The bad thing about messing up history and making a movie about a real person that is not based on facts but fiction is that we tend to remember the movie. So, now thousands of people will believe that Kelly saved Monaco (de Gaulle never went to any ball, the situation was negotiated peacefully with France at the end). They will believe that the marriage with the prince did not include numerous extramarital affairs on both sides and they will believe that Grace was as tall and elegant as Nicole Kidman, the perfect princess. Too bad, because reality was good enough. The movie is beautiful, superbly esthetic, but that is all.
Grace of Monaco
2014
Action / Biography / Drama / Romance
Plot summary
1961. Princess Grace, the former Grace Kelly, has been married to Prince Rainier of Monaco now for five years, they having two young children. Her transition from famed Oscar-winning Hollywood actress from a background as the daughter of a wealthy millionaire owner of a brickworks in Philadelphia to European princess of a small, exclusive and tight-knit principality has been a difficult one, the Monagasques who have been less than welcoming to her in her outspoken American nature. Even in her official charity work as head of a women's committee for the Red Cross, the other committee members largely grumble under their breath about her as their leader. Despite loving Rainier, their marriage is a largely distant one emotionally as he focuses on his role as monarch, now an especially difficult time in the on-going tension between Monaco and France under the leadership of Charles de Gaulle, who would, if he could, annex Monaco back under French control. She has a small entourage of trusted advisers who lead her through the maze of her life, including an American Catholic priest, Father Francis Tucker, currently based in Monaco, and she bringing back into the fold Rupert Allan, who worked as her Hollywood publicist. Despite the unofficial roles of the members of this entourage, Grace has never had official guidance into all that it means to be Princess of Monaco. She has always been courted by the Hollywood community to continue acting, the thoughts of doing so stronger now than ever in her general unhappiness, with a concrete high profile role offered to her by her oft late career collaborator Sir Alfred Hitchcock. She returning to acting would be seen by the Monagasques and probably Rainier as she turning her back on her royal duties. What Grace decides to do under the circumstances takes into account her own happiness, the welfare of their two children who nonetheless will inherit the throne, whether she loves Rainier enough especially in light of an action by France, and whether she sees herself as Princess, and what she can do for the monarchy, the principality, and its subjects in light of her relationship with Rainier.
Uploaded by: OTTO
Director
Top cast
Tech specs
720p.BLU 1080p.BLUMovie Reviews
Let's mess up history then, shall we?
bad soap opera
It's 1961. Former Hollywood star Grace Kelly (Nicole Kidman) is married to Rainier III, Prince of Monaco (Tim Roth) with two kids. Hitchcock tries to lure her back to Hollywood for his movie Marnie. France is fighting a colonial war in Algeria and is demanding taxation from Monaco. Charles De Gaulle is threatening invasion. Grace Kelly is suffocating under the pressure and decides to do the movie.
I came into this movie knowing that it's been critically panned but not necessarily why. At first, I thought the movie isn't that bad. There is definitely artistic license being taken with the historical events but that's par for the course. Then after twenty to thirty minutes, it became clear that something is glaringly wrong with this movie. The overwrought melodrama with the historical events left a bitter taste. Finally, I read that very little of it is historically accurate which makes a lot of sense. None of it rang true when I saw it. It's like a bad soap opera.
Some of the visuals are beautifully shot but sometimes it goes overboard like it's trying way too hard. There are many ridiculous things like her frustration day after day getting acting lessons. The screenwriter should remember that she was actually a professional actress. It's fine that she's told to act a certain way but Grace Kelly could easily achieve it all by herself without any trouble or any coaching. It becomes a group of fictional incorrect characters in a surreal play that intersects sometimes with historical events.
A lot of gloss and style, but not a lot of substance or grace
Despite the negative reviews, this reviewer saw 'Grace of Monaco' because of its subject matter, Grace Kelly being one of the most naturally beautiful and full-of-depth-and-grace classic film stars, and because Nicole Kidman has given a lot of good performances in her career.
Unfortunately 'Grace of Monaco' disappointed heavily. There are some great biopics around ('Amadeus' and 'The Elephant Man' being prime examples') but also some naff ones. While not quite as poor as 'Diana' or 'William and Kate', films with much worse editing and feel far more like Lifetime projects, 'Grace of Monaco' is one of the naff ones if not entirely without honour.
The best thing about 'Grace of Monaco' is the production values, the sumptuous costumes, sets and scenery looking absolutely breath-taking often. The film is very nicely shot too, though it's not without its dizzying or pedestrian moments in the editing.
It is agreed that Nicole Kidman is miscast, which will be and has been a turn-off for most, being at least a decade too old, four inches too tall (Kelly was tall but not as much as Kidman who is one of the tallest actresses in Hollywood) and not as natural a beauty as evident in some stiff and plastic facial expressions. However, it is whether she gave a good enough performance despite the miscasting that matters, and Kidman actually gives a very committed performance, that's charismatic and deeply felt too. The other good performance is the gleefully enjoyable Hitchcock of Roger Ashton-Griffiths, who does try to bring needed urgency to the proceedings, the culminating banquet actually being the film's dramatic highlight.
However, Tim Roth is too archetypal and too much of a dork as Rainier, while Robert Lindsay plays his very roughly drawn character too broadly and Derek Jacobi and particularly Frank Langella are wasted. There are some odd accents going on as well, as well as a lack of chemistry, and the characters are bland or annoying stereotypes, some not feeling relevant to the story and are as plastic as Kidman's Botox.
Faring worst are the very empty and half-baked script that sounds like soap opera past its sell by date, an overwrought and over-bearing music score that is too reminiscent of a comedy or a heavy-handed drama and the direction which sees violent and frequently jarring shifts in tone that suggests that those responsible had no idea what the film was trying to be or what to focus on. The story tries to be careful not to offend, but ends up being dull, dramatically soggy and laughably ridiculous with an overlong running time that makes some of the story feel stretched.
Overall, hugely disappointing, looks good and Kidman's performance is committed but what gives a film weight, depth and staying power is lost in translation. 3/10 Bethany Cox