‘Diana’ oversimplifies history, and its title character

Is it possible to make a movie both histrionic and dull? “Diana” manages the feat.

The film, based on a book by Kate Snell, looks at the romance between a heart surgeon and the Princess of Wales, who comes across here as a lovesick, clingy stalker (by her own admission) during the two years leading up to her death.

Naomi Watts plays the title character, and she works hard to mimic Diana’s head tilt, sidelong glances and inflection, but her efforts seem wasted given the soap opera dialogue and frivolous plot.

When she meets surgeon Hasnat Khan (Naveen Andrews), it’s love at first sight — for her, at least. She starts learning about medicine and jazz, two of his passions, while he maintains an aloof demeanor.

When he does come around, the romance turns out to have neither heat nor heart as Watts and Andrews generate virtually no chemistry.

Of course, we know the match turned out to be star-crossed. When Diana died in a 1997 car crash, she was with Dodi Fayed, her boyfriend at the time. What the movie doesn’t explain is why we should care about the fate of the movie’s central romance.

The woman whose death spurred a mountain of flowers outside Kensington Palace is trivialized here. Even her humanitarian efforts seem motivated by her romance, and she is shown with her sons only once from afar.

This Diana is the protagonist in a Lifetime movie, fighting for an unsound relationship that can never work — even resorting to screaming his name outside of his apartment in the middle of the night — because of her paramour’s aversion to fame and his family’s disapproval.

There are traces of a more compelling story in “Diana.” The film manages to capture the isolation of being surrounded by people who wanted nothing more than her picture and details of her personal life for the next day’s front page.

To justify the film’s focus, the movie’s final moments intimate that, had things worked out between Diana and Hasnat, her tragic end might have been avoided. There are voice mails that go unreturned and even a moment when Hasnat might have made some kind of history-altering gesture.

This theory glosses over the fact that Diana and Fayed’s chauffeur was driving both recklessly and under the influence while trying to flee the paparazzi on Aug. 31, 1997.

In these moments, the movie generates more skepticism than compassion. “Diana” isn’t just an egregious case of rewriting history, but one of oversimplifying it.

“Diana” (2 stars)

This story of the ill-fated princess (Naomi Watts) either dramatizes or glosses over the truth while remaining dull. The focus on the romance with heart surgeon Hasnat Khan (Naveen Andrews)is odd and the actors have zero chemistry.

Rated: PG-13 for language, sexuality and smoking.

Showing: Pacific Place, Sundance.

More in Life

Get tricked out in your Halloween best

Thrift stores can dress up you and your ghoul-friends.

How to find owls in Washington

Searching for owls in Discovery Park with wildlife photographer Paul Bannick.

Music in the mountains: ‘It’s a weather-dependant hobby’

Anastasia Allison of the Musical Mountaineers reflects on making music at the summits.

Jaw fragment, bloody shirt and stranger things in Everett

The Everett Public Library’s Northwest Room is a treasure trove of oddities.

Acura adds A-Spec model to superb handling TLX in 2018

In an already comfortable and refined interior for all TLX models, the A-Spec embellishes all of it.

Hundreds of ways to pamper your home and yourself

Find fancy fridges to sparkling jewelry under one roof at home and gift shows in Everett.

Self-esteem is important, and it’s not the same as net worth

Having it all doesn’t necessarily bring happiness. Self-worth is the most important kind of wealth.

Living with Children: Shift in paradigm derailed child-rearing

By John Rosemond / Tribune News Service I am sometimes asked if… Continue reading

Most Read