Lady D

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.

As a big fan of Princess Diana, I was of course sad when she died and stopped following her, as it made me sad. I decided to watch this because I was curious about The conspiracy theory. Princess Diana's course in life presented a Huge problem to certain people so It's not entirely far fetched to speculate that she was murdered. Our president was murdered by our own and it was covered up, so why others are saying that this is ridiculous is ignorant. the fact that no footage of the crash exists is a red flag, however it is pointless to speculate because if they can't solve the Kennedy assassination it is unlikely that we will ever really know what happened to Princess Diana.

Working in England, attractive blonde American reporter Jennifer Morrison (as Rachel Visco) is notified that former UK "Princess" Diana Spencer and her lover "Dodi" Fayed are staying at the luxurious Ritz Hotel in Paris. Sensing the frequently photographed woman has a major announcement, Ms. Morrison gets the assignment and is at the scene when Ms. Spencer's high-speed car crash end her life in 1997. Morrison correctly realizes the "paparazzi" did not cause the accident, as initially reported. When she investigates, Morrison discovers evidence of a "cover up" and finds her own life threatened...

This is based on the identically-titled book by Noel Botham, where it's called, "The cover-up of the century!" Interestingly, the film covers itself with an opening disclaimer...

When famous people die suddenly, conspiracy stories follow. The subject here, and "royal" people in general, are immensely popular in the media. "Princess Di" was one of the most popular, and you could not avoid stories about her; she was photogenic and outspoken. At the time, Spencer's crusade against landmines was admirable and the Queen's announcement that her former daughter-in-law would be stripped of her "Princess" title was amusing. Spencer was a breath of fresh air, though stories about the royal family are a bore; those highly fascinated may enjoy this "Lifetime" TV-movie.

**** The Murder of Princess Diana (8/25/07) John Strickland ~ Jennifer Morrison, Gregori Derangere, Kevin McNally, Jules Werner

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.

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.