partnership," she was sure the future king (Edward)would eventually tire of her and move on to a new fling. This is in contrast with the 7 CD set by the BBC, which gives all the details of the parliamentary involvement and the legal issues, and which presented Wallis as thinking she could become Queen of England and setting out with a definite plan to totally captivate Crown Prince Edward and remove him from the influence of his other married paramours.

It's also totally different from the portrayal of Wallis and Edward in "Bertie and Elizabeth," which paints both Wallis and Edward in a very negative light, especially in comparison to Bertie and Elizabeth, well respected for their exemplary lifestyle and sacrifice and courage during WWII.

Since obviously there are details of the Wallis/Edward relationship and history that no one, perhaps not even the persons involved, can ever really know, the film would have to be labeled "based on history." But Joely is fabulous and the actor who portrays Edward is also quite good, although other performances have captured better the physical appearance, voice, and mannerisms of the famous lovers.

Summary: I highly recommend this film for aficionados of the British Royal Family.

Edward, Prince of Wales was first in line for the British throne when he first met Wallis Simpson and her husband Ernest. They were Americans visiting in England on business when Edward and Wallis began what seemed to be just another affair in Edward's long string of mistresses. When Edward became King of England after his father's death, his affair with Wallis escalated with her divorcee from her husband. Edward was adamant that he would married Wallis and make her his Queen, despite her status as a twice divorced American woman of common background. The scandal rocked all of England and resulted in the only time a British monarch would renounce his throne in order to marry the woman he loved. "Wallis & Edward" is a brilliant BBC production of a royal love that would change history on the eve of the second world war. Truly tour-de-force performances are provided by every member of the multiple cast. The costumes and sets are picture perfect. This 94-minute film is now available in a DVD format allowing for the addition of an interview with writer Sarah Williams, production notes, a production photo gallery, an historical photo galley, and cast filmographies. A simply brilliant, informed, and entertaining production, "Wallis & Edward" is enthusiastically recommended for personal, family, and community library DVD collections.

Even today the British seem to have trouble figuring out how to present a balanced portrait of the 1936 abdication crisis. The best and most even-handed version by far remains the witty 1978 miniseries EDWARD AND MRS. SIMPSON, which is sympathetic to most of the parties involved and their torments over the split between the uncrowned Edward VIII's heart and his duties. More often than not, however, the future Duke and Duchess of Windsor are viewed as selfish monsters. The 2005 TV movie BERTIE AND ELIZABETH, for example, presented things from the point of view of his brother and successor George VI and his wife Queen Elizabeth, depicting Edward as a spoiled and callow child and his future wife Wallis Simpson as a brittle society harpy.

This lavishly produced two-hour television film takes the exactly opposite view. Edward here (as depicted by Stephen Moore Campbell, a dead ringer for the King) is an articulate defender of his inalienable human right to love freely, and Wallis (Joely Richardson, with a bizarrely harsh and unconvincing American accent that sounds nothing like the real woman from her appearances on television) wants nothing more than what's best for the British people and for her dear, dear second husband Ernest. In this account, she just can't seem to get Edward to leave her alone with his passionate intensity for her: he seems to be some sort of curse visited upon her. Meanwhile, Queen Mary (Margaret Tyzack, great as always at playing society gargoyles) and King George V (Clifford Rose) gnash their teeth at what they mistake to be Mrs. Simpson's incredible presumption, and Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin (Richard Johnson) and other Establishment monsters plot her annihilation. There's no talk of Wallis's scheming against Edward's other mistresses, and hardly any mention of her incessant social climbing; she just seems somehow to have blundered into the whole affair without a plan in the world. Still, it's nice for once to get things from the Windsors' point of view, even if it does almost as if they paid (from beyond the grave) to have this produced as propaganda. If anything this film is worth seeing just for the clothes: since both Wallis and Edward were famous clotheshorses, the costumes for this film are absolutely spectacular.

I grew up hearing stories of British royalty and their scandals as my mother is an avid fan of all things royalty and the epic romance of Edward, Prince of Wales and later King Edward VIII and Mrs Wallis Simpson was one which always fascinated me. Though I'm not a fan of the couple [because they were known Nazi sympathizers], I do find their romance fascinating, and used to wonder as to what kind of woman would so intoxicate a king as to persuade him to give up his throne.

This screen adaptation of their love story is told from Wallis' point of view and is quite a sympathetic portrayal of Wallis. Though I'm no expert on the history of this romance, I did wonder as to how much of this version was fact because the traditional versions seem to point a very accusatory finger at Wallis' role behind Edward's decision to abdicate his throne to be with the woman he loves.

What comes across clearly is Edward's [played magnificently by Stephen Campbell Moore] infatuation and obsession with Wallis [Joely Richardson, more recently seen in the tv series Nip and Tuck], an American woman who had been divorced and was married to American businessman Ernest Simpson [David Westhead]when the pair meet. Very soon, Edward, Prince of Wales who was famous for being a playboy [much to the detriment of his royal parents, King George and Queen Mary] takes Wallis as his lover, but their affair doesn't draw too much attention until he openly displays Wallis at official functions and shows his partiality towards her. When Ernest asks Wallis for a divorce [supposedly embroiled in an affair himself] after a civil meeting with Edward, all hell breaks loose as the British PM, Stanley Baldwin [Richard Johnson] and other influential people begin to realize the very real threat that Wallis poses to the monarchy should Edward decide to legalize their union by marriage once Wallis' second divorce comes through.

The specter of a marriage between Edward and Wallis at the time was deemed a catastrophe as Edward, who became King Edward VIII upon the death of his father, was the head of the Church of England, and which forbade remarriage for anyone whose divorced spouse was still living [and in this case, both of Wallis' ex' were still living].

The rest of the story tells of Edward's futile attempts at convincing the British government to grant a morganatic marriage. This version portrays Wallis as a woman prepared to sacrifice Edward for the sake of his throne, telling him NOT to abdicate, but has us believe that Edward was acting of his own volition in abdicating.

I found Edward's portrayal by Stephen Campbell Moore to be very credibly done and one of the most poignant scenes in the movie is when he is talking to his younger brother Bertie, who went on to become King George VI after Edward's abdication. Joely Richardson also does an admirable job as the much vilified Wallis, and this particular screen version of the romance portrays a very sexual side of the relationship between Edward and Wallis, which is made all the more believable by the authentic chemistry shared between the two leads. The sexual aspect of the pair's relationship is often ignored in other versions, but not here. One gathers that though Wallis was not endowed with great beauty in the traditional sense, often seeming almost manly, she nevertheless exuded a very potent sexual charisma that undoubtedly attracted Edward to her, among many other things.

All in all, "Wallis and Edward" may veer away from the traditional version of events but it nevertheless makes for riveting viewing.

This is a gorgeous production of a script, written by a woman who felt that Wallis Simpson had been unfairly villified in England and wanted to present another viewpoint. The story, itself, is fascinating and one can only wonder at the real truths...Did Mrs. Simpson cold-heartedly go after Edward? Did she want to become Queen of England? Did she really want to stay married to Mr. Simpson and just have an affair with Edward? And finally, did she really love this man?

This writer gives us her version, which is much more sympathetic to Wallis Simpson than others. Here Wallis is shown to want to have stepped out of the picture and to have Edward take the throne. What remained a question in my mind was whether the woman really loved the man or if she was grabbing at what she considered was her last chance at security. It is quite obvious that Edward was truly mad about her but I never got that she genuinely cared about him. She was flattered by the attention, and as a woman who had grown up as a poor child in America, the atmosphere in which she found herself as his favorite was certainly a heady one. Even her husband enjoyed it for a while. But did she love him?

Joely Richardson plays the enigmatic Mrs. Simpson, as self assured and supposedly charming. I felt that in the attempt to make the character more vulnerable and sympathetic to the viewer, that her beauty and charm were given short shrift. I don't consider Ms. Richardson particularly beautiful and, if I hadn't known the story I would have wondered what the Prince saw in her. When we saw the photos of the real pair, one could easily see the beauty and charm.

I found Stephen Campbell Moore amazing as Edward. He looked very much like the photos and seemed to perfectly embody his idealistic, romantic, perhaps foolish character. His portrayal made the man very believable. He had style, charm and beauty enough for both of them.

Like many others, I grew up hearing about this couple and saw pictures of them in their later years as they cruised from one fashionable spot to another. And I had heard his famous abdication speech many times. So I always had the impression that this was a great love story. Maybe it was, but in this film it comes across as more tragic and sad. In spite of the intentions of the writer, I found that the character of Wallis Simpson was still very unsympathetic.

This film is quite beautifully done and certainly piques your interest to know more.

"Wallis and Edward" is another in a long line of cinematic efforts that manages to twist history by levering in a touching love story. In the case of "Wallis and Edward" the event was the abdication, after less than a year on the throne, of King Edward VIII for "the woman I love," American socialite Wallis Simpson.

The problem is not the love story, which was self-evidently true, but the "touching" part. Both Wallis and Edward's nasty and pathetic characters have been airbrushed to make them more palatable as love interests we could identify with. Wallis, twice-divorced, promiscuous and grasping, is played as a sentimental ingénue who is tormented -- oh tormented! - that Edward would give up the throne for little ol' her. For his part, Edward's petulance and immaturity are portrayed as a broad-minded quest for independence from the tradition-bound confines of rule. The film doesn't mention that the reason he broke protocol about which way he would face on the realm's coinage was to show the part in his hair. Now I'm not big on tradition, but one might hope for a more portentous reason for breaking with centuries-old practice than that.

One might argue that forcing a human being to fit into the behavioral straightjacket of the British monarchy is neither good nor kind. We have seen enough examples of that in the last 25 years. But to imagine a king with as little regard for his people or his role as Edward is dumbfounding. I'd say the Brits dodged a bullet when he abdicated. Paved the way, I'd say, for B-B-B-Bertie and his lovely daughter, Elizabeth! A film to skip.

Extremely good acting.Different from the other movies about this pair, in that, it tells the story more from Wallis viewpoint.I very much enjoy British films about British people, especially the Royals.

In a nutshell, the acting was superb as to be expected from veteran actors Joely Richardson and Stephen Campbell Moore. Richardson, who already has a penchant for portraying decadent characters as tortured souls, including portraying Queen Marie Antoinette, also expectedly portrayed Wallis Simpson as the opposite of her reputation in the 1936 abdication crisis.

One always wishes to see the other side of the story and see the point of view from the principal characters themselves. But while it's in vogue now to always go against the prevailing point of view at the time, it's not that nice to see an obviously one-sided and biased story. Yes, the script was sympathetic to Wallis and Edward but it also employed the cookie-cutter good vs. evil, hero vs. villain, white vs. black differences here. For example, on the one side, you have King George V, Queen Mary of Teck and Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin who doesn't like Mrs. Simpson for being a divorcee. Why they don't like her being a divorcee with two living husbands, as someone who had an affair with the king while she is still married to a living husband, was never brought up as an issue in this story. Rather, this was used as the biggest turning point for a "you and me against the world" scenario that made the story even more romantic -- an anti-fairy tale with real life as its roots to paint a more sympathetic view of Mrs. Simpson.

I guess the producers and directors chose to omit the parts as to how Mrs. Simpson actually went through with her courtship with Edward. Up to the end of the film, one really wonders as to how a woman with no good background and a warm wedding ring on her hand could have such a hold on a king. Joely Richardson depicts Wallis Simpson as a gentle and refined woman who had the opportunity to present her wit in 'some' occasions but biographers and historians are sure to refute this. It is said that Wallis Simpson has had domineering ways, something that Edward finds unique and appealing as compared to the docile women surrounding him. But of course, this is not how this movie portrays her. She is portrayed as an innocent little wife who is stuck in a loveless yet convenient marriage but cannot help succumb to the charms of a king. Yeah, right. That sounds like it has more sense than a fairy tale!

I am not against having another point of view of Wallis and Edward or have them painted in a different light. I am not against a more sympathetic portrayal and movie of them either. That was what I was looking for when I saw this. But a good movie will always portray a balanced view especially if these can easily be verified or refuted in history! I think there will be more sympathy for Wallis and Edward if truthfully, they tried their best to live out their love despite thinking of their country or at least their family.

But somehow, these attempts to create such sympathies enough to make Wallis a saint is too much! She was no innocent. She was married and still married when she saw this king ascend the throne. Think about it.

I am going through a British period in movies - the complete Upstairs Downstairs is currently in rotation on my DVD player, interspersed with various productions about British royalty. Wallis & Edward is lavishly produced, beautiful to look at, but I found it to be a curiously detached telling of the story. The major hitch for me is the character of Wallis (and I don't have a problem calling her a "character," because it doesn't feel like this production was exhaustively researched).

As portrayed by Joely Richardson, Wallis doesn't seem to know what she wants. She pretty much swings with the whims of others. At the outset, she is content in a marriage that is clearly not a love match but at least features affection. At first Ernest seems like a bit of a buffoon. His approach to life is pretty much "grab all the gusto you can," so when the Prince takes a liking to Wallis, Ernest is all for it. He loves being the flavor of the month and does not mind when Wallis spends time alone with the Prince. I have no doubt Ernest knew there was some funny business going on and took that as his cue to move on with his life. Fundamentally he comes across as a decent human being, if muddled in his priorities.

As for the Prince, he is obsessed with Wallis to the point of being a little scary. Wallis doesn't seem to feel quite as much passion, but she does go along for the ride. She quickly becomes overwhelmed with the press and public attention and pretty much spends the rest of the movie in a puddle of tears.

The Prince (later King) seems totally self-centered and determined to marry Wallis. Despite some perfunctory footage where he is very much at ease with and obviously beloved by the common folk, and a later line from Wallis about how he loves the country and is a great King, it usually does not seem like he has anything else on his mind but Wallis. In the background there is a lot of political consternation and maneuvering, until Edward decides what is going to happen. To me the most touching part by far was the weeping Bertie listening to the abdication speech on the radio.

Is this the most romantic story ever? Based on this recounting, I would say it is more about the monarchy and entitlement and the decision to break away and not play by the rules. So, not exactly what I expected. But the cinematography is sumptuous, the costumes are to die for. Not a bad way to spend a couple of hours.

The tale has been told a million times, but this one takes the view point of Wallis, who comes across as almost as tragic as Edward who gave up his throne for her. Good acting and well done script put this production over the top. Not too long, and paced beautifully. Well worth watching.