Cannes Film Festival 2013

Review: The good and the bad of Madonna's 'W.E'

Drama features a fantastic performance by Andrea Riseborough

  • Critic's Rating C
  • Readers' Rating B+
<p>Andrea Riseborough and James D'Arcy in Madonna's second directorial effort, "W.E."</p>

Andrea Riseborough and James D'Arcy in Madonna's second directorial effort, "W.E."

Credit: The Weinstein Company

Are you a fan of Madonna?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

TORONTO - Something peculiar happened at the press screening for Madonna's "W.E" this morning at the 2011 Toronto International Film Festival.  Unlike, the packed first showing at the Venice Film Festival less than two weeks ago, there were no unexpected irruptions of laughter.  And you didn't have press passionately ripping the drama as they walked out of the theater.  In fact, the reaction was much more subdued.  Granted, the Venice reaction scared away many of the industry and press who might have seen it (about 40% of the theater was full), but there was no flurry of "The sky is falling! Madonna directed a movie!" tweets afterward.  Having now seen "W.E" with a roomful of non-Venice critics, it only convinces this pundit that the reviewers that day were either consciously or subconsciously looking for anything in the film to rip its director and rip they did.  And while their scathing reviews were harsh (um, did anyone see "Anonymous"?), let's be clear; "W.E" is not a good movie. Yes, it has serious problems, but it also has a lot of impressive things about it as well.

The biggest mistake Madonna and co-screenwriter Alex Keshishian ("Truth or Dare," the underrated "Love and Other Disasters") make is in the structure of their story (usually a fatal problem).  "W.E" centers on Wallie (Abbie Cornish), a rich doctor's wife struggling in modern day Manhattan to understand why her husband is so cold to her.  Is it because they cannot conceive children? Is he having an affair?  Or, perhaps they just truly don't love each other?  It matters little because after their first scene together it's clear the husband (a misused Richard Coyle) won't matter much to the viewer in the long run.   Depressed at her situation, Wallie returns to her old professional haunt Sotheby's where an exhibit of items owned by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, are being auctioned off.  Wallie, it seems, has always been fascinated by the story of the 20th Century's most romantic "fairytale" and spends the next few days going through every item set for auction.  As things get worse at home with her husband, Madonna flashes back to the Wallis and Edward story in a fairly obvious contrast between Wallie and Simpson.  Eventually, Wallie leaves her husband after falling for a Russian security guard (but fantastic piano player) at the auction house (Oscar Issacs).  

Want More...

Madonna?
  • Madonna-classic_thumbnail
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.
To be blunt, the modern day portion of the film doesn't work at all.  Cornish is simply awful looking like a low-rent Charlize Theron making Wallie seem like a bore and evoking little sympathy for her.  This is mostly the fault of the script, but even when Issacs shows up trying to bring any chemistry or life to their characters relationship she's like a blank wall.  It doesn't help that the film spends too much time in the auction house (product placement?) or Wallie's upper crust New York life seems hard to find that sad.  And, you can't blame Madonna for Cornish's uninspired turn.  Cornish has been weak before ("Stop-Loss," "Limitless") and it's unclear if any director could have pulled something interesting out of her here.  Where the film works and is most fascinating is in depicting Simpson's life.

Madonna, who admits she's been long fascinated by the Windsor love affair, makes an excellent point when Wallie verbalizes that everyone always talks about what Edward gave up in renouncing his throne, but no one mentions what Simpson lost.  Beautifully shot and executed, the period scenes depict the love affair between Simspson (Andrea Riseborough) and Edward (James D'Arcy) are mostly from Simpson's point of view and hint that as much as she loved the King she was also just as trapped by his obsession for her.  For example, in a unique 180 from last year's Oscar winner "The King's Speech" (also released domestically by The Weinstein Company), Wallis sees Queen Elizabeth, Duchess of York (aka The Queen Mother) as scheming to make sure her husband, King George VI isn't overshadowed by the in exile former King (Edward) and his new bride retuning to England.  Madonna succeeds in creating genuine sympathy for Wallis while not masking the fact this was a woman who divorced two husband and knew what she was getting into when tempting Edward while still a married woman.  Moreover, this material is powerful enough on its own to carry an entire film.  Madonna and Keshishian only complicate matters by trying to tie it into a lame and predictable contemporary tale.

Unlike the miscast Cornish, Riseborough is fantastic as Simpson as she basically stealing every scene she's in.  Moviegoers have mostly seen her in supporting roles in films such as "Happy-Go-Lucky," "Made in Dagenham" and "Never Let Me Go," but the talent she displays here is one reason her star is rising and she'll be starring alongside Keira Knightley and Saorise Ronan in Joe Wright's upcoming adaptation of "Anna Karenina."  D'Arcy is solid as Edward VII, thankfully dropping the effeminate mannerisms Guy Pearce gave the Prince in "King's Speech" and giving the historical figure a sense that he's truly aware of the consequence of his actions.

Having worked with some of the most visually iconic music directors and filmmakers in the world over her career such as David Fincher, Mark Romanek and Alan Parker it's no surprise the legendary music icon has a fantastic eye.  Working with cinematographer Hagen Bogdanski ("The Lives of Others," "The Young Victoria") Madonna gorgeously recreates 1930's England and has a clear idea of how she wants to communicate visually with the audience.  And while she tends to use too much music throughout the picture, there are moments when Abel Korzeniowski's gorgeous score is used to help fashion some wonderfully cinematic moments (again, mostly in the period portions).

Debuting at Venice was obviously not a smart move for "W.E."  Instead, it could have benefited from a premiere at a smaller festival such as AFI Fest or the London Film Festival.  The picture is not an awards season player, but it's certainly not a Razzie contender either.  Hopefully, critics and the media will give Madonna more credit the next time around.  Because if you know anything about Madonna these early reactions will only fuel her to direct once again and prove she has true cinematic talent.  "W.E" proves she's certainly getting better.

"W.E" is currently scheduled to open on Dec. 9.

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    GiannisDrakos

    Oh please. nice pathetic, thinly veiled attempt to save the Turkey of Toronto. people like you who feels and and sorry for Madonna's failures are just to intimidated to tell the truth. THE FILM IS A FAILURE just like the other two dozen films she's made that have all bombed.

    September 12, 2011 at 5:46PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Chloe Canacalon LOL And what do YOU have to say about the film? Any remarks on its cinematography> Score? What about the actors's performances? Or are you here just to hate on Madonna? yeah. I thought so. Good use of your time.

      September 12, 2011 at 8:53PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    briguyx

    Well, yes, I would blame Madonna for Cornish's uninspired turn, as Madonna is the one who hired her...

    September 12, 2011 at 9:01PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    SuperAmanda

    I saw this film tonight at the Toronto Film Fest and I loved it. Madonna rules.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:31AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Amanda Whelan

    I saw this film tonight at the Toronto Film Fest. It was excellent. Madonna rules

    September 13, 2011 at 3:33AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Amanda Whelan

    I saw this film tonight at the Toronto Film Fest. It was excellent. Madonna rulesccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc

    September 13, 2011 at 3:34AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    li85

    Considering it doesn't depict the true story of these two, being that they were also Nazi sympathizers. The fact that she fails to acknowledge that in her film is disgusting, far from some grand love story. The film is completely mangled by falsehoods. There are historical records clearly left out of the movie. That is just poor judgement and sad. Madonna needs to stick to what she's good at.ki

    September 13, 2011 at 4:50AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    li85

    Considering it doesn't depict the true story of these two, being that they were also Nazi sympathizers. The fact that she fails to acknowledge that in her film is disgusting, far from some grand love story. The film is completely mangled by falsehoods. There are historical records clearly left out of the movie. That is just poor judgement and sad. Madonna needs to stick to what she's good at.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:51AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Terry Jackson

    Wow. It's really odd to read the comments. It seems like those who like it do so only because they are Madonna fans. And it seems like those who don't only do so because they aren't.

    I am a Madonna fan. I believe she has it in her to be a good director. I do not, however, believe she has it in her to be a good writer. And I do not believe that she even necessarily knows what stories are good are worthy of being put on the big screen. If she puts her ego aside, she might be able to put her considerable skills (her great attention to detail and a keen understanding of what looks and sounds good) to use.

    terryjackson1nyc@aol.com

    September 14, 2011 at 1:58PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Derek

    Everyone sitting around us said they quite enjoyed the film. Even on the way out I could overhear people's positive comments. Critics need to get a grip sometimes - enjoy a film for an experience not as a report card.

    September 16, 2011 at 11:05AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Derek Shane

    I'm surprised how the industry seems to have it's head up it's ass on this one. Everyone sitting around us said they quite enjoyed the film. Even on the way out I could overhear people's positive comments. Critics need to get a grip sometimes - enjoy a film for an experience not as a report card.

    September 16, 2011 at 11:08AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    peter ramsden

    James D'Arcy at 6'3" is a giant compared to the diminutive Duke of Windsor who is variously reported at between 5'5 and 5'8. Is this so that he can look like a greek god in the beach scenes?

    January 24, 2012 at 7:53AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    peter Ramsden

    James D'Arcy, though wonderful, is totally miscast in the film. He is a hunky 6'3" whereas the Duke of Windsor was a somewhat weedy 5'8" (and in some reports as small as 5'5")

    January 24, 2012 at 7:56AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      John Thank God for a balanced review. The period scenes were indeed great, Riseborough is fabulous and Madonna's visual eye is faultless. Bummer of a modern story, but the rest is very praiseworthy. It is a ritual sport amongst critics to trash Madonna (like they tried to trash Streisand, who is mind you, a far superior filmmaker.)

      June 2, 2012 at 9:54AM EST

Get Instant Alerts on Awards Campaign

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web