The Murder of Princess Diana

Forget the fact there was no reason to make this film, a highly fictionalized account of the events surrounding the death of Princess Diana. If the subject were anyone other than she, it still would be a dreadful, a poorly constructed movie that makes little sense. The central character, an American journalist working for a British publication of some sort (what it is never is made clear, in keeping with all the other missing details), is a joke, blabbing everything she's uncovered to everyone she encounters with no thought of protecting her story or sources. A Hitchcockian plot centered on what supposedly was an international conspiracy should have some mystery, intrigue, suspense, thrills, a hook that keeps you riveted, anxious to know whodunit and why. This skips along with neither rhyme nor reason, raises suspicions but fails to confirm them one way or the other, and leaves the viewer scratching his head when it's over. Given the option to rate it zero, I would. Avoid this one like the plague.

If the title of this flick did not clue you in, let me leave absolutely no doubt; this is pure crap, and done in poor taste. It is emotional porn for conspiracy nuts(and for any of those reading this, no, this doesn't even bother to answer all of the questions it raises). I watched it to the end merely to be able to honestly review it, as I could figure out from before it began what the movie only proved; that it is a piece of exploitative, sensationalist garbage, put together for people who require meaningless tragedies to be explained by ridiculous coverups, and in doing so, tearing open wounds that could(and should) be allowed to heal. You know what, I have no problem with those who choose to believe things like what this picture proposes; just don't spread it like this, because as much as I hope that few rely on fictional films over the news mediums for their information, I don't believe that that goes for everyone. No, I tend to favor artistic license over taking care of those who are too ignorant to look into something for themselves before taking whatever Hollywood(or in this case, Lifetime) feeds them as the truth; however, there is nothing special to this, there is little reason for this thing to exist. All it does is put images to what some decided to think really happened. Perhaps you've read what I wrote about The Ghost Writer, and are considering me a hypocrite; what you must remember is that that was an example of a carefully crafted experience(like it or not, can you deny its ability to build atmosphere?), it did *not* use anyone's real name, and finally, it was far closer to being accurate. I haven't read the book that this is based upon, but I doubt it's better than this adaptation. Every character is one-note. The acting is decent at best(the accents can be hilarious; I swear he did not say "digging", that was a K, *not* two G's). Editing and cinematography are fine. There is a little violence and disturbing content in this. I recommend this to its obvious audience. 5/10

I won't discuss any of the historical fact and accuracies and I have no intention of discussing any of the conspiracy theories. I am simply interested in the film as such. Now let's take a look at it.

First of all, the story - since it is based on true events and some scarce evidence, it is coherent and quite easy to follow. The two hours pass by quickly, the pacing is alright and it manages to hold your interest. It doesn't really focus much on Diana, rather on the investigation.

The acting is nothing to write home about, it is on the TV level. No one here will win an Oscar, but that was never the intention here.

The only thing that bothered me here was the romance between the two main characters. It felt shoehorned in and was unbelievable. The film could have done without it.

Approach it with an open mind, don't take it too seriously and bare in mind that some of it could be true.

Only Lifetime TV could produce something this bad. People who believe that Diana was murdered probably also believe in alien abduction. The plot is not believable and while it raises some questions it then fails to provide a satisfactory explanation. Acted on the level of a soap opera, this is the kind of exploitation that provokes baseless conspiracy theories and glibly ignores facts. The whole concept of an American reporter stumbling onto the conspiracy and then blabbing it to everyone she meets is just not credible. It also plays on the prejudice of people who loved " the beautiful princess" but dislike the family into which she married. If you want to see something worthwhile watch Helen Mirren in "The Queen" and listen to Helen Mirren's comments at the Oscar ceremonies. Do not waste your time with this travesty.

I have seen this film yesterday in a Dutch commercial channel and I find it rather a nice film. As a TV film it has already reached the reasonable level as a TV film should be. The acting of the main actor and the actress are reasonably good.

It seems that the mean reason of the negative comment from the other viewers is more heading to the point that they don't want to see any films talking about this tragic event.

At the starting of the film it has already told us that the film has been made not based on "actual facts" but based on the "theories" of a book. That means the audience should be able to decide what they should/would like to believe and what they should treat as fiction lines. If the so call "facts and findings" which we have heard from the official media are really firm enough one hardly will be mislead by the fiction lines of this film. If this fiction film has been skillfully made that it has carried the audience into a "believable" fiction world with exciting fantasy, that means it has been well made, right? By the way, who is that Helen Mirren anyway? Why should one has to listen to her comments at the Oscar ceremonies? Just because she has played a queen role and win a price? Sorry, no way.

Whether this film should have been made? Well, if this is not a film with interesting story plot, the Luxembourg Film Council would hardly have joined the co-production (and probably the co-funding?)of it.

About respect, perhaps viewing all the so call "actual facts" from one side and the so call "fiction lines/theories" from the other side of this case is someway somehow a kind of showing respect to this tragic event.

Anyway, as an ordinary film watcher, I find this film rather nice and is worth to see. It might chill your spine in a lonely rainy night.