User reviews

The Duchess is a superior slice of costume drama which manages to craft interesting, multi dimensional characters and an involving storyline from the well worn confines of the genre.

Keira Knightley plays a very similar role to the one she played in Pride and Prejudice, a feisty, modern woman trapped in a male dominated society. However, whereas Lizzie Bennett's heart and character inspires affection, the Duchess of Devonshire's fosters only reproach and punishment from her traditional and patriarchal husband. Her performance is a standout and demonstrates why she is so highly rated in the face of many disappointing roles in other films. She brings both strength and weakness to the character. Able to deliver withering put downs at her husband and others, whilst showing the pain of her loveless marriage etched into her face.

If Knightley is the lynchpin of the piece then it is Ralph Fiennes that elevates it above a crowded genre. Resisting the temptation to play his character as evil, instead he simply plays him as a man of his times. In Fiennes' hands the Duke feels no need to win any bouts of verbal jousting with his wife as he is secure in the knowledge that, as a husband, he is in complete control of the relationship. The Duke also clearly sees very little wrong in his treatment of his wife and acts, as he sees it, in a logic manner making the whole film feel more believable and, as a result, tragic.

In terms of the cast the only misstep is Dominic Cooper as Charles Grey, who lends the wide eyes of a political dreamer but doesn't have convincing chemistry with Knightley and plays one of the more one dimensional characters in the piece. However Hayley Atwell impresses by playing her character so well it is possible to describe her as scheming, and manipulative as well as sympathetic and loyal without it seeming a contradiction.

The film is deliberately paced so as to give characters and events time to breathe, encouraging the mood that the marriage is a car crash in slow motion, inextricably drawing all the characters further into the muddled mess of their relationships. Overall it's a fully recommended slice of real life costume drama that draws a multi layered drama full of compellingly deep characters from what could easily have been a one note story.

It's 1774 England. Georgiana (Keira Knightley) is arranged by her mother Lady Spencer (Charlotte Rampling) to marry the older Duke of Devonshire William Cavendish (Ralph Fiennes). She is eager for high society but finds him personally cold. He brings in a girl who is probably his bastard child. He is bitter that Georgiana delivers him a girl. She becomes a popular figure. She befriends Lady Bess Foster (Hayley Atwell) who is desperate to get back her children from her abusive husband. The Duke starts an affair with Bess in a long line of many mistresses and he is able to get her back her children. Georgiana starts her own affair with Charles Grey (Dominic Cooper).

This is a solid costume drama anchored by a powerful performance from Knightley. The other cast members also deliver led by Fiennes. He is a layered villain and a real human being. Atwell is also great as her character is caught up in an impossible situation. This is a slow deliberate burn. The beauty of the costumes hide an ugliness underneath it all.

The career of Keira Knightley has been somewhat of a mixed bag. She has had strong moments, invariably under the direction of Joe Wright, and she has had her less brilliant moments, mainly in the later "Pirates of the Caribbean" films. But, in "The Duchess", an entertaining and moving portrait of Georgiana, the Duchess of Devonshire, she truly shows signs that she is coming of age with a performance of subtlety and nuance.

The film has been marketed with not so subtle emphases on Georgiana's relative, Diana, Princess of Wales. The tagline for the film, "There were three people in her marriage", is not only, by my count, a miscalculation (a serious miscalculation if you count the dogs) but also guilty of creating a subtext which simply isn't in the film. Anybody looking for a film about Diana will be disappointed. Anyone looking for an entertaining film won't be.

The film is a moving portrait of a very tragic figure, brought to life by a career best performance from Keira Knightely. Her abilities have grown over recent years, with "Atonement" being her previous best, but here she shows great potential. She is ably supported by Ralph Fiennes, who is on fine form. His performance never descends into caricature or cartoonish villainy, but maintains a sense of humanity, no matter how selfish it is, underneath his characters various inexcusable actions. There is also a fine performance from Charlotte Rampling, though there is a weak link in the person of Dominic Cooper, who is too young for his part and struggles with it.

The witty and emotive script has a lot to recommend it and its characters are put into an engrossing and lavish world, successfully created by the director Saul Dibb. Extraordinary costumes fill the extraordinary locations, and there is a beautiful score by Rachael Portman to accompany it. The result is a fairly stylish affair.

The film's exploration of unfortunate innocence and the loss of freedom is at times poignant and adds to what is an extremely satisfying experience at the cinema and provides a great deal of promise for the future from its director and its star.

I saw this film for the first time this weekend, and overall I liked it a lot. The story is a little uneventful, with some parts feeling as though they were skimmed over(the political life) or only briefly explored, and the pacing can be pedestrian. That said, it is a visual feast really, as the costumes, sets, scenery, cinematography, interiors and even the carriages are spectacular, while the music gives a lovely touch to the proceedings too. The script is well written and gripping, and the direction is fairly good. Kiera Knightley is great as Georgina, really quite dignified, while Ralph Fiennes is perfect as her philandering husband. To conclude, a visually beautiful film. 7/10 Bethany Cox

The latest slice of period drama to grace our screens is this biopic on Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, who during the 1770s was patroness of the Whig party and prisoner of a marriage which made her, among other things, suffer the indignity of having her husband's mistress living under the same roof. These heritage dramas are an industry all by themselves; the armies of prop hirers, wig and costume makers, researchers, production designers, location scouts and (mostly) British actors who go to make them must find themselves in almost permanent employ. The BBC does them, the Americans have a go at them, and the public can't seem to get enough of them. The Duchess is a superior example of the genre, though nowhere in the league of Kubrick's Barry Lyndon, and combines the spectacle of Keira Knightley looking glamorous in a range of frocks and wigs, while at the same time honing her acting talents (no more those rictus grins), with the guilty pleasure of following the uncomfortable parallels between the fortunes and indiscretions of the ancestress of Lady Diana Spencer with those of the Princess of Wales herself. Lowering over the whole proceedings is the truly superb presence of Ralph Fiennes's Duke of Devonshire, Fiennes an actor who can convey polite discomfiture or threatening ire with slightest twitch of the mouth. In his hands the Duke becomes far less a melodramatic villain than a product of his time, and you almost feel sorry for him. Go and see The Duchess; only those who have had children will balk at the liberties taken with childbirth and breastfeeding. But not even that will spoil the fun.

After reading copious amounts of mediocre reviews for "The duchess", I wasn't expecting much from this film. However, from the first scene I was utterly absorbed.

The film isn't "just another period drama", it is an absolutely beautiful and heart-rendering tale of the tribulations faced by Georgian woman. Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, who although is the key character in the film (as you can probably infer from the title), represents the situation of all woman belonging to a patriarchal society, not just the aristocracy.

Keira knightly is exemplary in this role. Her facial expression tells more than a script ever could. I enjoyed her performance in "atonement" but this was in a whole new league. Ralph Fiennes was also excellent. My best advice is to ignore the critics and come to your own conclusion. My only negative criticism was the rapidity with which Georgiana bonded so intimately with Bess. However, I don't know enough about the social context of the time to really make a judgement.

All in all, a deeply moving tale that shouldn't be neglected.

This is one of my favourite films of all time. Keira Knightley is superb in this role. Although it may not be wholly accurate, this film clearly shows how badly women (even those of high birth) were treated by men and society. The costumes and settings are delicious. Love love love!

The Duchess - Set at the end of the eighteenth century, The Duchess is based on the life of Georgiana Cavendish (Kiera Knightley), Duchess of Devonshire. The film delves into Georgiana's passionate and doomed affair with Earl Grey, the future Prime Minister, and the complex love triangle with her husband (Ralph Fiennes) and Georgiana's best friend, Lady Bess Foster (Hayley Atwell).

Kiera Knightley again does a period piece and again looks mostly out of place. She's British alright, but a few stone away from looking like she belongs in 1770's Britain. It's augmented by the fact that her character, based on a real woman, was supposed to have gone through about 6 pregnancies, 4 of them successful. Knightley's emaciated form is just wrong. What is right though, is her performance. As a mother, as a chasismatic political presence and a woman desperate for a happy life she nails it absolutely.

I could have seen a little less focus on the love triangle and a little more on the "hows" and "whys" of this woman becoming such an important and popular cultural icon in British society. The film glosses over how this came to be, and asks us to take it as a fact after one brief scene showing the Duchess's political shrewdness. It's another case of Hollywood ignoring what's different about a film, preferring the safety of delivering what people have seen before.

Fiennes gives such a quiet performance right from the start but it grows and fills the area. It's often a mesmerizing performance because of his rigid adherence to societies expectations and rules at the cost of all else. Fiennes occupies the screen whenever he's in a scene. When he and the Duchess argue, she's like water smashing up against the unyielding cliff. Ralph Fiennes is aw-inspiringly scary in one scene without seeming in anyway over the top or demonizing of what his character represents. Ultimately his character is human and believable; purely a man of his times. His character is so down to earth and in the end simple. All he wanted from his marriage was a son and to be left alone to play with his dogs.

A mesmerizing turn from Fiennes in a likable, if familiar film, The Duchess gets a B+

The locations, specially Bath are the most cinematic aspect of this opportunistic tale. The Duchess, it seems, was a distant relative of Lady Diana Spencer's and there is a certain symmetry in their stories but Keira Knightly projects only an "actressy" air. She was superb in "Pride and Prejudice" but here she just simply poses and stares. Ralph Finnes's awful Duke is much more believable. The extra marital doomed love story between the Duchess and Dominic Cooper left me completely cold and perhaps that's were the problem resides. Their relationship, their "love" should have consumed us for the sketchy tale to work, but it didn't. Still, the locations, I repeat, are breathtaking and "The Duchess" can be seen if you don't expect to be other than an spectator.

The was a good one in most parts but the use of Ralph Fiennes as the Duke was wrong at 46 he was far too old to play the Duke of Devonshire. When Georgiana Spencer was 17 she married William Cavendish the Duke of Devonshire a man who was only 26 so a 46 year old was way too old. fun fact her son became the 6th Duke but never married William Cavendish oldest son of third son of 4th Duke who was married to Georgiana's granddaughter

Greetings again from the darkness. The film fascination with Royalty continues thanks to the coolness of costumes and the grand scale of palaces. Of course, a thread-thin relation to Princess Diana doesn't hurt at all either.

Somehow the man's world of the Duke of Devonshire, played by Ralph Fiennes, allowed for multiple affairs even to the extreme of having one's favorite side dish just move right on in to the main house ... including meals with the Royal couple!! It would be quite funny, if not so sad.

Keira Knightley plays the Duchess with fortitude and the proper amount of reservation. She has become quite adept at the period piece. Fiennes, on the other hand, plays the Duke as if he has a constant stomach ache and is in need of Alka-Seltzer. He totally lacks charisma or even many human traits, save lust for those other than his wife. The third wheel who is promoted to second is played well by Hayley Atwell, a desperate and alternatingly cold and warm mother and friend. Rounding out the cast are Dominic Cooper (Mamma Mia) who plays future Prime Minister Charles Grey, and the true love of The Duchess' life; and Charlotte Rampling as the too proud mother to Knightley, who dispenses very weak advice with a stiff upper lip.

The film is well done and the similarities to Princess Diana's marriage are inescapable, but there is just not quite enough substance here. Easy enough to watch, but lacking in historical details ... more of a soap opera approach.

I came away from the cinema after seeing The Duchess feeling I had had my consciousness of what life must have been like for the aristocracy of 18th century England dramatically raised (both literally and metaphorically). The story of Georgiana's marriage unfolds by subtle degrees amidst the most sumptuous of interiors and landscaped gardens - all beautifully filmed and realistically recreated. Apart from the main characters, there appear a rich selection of characters from neighbouring strata of society - aristocrats, political activists, servants and children (as babies and older) both legitimate and illegitimate - all of whom contribute to weaving the screenplay into an immensely fascinating narrative. I was already a fan of both Keira Knightly and Ralph Fiennes before seeing The Duchess, so I was pleased to find that their performances were well up to - and in the case of Ms Knightly even surpassing - my expectations. Even those who aren't normally 'into' period dramas (like me) should, I feel sure, find much to appreciate in this excellent film.

"The Duchess" is a very good film which probably has not gotten the recognition that it deserves. The cinematography is wonderful, the costumes grand, and the acting top notch. Knightley gives one of her best performances and is well cast, and all of the other actors are great as well. This film is more of a psychological drama between spouses and those around them, so there is not a lot of overt action or business in the plot but that is ok. This is about the inner life of a wealthy couple and how it's not always great. Those on the outside sometimes look on with envy, but the reality is often more grim. Georgina is trapped by a bad husband and a societal structure that gives her few options, but I think that it is also important for the audience to remember her "suffering" pales in comparison to what many in the world go through. After all she has food, clothing, money, housing, family, servants, etc. There seem to be many of these historical dramas which seek to show the bondage that even the upper-classes face, especially women. But strictures bind everyone to a degree and again a proper perspective should be maintained. The weak point of this film is that it is a sad story, with the husband so unlikeable, but it still made for a good drama or soap. I rate it a 9/10.

a beautiful film. not great or remarkable. only beautiful. for costumes and correct acting. for the light to dark rooms of period. for the flavor of Anna Karenina. and for the atmosphere before the storm. a movie like a jewel from 18 century. more complex than a nice adaptation of a book, almost fascinating for the science of Keira Knightley and Ralph Fiennes to explore theirs roles possibilities, special for performance of Charlotte Rampling and for the air of portrait of a life. a movie like a drop of perfume. noble, seductive, charming. and a different tool for discover the past in a profound way.that is all. a beautiful film about a special universe and remarkable force of a woman to be herself .

When Quentin Tarantino presented Reservoir Dogs at Sundance in 1992, he famously stated that Merchant-Ivory productions were a major turn-off for him, much like on-screen violence could be for someone else. No one else seems to agree with him, though, or at least not openly, since lots of British directors are trying to become the next James Ivory (the real one lost his mojo with The White Countess, which also marked his last collaboration with the late producer Ismail Merchant). And while Joe Wright hit the jackpot with Pride & Prejudice and Atonement, his colleague Saul Dibb doesn't fare as well with The Duchess, an elegant but frigid costume drama which fails to be particularly dramatic.

To secure some kudos, Dibb cast Wright's go-to leading lady Keira Knightley as the film's heroine, Georgiana Spencer, whose life changes radically when the Duke of Devonshire (Ralph Fiennes) asks for her hand in marriage. The quality of her lifestyle improves significantly, and all she has to do, as she's frequently reminded by her mother (Charlotte Rampling), is to be a good wife. Unfortunately, that task proves more difficult than expected, since the Duke insists on having a male heir and Georgiana keeps giving birth to boys. All that's left for the poor man is to find a mistress, who happens to be the Duchess's best (in fact, only) friend (Hayley Atwell). Georgiana would like to retaliate by having an affair with her former suitor Charles Grey (Dominic Cooper), but common decency suggests she shouldn't. Why? Because she's just a woman.

Unhappy marriage, sex seen as a mere reproductive device, lust for freedom, society of the past seen as a mirror of contemporary events. Sound familiar? yes, the blueprint is obviously Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette, a far superior period piece that manages to speak to the audiences of today. Coppola did that thanks to the soundtrack, which emphasized the idea of the Queen of France being a rebellious teenager; Dibb's approach involves parallels with Georgiana's famous descendant, Princess Diana, as well as a political subtext suggesting the Duchess was one of the world's first feminists. Fair enough, as long as he has the substance to back that up. Does he? No. He puts all his energy in highlighting the natural beauty of 18th century England, and in that sense the movie can be mentioned in the same breath as Room with a View or Howard's End. Elsewhere, though, it's pretty basic, with a story that's been told many times before and has no new twists that can add to its dramatic resonance.

The performances are another problem altogether: Knightley might have seemed like a perfect fit for the role and she tries her utter best, but it feels quite theatrical (in a bad way) and overstated, and sh isn't helped by Atwell and Cooper's emotionless staring as support. Fiennes and Rampling, on the other hand, are amazing, especially the former's apparently cold but really entertaining and moving performance - if Bill Murray did period dramas, it would look a lot like that. It's also a bit ironic: the film aims to be female-driven, but is completely stolen by a man.

What rather wonderful about this story is that Georgiana Spencer (Keira Knightley) discovers a way to exult in victory over things and to get back some kind of power in a time where, really, women had very little… Being someone of great vitality and liveliness, she was very much a dreamer and an idealist, a woman who loved being the center of attention, who loved the fact at some point that her picture was in the paper, that the clothes were always talked of, that her every move was commented on…

We are immediately impressed by her presence, by her personality… She wasn't behaving quite in accordance with the way in which other 18th century women were expected to behave…

But there was something incredibly sad about this self-conscious lady… She was a victim of herself… A victim of her own innocence… A victim of people using her for their own profit… Even though she seemed to have everything, we realize that it was not that simple… And with all of her privilege came a lot of moral obligation and things were never what they really appeared to be…

The Duke (Ralph Fiennes) was a misanthropic man, rather cold, unemotional and quite cruel… He seems to like better his hunting dogs to his young wife… Of course with certain values, that he believes were absolutely right and that he strictly held to…

This sumptuous period piece also presents the Duchess of Devonshire as a political hostess… Saul Dibb's film shows us her dinner parties, her evening events, her fame and its extraordinary effect on her… It made her both desperate to please, terrified of doing anything wrong and shocked at her own celebrity and unable to figure out in her own mind why she was quite so famous… And we see the crippling effect it has on her sense of self

Not sure why more people didn't like it. Really. It certainly is a handy piece of work featuring both interesting characters and highlighting an interesting life. Maybe people are a bit sick of period pieces from England, especially if they featuring Kiera Knightley and concerns love triangles and such. Lets face it, we have seen most of what is presented here in one form or the another.

Still, i found myself very much caught up in this drama. Its hard not to. The costumes (most deservingly awarded) and settings are really beautiful and there are some interesting characters that move in and out in the background, i especially liked (or loathed?) the parts with Bess. Films that are based on true evens inherently tend to be a bit less clichéd and harder to foresee, as i think was the case here, although this certainly cant be said for everything here.

I mean, take the part where Georginia wants to feed her babies her own milk. WHY?? Why does films like this force modern views on their protagonists. Because we couldn't sympathize with them otherwise? Please. Stop. Its just annoying.

On the whole though its a fine drama with good performances. Knightley proves herself more then worthy, don't believe the haters. Dominic is OK but needs more scenes to flesh out his character. Ralp Fiennes on the other hand manages to make The Duke if not charismatic, at least interesting, even though his character isn't explored as much as it should have been. (seriously WTF is his problem). This drama is rather one dimensional in this respect and though its sibling, Sofia Coppulas Maria Antionette did a better work capturing much of its thematical meat without resorting to pinpointing. That said, its still a very nice film, and if you are into period pieces you owe to yourself to check it out.

I'm of two minds about this film. On the one hand, Saul Dibb has managed to turn a book into an entertaining film about the trials and tribulation - and, let's keep things in perspective, extremely privileged life - of the frolicking Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire (Keira Knightley). It hits all the targets of the romantic genre, and does so with a nice mix of emotional scenes, witty banter, and even some interesting discussions.

Some, because on the other hand the film fails to step beyond the confines of its genre and to really engage with the historical period in which the events take place. The female protagonist gets married to a Duke (Ralph Fiennes), is supposedly unhappy (but wastes little time exploiting the new social options presented to her because of said marriage), and soon the viewer is on board with Georgiana for a ride through all the familiar scenes: her husband's mistresses, her own dalliances with young dreamers, an unexpected pregnancy, etc. etc. The political scheming in the background is mentioned, but there is very little interaction between the events of the story and the historical context. In the final minutes of the film, lines of text assure the viewer that Georgiana was one of the most influential women of her day (in England, one assumes). Unfortunately, not much of that supposed influence is shown in the film, where Georgiana has to make do with a short scene in which she rallies a crowd of a few dozen spectators at a political campaign event.

It's all the more unfortunate that this angle of Georgiana's character was left underexposed, because in the first few minutes of the film she quickly finds herself in a rather witty back-and-forth with one of her husband's political allies, Charles Fox (Simon McBurney). Those scenes, so teasingly shown in the trailer, are sadly moved to the sidelines soon after. If those reading this felt similarly disappointed by this, I can recommend Patrice Leconte's 1996 film Ridicule. It's an excellent and very witty look at the French court in roughly the same time.

So all in all, if you're looking at this film as a romantic historical drama, it's actually not all that bad. But unfortunately it's also not much more than that. A shame, especially because this is an era in which there should be no shortage of great characters from which to draw inspiration for far more interesting stories and films.

A final note on the acting: Ralph Fiennes is great as William Cavendish, Duke of Devonshire, as is Simon McBurney as the politician Charles Fox. Dominic Cooper and Hayley Atwell gave two decent but unexciting (which isn't necessarily bad) performances as Charles Grey and Bess Foster respectively. As for Georgiana herself? I can understand directors are reluctant to use different actors for the same role, but wanting a 22 year old Keira Knightley to portray both a 17 year old newly-wed and a 35 year old mother was perhaps a bit too much to ask. Knightley makes the most of it, and some scenes are well done indeed, but on the whole it wasn't really working out for me.

Recommended for easy romantic watching, not so for an engaging historical drama.

Superb job by the costume designers, hairstylists and location spotters. Nice to see Charlotte Rampling in a big production again as well. What of the two leads, Fiennes and Knightley? They really try and some of the scenes are quite moving, but, overall, a second rate script defeats them, which, basically, does not have enough 'meat' to cover the entire length of the movie (meaning that we get lots of scenes inserted on the same principle as 'The Tudors' TV series - 'ten minutes up, undergarments down' and time for a bit of carnal viewing for the audience). Overall, I came away feeling the script writer/director had tried to be just a little too clever in getting the 'parallels' across: a beautiful, young member of the minor aristocracy is 'auctioned off' by her parents to marry a (much older) member of the 'top of society' (have you got it yet?) Her family name is 'Spencer' (have you got it now?) The old fogey she marries only wants her to produce a male heir (come on!) and it becomes apparent he has no interest in her at all as a person. In the end, he forms a relationship with another woman (who has lots of strapping, healthy sons) and they form a 'menage a trois' under the same roof (Ahh, now you've got it!!!!!!) In the end, she fights against love and following her heart (and going for cruises on big yachts in the Mediterranean?) and instead sacrifices herself for the sake of her beloved children. MORALE: women in the 18th century had it rotten and is it not lovely to live in an enlightened, blissful era like ourselves instead??! As I said, I would concentrate on the hats (how DID they keep those things on top the massive haystacks of hair piled up on their skulls???)