Review: ‘Diana’

Reviewers slammed this film on its London premiere, calling it tasteless at best, and offensive at worst. I was never a huge fan of Diana, so my expectations going in were low despite Downfall director Oliver Hirschbiegel being at the helm.

The film I saw was neither offensive or tasteless. It was dull.

Centering on the last two years of Diana’s life, the film follows her as she meets and falls in love with Pakistani surgeon Hasnat Khan. As their relationship blossoms, so does Diana. She expands her humanitarian work and grows more confident when dealing with the media who seem determined to expose her relationship to the public.

Unwilling to be party to such media scrutiny, Khan is less confident that the partnership will work, even after Diana heads to Pakistan alone to introduce herself to his family.

Naomi Watts looks the part, but because the script fails to show Diana outside the relationship – dealing with her ex, her children, or anyone else in her pre-divorce world – she never becomes a real person. Toward the end of the film when Diana uses her powers to manipulate the media and flaunt her new relationship with Dodi Fayed so that Khan will see, it makes her downright unlikable – before she just appeared self-centered and rather dim.

And Naveen Andrews (Khan) and Watts have so little chemistry, even their most intimate moments are passionless.

So while it’s not the complete disaster some critics might have you believe, Diana is far from a great film. It’s just another Romeo and Juliet tale of lovers torn apart by forces beyond their control. And if it wasn’t Diana’s name in the title, it would have slipped quietly under the radar like a straight-to-DVD romance.

4/10

.