I suppose there is the germ of a good idea here, and 2011's "W.E." is not unsuccessful. As a directing effort by Madonna, it's okay. And you have to give her credit since she had to know everyone would be gunning for her.In 1998, the estate of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor goes up for auction. One person particularly interested in it is Wally Winthrop (Abbie Cornish), who is very taken with the love story between Wallis Simpson and the Duke of Windsor, and particularly Wallis' life and other marriages. The film takes us through the courtship and marriage of the Duke and Duchess as well as Wally's disintegrating marriage to William, and then her relationship with the Soviet security guard she meets at the auction house.Personally I've never found anything romantic or sympathetic about Wallis and David. I think Wallis was a great excuse for David to duck responsibility and heap it onto his stammering brother. And neither he nor Wallis thought about what they were going to do once they were married. And what did they do? Roamed the world, showing up at a location when it was in season, and making friends who would write books about them after they died. By the time the couple realized what they had done, it was too late. No breaking up the great romance.Nevertheless, as many times as their story has been told, it's still fascinating, and much more interesting than the marriage of Wally Winthrop and her husband. Not to mention, there is a fantastic performance by Andrea Risborough as Wallis. As Edward, James D'Arcy is incredibly dashing and attractive. It's really the stronger story, and Madonna might have been better off just telling their tale, using a different point of view than others have in the past.The moral seems to be to take a risk and go for happiness. It's a fine moral; I'm just not sure I would use the Duke and Duchess of Windsor as inspiration. Was theirs a great love story? I'm sure it was, and no doubt the Duke's death hit the Duchess very hard. But they were human beings who undoubtedly fought, took one another for granted, and had some misgivings. And that's the big problem with idealizing any romance - in the end, the people we idealize are too much like us.

I was surprised by how satisfying this film is. I generally don't like the plot device of having a contemporary story parallel and intersect with a historical story (e.g., in Julie and Julia, the character of Julie drove me batty and I wanted her to just go away) but this film comes at that story strategy in an original and interesting way. The production values--the lighting, music, costumes, sets--are beautiful, clearly sparing no expense. Andrea Riseborough is compelling as Wallis and comes closer to making her "real" than any other performance I've seen. The film is committed to telling the story from the perspective of Wallis, but for me she is still hard to grasp as a person. Something about her remains closed and hard, vacant. I remain fascinated with her to some extent, however, and the film went a substantial distance toward making her flesh and blood. The acting is great across the board. I like that they made the Queen Mother rather a bitch. The film seems well researched and reflects an earnest attempt to add something new to the story of the Duke and Duchess. At a few points, I feel like Madonna is talking about herself, making the story about her, but that's not surprising. It was minimal and doesn't mar the movie. I'm not a Madonna fan, but I liked this film very much.

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.