A Royal Night Out

This visually intricate film imagines the supposedly true story of English Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret's incognito adventures outside Buckingham Palace on the night of Victory in Europe Day, 8 May 1945. Elizabeth would have been 19 and Margaret 14 when the escapade into the night celebrating the end of six years of death, maiming and privation occurred. It gave some shallow insights into royal life behind the elaborate gates, rattling around in all those rooms with countless aides to assist in most ways, and how ill prepared the princesses appeared to be to deal with the much wider variety of situations and people they encountered. Jack Reynor as Jack, the chap that Princess Elizabeth comes to depend on was my standout performance, and it's hard to fault Sarah Gadon (Princess Elizabeth) and Bel Powley (Margaret). A few scenes were touchingly awkward, such as the frosty breakfast of the morning after, but overall it left me with a bit of the "so what?" It's easy enough watching, didn't drag, and had a bit of tension from wondering what might go wrong, but for me it was just a bit too Nice and Sweet.

I'm a UK republican (not to be confused with a US republican of course) and I don't believe in the institution of Royalty. I acknowledge that this might discolour my appreciation of the film. If you have a fondness for the institution of 'our' Royal family you might enjoy this film more than I did. It's a completely fictional story about something that never happened at a peak point of flag waving nationalism. You can probably track the decline of British image of empire and royalty and traditionalism from there ironically. Of course the (now) Queen never went out with Princess Margaret in the fashion that has been portrayed and I'm sure that the truth would offer no form of cinematic fascination at all. So instead they play the 'what if' game of allowing the two princesses to slip their chaperons and made off into the London night. The whole thing is a bit pantomime though to be fair. It is difficult to explain the different contrasting portrayals of the (in this) idiot Margaret and the sensible and instinctively capable Elizabeth. Other than for comic purposes of course. Margaret is also (for dramatic purposes) the more 'plain' of the two in appearance - which suits the narrative of 'the chosen one' being Elizabeth. In truth I'd punt on Margaret being the sharper and more worldly of the two - she seemed that way in her life - and to be frank she was always the more beautiful too. The Royal family are also portrayed in the comic realm of being quite 'normal' except of course for the fact that dad can call the army in to look after his girls when they go out. The footmen etc the 'we don't carry money' gag (used more than once) - all used without a sense of shame. The whole of London society is portrayed as high or low born with either '*-er-ney' good charm but either inside a pub or a brothel, or snobbish officership inside the Ritz etc. It's quite two dimensional. Of course everyone is united in their love of the King and his family and there is a picture of them propped on every mantel piece - no matter who owns the mantel. This is misty-eyed revisionism for a purpose. It can't possibly be true - no more than it is now. Hardened Soho gangster and pimp puts a protective wing around the young Margaret - neither with sexual motives nor anything more cynical in mind than getting his prostitutes into a secret party at the Chelsea barracks. To be fair the film does allow the main male 'low born' character to reflect on the bitterness that more than just himself in isolation must have felt (and still do) about the concept of Royalty. Regardless you do get the impression that, in the end, he saw the error of his ways and learned to love the Royal family too (because after all, aren't they smashing?). It's predictable. It's soft. It's modestly entertaining (or at least will pass the time). It's also instantly forgettable without any outstanding performances or messages.

I was very excited to see this film - it seemed like a dream come true when I saw a poster of it. Later on I found out that it is based on a real fact - I could only hope that the creators would not go for too many cheap thrills. Well - they did and they didn't. There were plenty of moments that made me cringe and feel disappointed (useless guarding officers - pompous and idiotic; the brothel - what on Earth for?; the running around) - on the other hand there were plenty of opportunities for cheap thrills that were not used and for that I am grateful. The scenery, clothes and hair styles were wonderfully engrossing and seemed authentic - a rare treat. All in all I have to say that the film was good - there were poignant moments as well as OTT ones; it did convey that very British sense of duty and loyalty which I admire a lot.

16 May 2015 Film of Choice at The Plaza Dorchester Tonight - A Royal Night Out. On 8 May 1945 all of Britain was celebration Victory in Europe and behind the doors of Buckingham Palace two daughters were asking their parents if they might be allowed to join in. The two daughters were Princess Elizabeth, heir to the Throne and her sister Princess Margaret. This store is rumoured to be based partly on fact and I would very much like to have heard it was all true. With Rupert Everett starring as King George and Emily Watson playing his wife Queen Elizabeth this film is a rather jolly jape depicting what could have happened if the two princesses had been allowed out on the town for the whole night. Everett and Watson were uncanny as the King and Queen, and the girls bore more than a little resemblance to the Princesses ....although costume, deportment and hairstyle helped enormously. The plot was a little like I imagine that day to be, uproariously out of control but most joyful. My favourite line in the whole film was when Lilibet was asking Jack the airman to assist her to make the most of 'an opportunity to be ordinary on the most extraordinary day of her life'. I wonder if the Queen has seen this and if so, was she a little wistful.

It is VE Day, and Britain is celebrating, with much partying in the streets. The two young princesses Elizabeth and Margaret see an opportunity to go out and party with everybody else, a once in a lifetime opportunity, never to be repeated. With the King's permission, and against the better judgement of their mother, out they go with two young army officers as chaperones. And then they lose their escorts... and get separated... It is true that the two princesses did go out on the night of VE Day, but this film is not so much what happened, but more what could have happened but almost certainly didn't, particularly given that the longer it goes on, the less likely it becomes. For all that, it is good fun. Think The Hangover, reimagined in 1945 London with two rather naive and unworldly young women, one rather prim and the other up for pretty nearly anything. The period feel is effective (albeit you sometimes have the feeling that, had the camera pulled back another few feet, present day would have intruded rather rudely). The girls playing the fictionalised princesses are both excellent, with Sarah Gadon having a distinct look of the young Princess Elizabeth about her. Bel Powley lets us see the Margaret who grew up to be fond of a drink or two (and other pleasures) but who, at this point, is simply innocent but keen to explore. And there were times when, as a Brit, I found it very moving. Ultimately, it's a bit of fluff, but it's a very enjoyable one.

This is not a documentary so don't expect it to be accurate or even the slightest bit true. It is based very loosely around Princess Elizabeth and Margaret going out into the crowds at Buckingham Palace on the night peace was declared (VE Day)....that's where the similarity stops. Rupert Everett as the King is such a bad choice, but again, it's not meant to be taken seriously. I liked the character portrayed as Princess Margaret and also the Queen Mother... they are likable and funny. The whole story is quite well written and very funny in places...as long as you don't take it too seriously and try to work out fact from fiction. All in all I thought it was very entertaining.....

I'm a UK republican (not to be confused with a US republican of course) and I don't believe in the institution of Royalty. I acknowledge that this might discolour my appreciation of the film. If you have a fondness for the institution of 'our' Royal family you might enjoy this film more than I did. It's a completely fictional story about something that never happened at a peak point of flag waving nationalism. You can probably track the decline of British image of empire and royalty and traditionalism from there ironically. Of course the (now) Queen never went out with Princess Margaret in the fashion that has been portrayed and I'm sure that the truth would offer no form of cinematic fascination at all. So instead they play the 'what if' game of allowing the two princesses to slip their chaperons and made off into the London night. The whole thing is a bit pantomime though to be fair. It is difficult to explain the different contrasting portrayals of the (in this) idiot Margaret and the sensible and instinctively capable Elizabeth. Other than for comic purposes of course. Margaret is also (for dramatic purposes) the more 'plain' of the two in appearance - which suits the narrative of 'the chosen one' being Elizabeth. In truth I'd punt on Margaret being the sharper and more worldly of the two - she seemed that way in her life - and to be frank she was always the more beautiful too. The Royal family are also portrayed in the comic realm of being quite 'normal' except of course for the fact that dad can call the army in to look after his girls when they go out. The footmen etc the 'we don't carry money' gag (used more than once) - all used without a sense of shame. The whole of London society is portrayed as high or low born with either '*-er-ney' good charm but either inside a pub or a brothel, or snobbish officership inside the Ritz etc. It's quite two dimensional. Of course everyone is united in their love of the King and his family and there is a picture of them propped on every mantel piece - no matter who owns the mantel. This is misty-eyed revisionism for a purpose. It can't possibly be true - no more than it is now. Hardened Soho gangster and pimp puts a protective wing around the young Margaret - neither with sexual motives nor anything more cynical in mind than getting his prostitutes into a secret party at the Chelsea barracks. To be fair the film does allow the main male 'low born' character to reflect on the bitterness that more than just himself in isolation must have felt (and still do) about the concept of Royalty. Regardless you do get the impression that, in the end, he saw the error of his ways and learned to love the Royal family too (because after all, aren't they smashing?). It's predictable. It's soft. It's modestly entertaining (or at least will pass the time). It's also instantly forgettable without any outstanding performances or messages.

This film is pure fantasy, taking a very small amount of historical accuracy, and blending it with a lot of nonsense. It's well performed in places, but it reeks of wish fulfilment, and only a very good performance from Jack Reynor (who was also great in John Carney's 'Sing Street') saves this film from being worse than it is. Very forgettable. Much like historical accuracy.

Based on true events. The war is over and VE day is beginning. War that we are lucky enough to not see the destruction and terrifying events it brings with it. Loved this film and is hilarious. The Princesses are allowed to go out under the watchful eye of two minders after some persuasion from their parents the King and Queen. While they are out Princess Margaret slips away to go somewhere more interesting. It shows Princess Elizabeth desperately trying to find her younger sister Princess Margaret whilst she is enjoying the celebrations. Meanwhile Princess Elizabeth befriends and man who helps her find her sister. Loved the music, the characters, and storyline.