This movie obviously had a tremendous budget and no expense was spared in their sets and quality of costumes and locations which are superb and the real 'star' of this movie. It appears that the director really took great pains to ensure authenticity with regard to Wallis Simpson's wardrobe as well as the Royal's wardrobe and their lifestyle. I was quite mesmerized with the laissez faire life that Wallis and what was to be the future King had created and this movie if to be believed portrays it very well. The parallel story in this movie whilst interesting really does not add anything to the already complex and intriguing life of Wallis and Edward; therefore, had the director focused more on W.E., this movie may have been more successful.You can sort of discern in this movie that the Director is 'thinking' out loud to themselves in the way some of the scenes are shot. The director has her actors over emphasize actions in order to convey an emotion that the director thinks is subliminal to the audience when in fact it is just too obvious that the director is a bit immature in their direction. Had this director allowed emotions to develop sincerely without the obvious conjecture of 'set-ups', then again this movie would have been dually successful.

W.E. (2011)Don't even think about who directed this. Think of it as a multi-layered, multi-era epic centering on the marriage of King Edward and his American love, Wallis Simpson. He's the English king who abdicated for love. But this is the story of the love, Wallis, the woman who gave up as much as the king did, or so the thrust of the movie suggests.It's rather good! It mixes a bit of fantasizing with a contemporary woman, Wally, finding her obsession with the Wallis of history (1930s) is more than coincidence. The narrative flips between several parts of the royal story before WWII and the contemporary version, which includes a budding relationship with a guard at an exhibition of Wallis Simpson memorabilia.Whether you find either story convincing doesn't matter. One of them is of course based on history, and is interesting if you don't already know the facts. The other is an echo of the same, with the woman having to become strong and independent just as her earlier namesake did. What is most interesting is the way the two stories are inter-spliced, including some scenes where the two times zones are mixed (apparently in Wally's head, but it's very real to the audience). We start to see how often and completely women are stuck in situations they would not choose if they knew ahead of time. It's about independence, yes, but also failure to be independent and the consequences. And maybe it's about learning a little from history.The director? Madonna. Yes, the singer from Michigan. The director of the terrible bomb "Filth and Wisdom." Here there is some real cinematic intelligence. It's a good movie. Flawed, a bit longer than it needs to be, a bit forced in the layering of stories, but well acted and conceived.

Madonna's second feature as director begins in 1998, where lonely Wally Winthrop (Abbie Cornish) becomes obsessed with the story of King Edward's VIII's abdication of the British throne for a woman he loved, the American divorcée Wallis Simpson (Andrea Riseborough). Wally's personal life is on the cusp of a dramatic change. On the surface, her marriage seems solid; her husband William is a successful therapist and the couple is envied by friends and relatives. But in reality, miscommunication takes the lead during our first encounter with the doctor at a dinner in his honor. Wally is not sitting beside him; and he either doesn't notice or acknowledge her presence. As she says, William is a smart manipulator, "he can use my words against me". He doesn't want her to work, but doesn't want children either. Wally tries to overcome her bitter reality by daydreaming about images from history.Wally ends up spending her long and lonely days at a Sotheby's auction house, looking at objects from the royal estate in Windsor and researching the doomed affair between King Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson. The parallel lives meet through the imagination of Willis triggered by an object, a letter or a photo and sometimes an accessory she wears herself. On many occasions, she becomes one with her idol, getting inspired by her strength against all odds.The film cuts between Wally's self-discovery – which is noticed by a widowed Russian intellectual working as a security guard at the auction house – and the glamorous early days of King Edward and Wallis Simpson's relationship. The past and the present accentuate the similarities between the two women; one punished for being loved by a king, and the other punished by her insensitive husband.Last year's Oscar winner "The King's Speech" gave us a glimpse of the relationship between King Edward VIII and Simpson, casting Guy Pearce as the beleaguered king. "W.E." develops this section. This is by no means a historical film, it's like a poem narrated against background music. One notable feature of the film is the omnipresence of music, but it certainly isn't harmful.Andrea Riseborough's performance elevates her above the act of impersonation to reveal the character of a woman condemned by history. Her powerful acting is worth mentioning, making her one of the most promising rising actors in Britain today. Similarly, Madonna's directing shows a cinematic maturity previously unseen.If you're a dreamer who is questioning why a king would give up his throne for a woman, or if you just want to let go with a memorable love story, then this film is your answer.

This is the story of a man who gave up the kingdom for a woman and a woman who gave up everything for the man. Still there are absolutely no chemistry between them whatsoever. The movie totally misses it's mark. No passion, no sex, no feelings - nothing. You missed out on this one Madonna. I a movie are to show us how true passion is bigger than everything - yes, there has to be passion involved. And another thing - spoiler coming - in the contemporary story a woman are married to a cheating husband, who also abuses her - still SHE ask HIM: "Why won't you have sex with me". Come on... please! Why would she be stupid enough to want to have sex with a cheating and abusing husband? This movie really sucks and i would not recommend it to anybody.