A Royal Affair (2012)

THIS MOVIE HAS THE INCREDIBLE MERIT OF PRESENTING A PRACTICALLY DELETED REALITY OF THE OFFICIAL HISTORY OF DENMARK. ITS PROTAGONIST, JOHANN FRIEDRICH STRUENSEE, IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED SO MUCH TO THE FREEDOM OF THE MANKIND... THAT RESULTS VERY INDIGESTIBLE TO OFFICIAL HISTORIANS. THIS FILM BRINGS BACK SOMETHING THAT LOOKED LOST IN THE CURRENT CINEMA: DEPTH, MORAL RELEVANCE, PLASTIC BEAUTY, SINCERE EMOTION, GREAT INTERPRETATION, EXCELLENT DIALOGUES. THE THEME OF FREEDOM OF THOUGHT HAS BEEN FEW TIMES TOUCHED BY CINEMA (I REMEMBER "WITCH" IN 1920, "INHERIT THE WIND" IN 1959, "THE PHARAO" IN 1966), BUT AS IN THIS MOVIE, NEVER. EQUALLY "A ROYAL AFFAIR" (TITLE THAT HIDES THE TRUE SENSE OF THE ARGUMENT) SHOWS EMPATHY TOWARDS THE OPPRESSED PEOPLE, TOWARDS THE IDEALS THAT CAME IN THE FRENCH REVOLUTION, AND DENOUNCES THE DARK COMPLOTES OF THE EUROPEAN NOBILITY AND THE CHURCH. THIS IS THE DENIED HISTORY, THIS IS A WORK OF ART THAT OBEYS WONDERFULLY THE GREEK IDEAL OF THE DEEP LINK OF BEAUTY AND INTELLIGENCE. "A ROYAL AFFAIR", DESPITE THE TITLE, IS A GIFT FOR THE MIND AND THE HEART.

Set in 1767, the British Princess Caroline is sent to Denmark to marry the mentally ill and promiscuous King Christian. A German doctor, Johann, a free thinker, is recruited to help organize the king's affairs. He influences the king's policies with Enlightenment ideas, undermining the interests of the ruling class. Johann has a child by the king's neglected wife which gives the conservative ruling council their opportunity to indict Johann of treason, resulting in his execution and restoration of feudal law.Based on a true story this is an intriguing piece of history well told in a well made film. Convincing, excellent acting within luscious, superbly filmed settings.

This movie is a decent enough attempt to present a quite interesting time in Danish history, when with an unhinged King on the throne a 'Man of the Enlightenment' tried to force through his new ideas as Chief Minister on a very conservative, almost feudal, society in the latter part of the eighteenth century. Oh, and by the way, Struansee (Chief Minister played by Mads Mikkelsen) was conducting a lusty affair with the young Queen from England/Hanover. (Played by 2015's It Girl Alicia Vikander). Of course, it all ends in tears, and the conservative court triumphs and overturns all the progressive work done by the reformers. It is a good presentation of the romance, but the budget looks thin in places; the court itself is never fully portrayed; the so-called progressive ideas are barely illustrated; their impact on the people never demonstrated; Ms Vikander never convinces by looks or acting that she is a Princess and brother to the King of England; and it all feels far too modern and sloppy. The worst illustration is the King and Queen's first night together. He pushes himself upon her, which she rejects like a 2015 modern woman who says 'no' at the last minute. But then the king saunters over to the other side of the bedroom, orders her to bed and get undressed. Without a murmur, Ms Vikander gets into bed and strips off to become pregnant immediately! The script is dull and plodding, while the direction is absent without leave. Characterisation is minimal, except for the role of the King, but even here things are not clear enough. History is altered to favour the lovers, and the film is far less than it should be.

Nominated for best foreign movie Oscar, this Danish film revolves around the eighteenth century love story between Queen Caroline Mathilde, married to the mad King Christian VII of Denmark, and the court's German doctor Johann Struensee, father to the queen's second child Princess Louise Auguste. Mads Mikkelseen, as the doctor, gives a likable and assured performance as the tragic character who attempted to introduce reforms into the Danish constitution that would have bettered the health and prosperity of the masses and weakened the powers of the aristocracy. Mikkel Folsgaard, as the mad Christian VII, gives a scene stealing performance as the hapless individual unable to control his impulses. His performance is both frightening in its irrationality, yet sympathetic in its vulnerability.Which brings us to Swedish actress Alicia Vikander as the central character of Caroline Mathilde, given in marriage to a man she had never met. Hard to say where the fault lies for the inadequacies of her performance -- her lack of experience as an actress or with the director, who should have exerted a much firmer hand. From start to finish Vikander plays her role as though headed down the inevitable path towards doom. If a character is to appear more sympathetic to audiences, then she should begin with a sunny disposition that would instantly have the audience on her side. From start to finish Vikander plays the role like a glum, combative shrew, a totally miscalculated interpretation that offers no shading of any kind. Any royal wife of this time who both verbally and physically assaulted her husband, mad or not, would instantly run the risk of divorce, imprisonment or execution. England's Henry VIII set the bloody example for the manner in which royal wives could expect to be treated if they failed to toe the line. That Caroline Mathilde would have been stupid enough to ignore the perils of such behavior would be foolhardy in the extreme. So who is to blame for this interpretation, the actress or the writer/director Nikolaj Arcel? The story itself is both fascinating and eminently watchable -- aided to no small extent by Mikkel Folsgaard's showy performance as the mad king and Mads Mikkelsen as the new-thought foreigner struggling to update a backward country, confronted by an intransigent government dedicated to preserving the past. The direction is fine, the film's look is fine -- if not quite up to the extremely high standard set by similar French period pictures -- which are very hard to match. Alas, alas, while Vikander may very well have some fine performances to give in the future, this one fails to ignite due to the lack of vivacity, charm or sympathy elicited by her character. Her scenes with Mikkelsen, which should have revealed a side of her that would have evoked audience sympathy, are as flat and charmless as all that have gone before. This is simply a one-note performance. How could the director not have seen this? Would I recommend this movie? Absolutely! There is a lot of hard working talent in evidence and the story itself is enthralling. But you know where the weaknesses lie...