Konterr Brilliant and touching

Humbersi The first must-see film of the year.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

lynnmikenoel While we enjoy watching this interesting and historical movie, our enjoyment is somewhat tempered by our relationship to the film. My wife and I were extras in the Kenya segment of the film and had the opportunity and misfortune to see Edward Fox, a second-rate actor who should get down on his knees every morning to thank whatever powers that be that his brother gave him his breakout chance in film, behave as the spoiled and undeserving brat he is. He treated everyone around him as though he was the only true human in the area. At one point he reduced one young woman to tears when she was a (very) few seconds late running to hold a mirror for him to check that his face and makeup were up to his high standards. This young woman was making a tiny fraction of Mr. Fox's salary but she was worth twenty of him. In contrast, the fine actress Cherie Lunghi, who was not on camera at the time, asked the extras if they would like some tea. It was only when she stood up for her section of the shoot that we realized that she was ,in fact, a cast member, and hundreds of times more gracious than Mr. Fox.

Enoch Sneed This is certainly one of the best historic dramatisations ever made for television. Based on a deeply researched book and with the technical advice of the author, Simon Raven's scripts succeed in 'showing' us the story rather than simply 'telling' it.The character development of Wallis Simpson is a fine example of this. At first we see her as quite obviously socially ambitious, determined to work her way into Edward's private circle of friends. Once she has achieved this, she ensures the former lovers who helped her are excluded (and we see their hurt feelings). Having got her feet well under the table she begins to take over Edward's life, to the extent of getting him to neglect his official duties for her benefit. Finally her victory is complete: on vacation someone asks the King his plans for the next day and he says "Wallis, what are our plans for tomorrow?" She has taken control. Both lead performances are flawless.The supporting cast is a superb ensemble of British character actors who play their historical roles excellently. Some highlight David Waller's Baldwin, but John Shrapnel's increasingly frustrated (and disgusted) equerry Major Hardinge is equally compelling.Compared with today's 'historical' series about 'The Tudors' or 'Rome', this is highly intelligent and thoughtful drama. Only the technical aspects make it seem a little dated with studio scenes shot on video and exteriors on film (standard for UK television in the 1970's). Still, this is excellent viewing and well worth watching.

selffamily I have long wanted to see this series, having only read Royal Feud so far as background. I watched the first half, then as there was a delay in obtaining the second half, I read the book written by the Duchess of Windsor, The Heart has its reasons. Now I have just finished the second half and feel that I have had a well-rounded view of what went on. I did feel (contrary to what previous reviewers have said) that maybe it missed a few things and could perhaps have been longer!I have always felt instinctively that Wallis Simpson had a raw deal. She has been cast by history as a manipulator, a gold-digger and a not-very-nice kind of woman. Well history is always written by the victors as we have long known - Richard III's story is evidence of that - and there is nothing to really support that. I feel sad that so much power has been wielded by churches over the centuries, (I'm not the first as Henry VIII shows) because without the censure from the Archbishop of Canterbury maybe some other way could have been found. However, this man loved this woman and made a grand gesture, and we hope, lived happily ever after. It was a huge burden to put on one woman's shoulders but she bore it with dignity to the end of her days. The series was extremely well-done, the acting faultless and the writing most likely very accurate to historical fact. (I did think that some of the furnishings looked a bit shabby). I am British and I remember being told by older family members what a shocking and awful thing Edward/David had done. I don't agree - sometimes you have to do what for you is right, and he did. I admire him for that. Ironically, the late Queen Mother was rumoured to have fancied Edward/David first unsuccessfully; well if she wanted to be queen, then she got her wish. Just shows you should never wish for anything! With the perspective of the 21st century, it's good to see that society has slowly become more accepting and less judgemental. Thoroughly enjoyable to all who enjoy history being brought to life.

treeline1 The scandal that brought down a King is examined in detail in this 1978 English miniseries. We meet Edward, Prince of Wales (Edward Fox), who eschews royal responsibilities and propriety in favor of a rather hedonistic life style. He'd had a string of affairs before he met Wallis Simpson (Cynthia Harris), a once-divorced, married American woman in 1931. She is shown to be a calculating spider, he the willing fly. When he becomes King and insists upon marrying her, his actions threaten to destroy the monarchy.Edward Fox is perfectly cast as the spoiled and boyish Prince; it is a pleasure to watch him completely inhabit the character. Cynthia Harris, on the other hand, is never believable as Mrs. Simpson; none of her lines sound spontaneous and her stiff acting weakens the show. The supporting cast, including Peggy Ashcroft as Queen Mary, is wonderful, but the scenes where Edward's advisors endlessly debate the sticky situation are tedious.Still, it's a fascinating story despite its faults and it's fun to watch the Royals' private lives.