User reviews

The one to blame for Tippi Hedren, and not Grace Kelly, starring in Hitchcock's 'Marnie' is really Charles De Gaulle. At least, that's what 'Grace of Monaco' suggests. It's probably not quite true, but the film doesn't pretend to be historically accurate. It says so at the beginning: it's a fictional drama, based on true events.

The film shows a relatively small part of Kelly's remarkable life. After having been married for six years to Prince Rainier of Monaco, she is visited by Alfred Hitchcock who offers her the lead in his film project 'Marnie'. She wants to do it, but reviving her acting career turns out to be impossible because of a crisis in Monaco, caused by French president Charles De Gaulle's political manoeuvrings.

We see Kelly as a somewhat naive Princess, who against her will becomes involved in political power-play. When a French diplomat suggests that Europe should become a third pillar of world power, next to the Soviet Union and the US, the American-born Kelly quips that this wouldn't be necessary if Europe wouldn't have invented communism and fascism. It's one of the best one-liners in the film.

The story switches nicely from Rainier's political problems to Kelly's own personal doubts. She is not happy as a Princess, and has trouble with the rigid conventions of life at the palace. The film even suggests that her outspoken opinions help solving the problems with France in the end. This may not be historically correct, but it makes for a nice script.

Much has been said about casting Nicole Kidman. I think there are very few actresses on the globe who would have done a better job. I'm not exactly a big fan of Kidman, but in this case she shows exactly the right mix of a strong will, a fearless non-conformist attitude and a superb elegance. She fits in perfectly with the cinematography, full of warm colours and lush images.

I liked the way the script works towards an apotheosis: a speech by Kelly at a high-profile philanthropic event in Monaco. The speech is truly great; either it's very good script writing, or Kelly employed a very talented speech writer. It's the highlight of the film: Kidman delivers her text in a truly heartfelt way, with the camera extremely close, so only a part of her face is visible.

The film has weak points. The dialogue sometimes feels clumsy and pompous, there are too many subplots and intrigues, and the director indulges a bit too much in the glamorous palace life. But at least this film doesn't make the mistake of cramming too much biographical information into a 100-minute movie. It's an enjoyable movie about one of the most interesting women in film history.

11 June 2014 Film of Choice at The Plaza Dorchester Tonight - Grace of Monaco. Generally slated by the critics I decided to see this film anyway and I was glad I did. A fictional story based on true events, this enjoyable film was a very haunting portrayal of Grace Kelly's move from Hollywood Princess to Royal Princess and the difficulties that arose during the transition. Centred around the very trying times when Charles de Gaulle was trying to gain control of Monaco, Grace Kelly was portrayed as a lost figure. Lost in her marriage, lost in her identity and lost in her way. Unfortunately, Nicole Kidman, although a very accomplished actress who was dressed well and at time did look very much the princess, did not convince me that she was Princess Grace. For starters physically she was too red, Grace Kelly was blonde, not a Marilyn Monroe sort of blonde but a regal blonde, and a serene blonde, Nicole just looked like a red head, furthermore she didn't make me believe that she was Grace Kelly, I just felt that I could see many of her other parts all tumbling together to try to encompass this icon of movie and Royal history. Having said that, I don't know exactly who could have played the part of Princess Grace of Monaco.........except perhaps ......... Grace Kelly!!!!!

First of all, this is not a biography, it's about an event that apparently took place in Monaco in the early 1960's. The French President deciding Monaco should pay taxes to France? After all the negative reviews, I was expecting the worst, but was surprised I quite enjoyed it. Nicole Kidman was most effective as Grace Kelly, and I can't think of anyone else today who could have handled that difficult role so well. Tim Roth was not as good looking as the real Prince Rainier, and Nicole's 5'11" towered over him. I thought the guy who played Hitchcock was better than the recent screen versions! Perhaps the film should have been titled 'Monaco in Crisis' or some such, so as not to mislead people into thinking this would be a bio of Grace Kelly?

I was really pleasantly surprised by this film. It was interesting and well played. I like Nicole Kidman and she really looked like a princess in this film.

Story of Monaco was very interesting and this particular episode in life of the Principality was well described in the history and well portrayed in this film.

In the movie theater where I watched this film 99 percent of the audience were women. I guess all of the dream to marry a Prince charming. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it! My ex got her and she ran for her life ;)

Nicole kidman is the delicious grace kelly, who made those awesome hitchcock films. As we know, she married the prince of monaco and whooshed off to be a glamerous princess. This tells the tale of an offer from hitch about making a film with him. But... just then, monaco and france are having a conflict over taxes; monaco does not tax new corporations, so many french companies are moving there, resulting in less tax income for france. This was one roadblock. At the same time, word has leaked out that the royal princess, mother to the royal heirs, may be part of a rough, violent hitchcock film back in the states. And there is political intrigue, where backroom deals are being made regarding the future of monaco that almost no-one knew about... can grace go make a movie in the united states with all this going on? History has already told us what happens... frank langella co-stars as tuck, her advisor. Tim roth as ranier. The trivia section tells us there are three different cuts of the film, so which version is shown appears to be the luck of the draw. Directed by olivier dahan. Written by arash amel. It's pretty well done, even if the royal family says there are in-accuracies.

The bad thing about messing up history and making a movie about a real person that is not based on facts but fiction is that we tend to remember the movie. So, now thousands of people will believe that Kelly saved Monaco (de Gaulle never went to any ball, the situation was negotiated peacefully with France at the end). They will believe that the marriage with the prince did not include numerous extramarital affairs on both sides and they will believe that Grace was as tall and elegant as Nicole Kidman, the perfect princess. Too bad, because reality was good enough. The movie is beautiful, superbly esthetic, but that is all.

When you're buying a ticket to a movie called 'Grace of Monaco', then you are expecting a biopic right? However, the movie starts with the message that this is a fictional story based on non fiction events.

Those expecting a full run down on the rise and fall of Grace will be hugely dissatisfied: the story chronicles a political dispute in Monaco about taxes. The director suggests that Grace had a critical role in the outcome of that dispute... but this might also be a fairytale on top of a fairytale (that is probably the fictional part as mentioned at the beginning of the movie).

If anything this movie does not demystify Grace, it only adds to the legend now even accrediting her for solving a major historical problem in France.

Probably would have been better anyway if the tax problem would not have been solved and President De Gaulle would have invaded Monaco because since then it serves as a tax free haven for drug lords and the super rich (who would rather buy another Lambo or Ferrari, rather then to pay the state for redistributing money).

So to me it's puzzling why a mediocre actress who marries royalty in Monaco gets so much attention: it's obvious that the charity goals of Grace are half baked, because she chose to live in abundant luxury herself in a country which hosts mostly tax evaders. So presenting her as some kind of angel figure or a royal Mother Theresa is laughable at best.

Kidman has a good run trying to mimic the angel like posture of Grace, but the lines smother her with cheesy dialog and real drama is nowhere in sight. I missed 10 minutes because I fell asleep but was still perfectly able to follow the storyline... so don't expect any surprises. I asked my companion and he said I did not miss anything... so there you have it.

Biopics will always come with their fair share of controversy - doubts will inevitably be raised about whether the subject in question was well-served by the film and his or her characterisation therein. Even so, Grace Of Monaco arrives in cinemas dogged by an outsized share of debate and, well, debacle. The script has been openly decried by Princess Grace's children and the entire project overwhelmingly reviled by critics across the world. Distributor Harvey Weinstein reportedly riled French director Olivier Dahan by cooking up an alternative cut of the film. Of course, it's Dahan's version that has premiered in Cannes, to widespread critical derision, so one can't help wondering if Weinstein's cut might actually be better. That's a lot of weight and scandal for one film to bear, most of which is - unfortunately - borne out by the final product.

It's possible to see why everyone involved might have been optimistic about the project. After all, the film purports to pick apart the fairy tale that is Grace Kelly's life - a legendary Hollywood actress finds and marries her real-life prince. In reality, Grace (Nicole Kidman) is struggling to find her place in the tiny principality of Monaco. As she contemplates returning to Hollywood to make another picture - Marnie - with Alfred Hitchcock (Roger Ashton-Griffiths), Grace's husband, Prince Rainier (Tim Roth), finds himself trapped in an increasingly tense face-off with French President Charles De Gaulle. Add in courtly intrigue, an identity crisis or two, a fairytale romance gone a little bit wrong - and it seems the perfect way for Dahan to make his Hollywood debut.

However, much of the sensitivity demonstrated by Dahan in La Vie En Rose, his lovely, bittersweet biopic of Edith Piaf, has been lost in translation. Grace Of Monaco plays far too frequently at the full, high pitch of soapy melodrama, the converging story lines somehow managing to feel overwrought and inconsequential at the same time. Grace frets about her role as wife, mother and princess; Rainier broods moodily about the fate of Monaco; we're led to suspect that Grace's handmaiden Madge (Parker Posey) is a spy within her inner circle - huge, important events within the narrative of the film, but all of them are rendered in paper-thin characterisation and overly ponderous dialogue.

As the film stumbles towards its unlikely climax, it becomes harder and harder to take it seriously. The unravelling threads of Grace's life are clumsily woven together by what amounts to Grace undergoing princess training at the hands of Sir Derek Jacobi's Count Fernando: a montage that would feel clumsy even if grafted into My Fair Lady or The Princess Diaries. Grace Of Monaco also runs afoul of a few odd directorial choices. It's no exaggeration to say that Dahan makes the most excessive use of the close-up since Tom Hooper in Les Miserables - in narrowing the frame to an almost unbearable degree, his camera practically assaults his actors' eyeballs on several occasions.

To be fair to the cast, they try - particularly Kidman, who seems quite committed to giving as rounded a performance of the trapped princess as she can, whatever her director or screenwriter might have in store for her. Her efforts aren't enough to salvage the film but, at least, she's not adding to its many problems. Other reliably good actors chew over but fail to elevate the mediocre script: Roth's Rainier remains a frustratingly opaque character, while Frank Langella is quite wasted as Father Francis Tucker, a pastor whose strangely controlling relationship with Grace adds a few more wrinkles to the already oddly-constructed plot.

In effect, Grace Of Monaco brings to mind that other mess of a princess biopic: Diana. Both films have impressive pedigrees, from director to headlining actress, and both seem to have completely failed to grasp - much less do justice to - their subject. In a pinch, Grace Of Monaco is the (slightly) better film: there are more complexities at play here that can be glimpsed amidst the shilly-shallying of the script. There is, at least, more of an attempt made to look beyond the princess' love story to find the person within. That's not saying much, however. For the most part, Grace Of Monaco is an awkward, frustrating watch - one that ultimately fails to establish its title character as either person or princess.

it is too easy to criticize it. because it is only glamorous homage to a legend of Hollywood. nothing more. the costumes, the lights, Nicole Kidman herself as inspired choice for remind Grace Kelly, Tim Roth as an ambiguous leader looking the better manner for solve the crisis and drive his marriage, the naive crumbs of conspiracy and the characters as sketches are proofs for accept the film only as nice exercise for remind an old fairy tale in its dramatic aspect. it is not a great film. but it is useful trip in atmosphere of a small European state who remains almost a mystery under the sparkles of a lot of seductive activities.

The opening titles inform us that while the story is fictitious what we are about to view is based on real events. Therefore I'm wondering why the film wasn't re-titled as How Grace Saved Monaco; because that is exactly the story told in this version and dare I say it, in Hitchcockian Style.

The strengths of this short tale (88 mins) are also it's weaknesses. Audiences will be divided because those who come wanting an overview of a dearly loved princess's ideal life will be disappointed. But for those wanting a film depicting a legend and her possible trials and tribulations, through a short period in her life will find it fascinating. Oh, and if your French, I don't think you'll be happy, but then it is told through American eyes. Watch out for McNamara's sickly throwaway line to DeGaulle late in the film.

Kidman is lovely, but plays Nicole as Grace. I'm not sure Grace had that wandering eyebrow though. Tim Roth plays the insignificant prince, he's serviceable but not mesmerising. And then there are others but it is not their film.

Now about the Hitchcockian style; well that's the thing, I don't want to give anything away! It's worth a look but don't get your hopes up !!

A classic example of a fun and very watchable movie blighted by wrong expectations...biased sentiments...and unfathomable demands.

This film clearly states at the start that it is a "fictional story based on true events"...and as such should be viewed as pure entertainment.

It's a small movie with big aspirations...and just plain fun to watch.

Strong acting...not easily pulled off...and highly professional.

Watched it on Netflix with no expectations...found myself pleasantly and sometimes emotionally invested in the "fairytale"...and like all good fairy tales...this is dark in surprising ways.

Watch it for the cast...and don't be too harsh.

The plot is thin but saved mostly by Kidman's acting, the scenes with her and Tucker were excellently played out, beautiful cinematography and the opulent setting. A shame, given the story line could have been better spinned since it's a fiction.

Still worth a watch.

I hope Hollywood would stop using famous and well-known actors to embody famous actors whose lives they pay homage to. As a viewer, my perception becomes too skewed with trying to remember who the homage is for and how well the actor is performing. I would love to imagine the honored person's life being played out in the big screen, if Hollywood doesn't mind. In my opinion, a less known or unknown look-alike would do that. Nicole Kidman is a beautiful actor but I couldn't imagine nor remember Princess Grace. Also, Nicole Kidman does NOT have Grace Kelly's facial bone structure nor the look in her eyes that made Grace Kelly so famous and loved. Now Tim Roth who played the role of Prince Rainier was just frustrating. Disappointing.

After lingering on my watchlist for years, I finally delved into this film, despite its long-standing reputation of being pummeled by overwhelmingly negative reviews. The deciding factor, however, emerged from the scattered praises for Nicole Kidman's stellar performance amidst the critical wreckage.

Upon initiation, it's imperative to declare that the movie grapples with one of the most lackluster scripts to grace (pun intended) the silver screen, coupled with direction so woefully misguided that even Kidman's nearly flawless portrayal finds itself trapped in mediocrity. These two substantial pitfalls, the lamentable script and subpar direction, become the burdens that the lead, Nicole Kidman, valiantly shoulders. Despite her commendable efforts to elevate the dismal writing, her exceptional performance is somewhat sabotaged by the director's missteps. Kudos to Kidman for breathing life into her portrayal of "Grace Kelly." Amidst online dissent claiming Kidman never truly embodied Kelly's essence, it's crucial to acknowledge the Herculean task she faced - a challenge where makeup fell short. The film thus leans heavily on Kidman's acting prowess, and she rises to the occasion admirably. A decade prior, this role could have marked a pinnacle in Kidman's career. Despite her stellar performance, the inevitable truth surfaces - Kidman, already in the later stages of her career, may have been slightly too mature for the part. The accent, however, is a non-issue, as Kidman skillfully mirrors Grace Kelly's breathy vocal nuances and distinctive mannerisms.

In the final analysis, the film earns a commendable 7/10, owing predominantly to Kidman's impeccable performance, complemented by the captivating set design, costumes, and cinematography. The cinematic zenith arrives towards the movie's closure, where Olivier Dahan orchestrates an intensely intimate shot of Kidman during a pivotal speech. Kidman's expressive eyes steal the spotlight, effortlessly eclipsing any distraction posed by a possibly botoxed visage. This climactic moment attests to Kidman's unparalleled brilliance throughout the film.

Really difficult to care about super-rich people maybe having to pay a little tax. Not worth watching. Feels like it belongs in a box set with Natalie Portman doing Jackie and Naomi Watts doing Diana - all of them utterly mediocre.

After watching this movie, I asked myself why I had enjoyed it, in spite of its cheesiness, in-your-face feel-good-ness and insouciance about detail. Then the penny dropped: it had a straight, comprehensible, linear story line, there were no puzzling flashbacks, the characters were clearly delineated...and, what's more, no foul language, no nudity, no drug-taking, none of the trendy, often forced ingredients of contemporary cinema!

This movie is far from perfect, but it is a breath of fresh air, even if the attempted canonization of Kelly doesn't quite come off as intended by its creators. And, mercifully, it's less than two hours long!

After six years of royal wedded bliss (or something like it), Grace Kelly - excuse me, Gracie to her friends - starts feeling the itch. No, not that kind of itch, but the itch to swap royal waves for Hollywood close-ups. Enter Alfred "Hitch" Hitchcock, who dangles the role of Marnie in front of her like a glittering carrot. But here's the catch: Prince Rainier, or Ray as I'm sure his poker buddies call him, isn't exactly thrilled about his wife abandoning her crown for a camera. Gracie signed up to be Monaco's First Housewife, not its latest export to Tinseltown.

Ray has his own problems, like being perennially grumpy and dealing with that killjoy Charles De Gaulle. De Gaulle wants Ray to pay taxes (the horror!), or else France will swallow up tiny Monaco like a snack. What's a prince to do? Certainly not cheer up, that's for sure.

But Gracie, ever the multi-tasker, decides to kill two birds with one impeccably thrown stone. She begins learning French (apparently six years in Monaco wasn't quite enough time to pick it up) and even manages to thwart the annexation. How, you ask? With a long-winded speech at the Red Cross ball that's as riveting as watching paint dry. But hey, disaster was averted, all thanks to Gracie's grace, style, and, of course, those cheekbones.

Can you imagine the tragedy if Monaco had been annexed to France? I'm talking end-of-the-world stuff here, people! But thank goodness Gracie swooped in with her Hollywood charm, and voila, global crisis averted.

Even with my low expectations, I was kind of hoping for a scene where Gracie teaches her Hollywood pals the fine art of gambling and partying, Monaco-style, to boost the principality's revenue. But alas, that would've been way too edgy for this royal snoozefest.

What's truly laughable, though, is how the film treats Monaco-a glorified tax haven and playground for the rich-like it's some sacred ground. The movie acts like preserving the Grimaldi dynasty is somehow a matter of international importance, when we all know it's more about preserving a posh postal code.

Obviously, I watched this on TV, and I'd recommend the same to anyone who occasionally enjoys the guilty pleasure of a truly terrible movie. Because let's be honest, sometimes you need a film so bad it makes your everyday life feel like Oscar material.

It's a great film to watch if you don't know a thing about Grace Kelly. At the beginning of the film, it states that the film is a fictional drama based on true story so if you are expecting a biopic, don't watch this movie as many critics warn.

Nevertheless, this is a great film to watch. In perspective of an occasional movie watcher, it's not such a bad film as many critics write. Nicole Kidman's acting, I believe, captures the moment quite well. Her struggle and sacrifice as a wife, a princess, and an artist are somewhat inspiring. I also liked how supposedly evil French president resembles Hitler. Most importantly, setting and theme are refreshing. If you liked The Iron Lady, you will probably like this film, too.

This movie has sucked me into watching it twice now and, you guys, I'm mad as hell. The trailer leads you to believe that it will be this dramatic re-telling, albeit largely fictional, of Grace Kelly's life when all it really depicts is one or two inconvenient situations that she was faced with. The first time I watched it I was so disappointed and bored by the end but I decided not to review it because I am a Nicole Kidman fan. But then the unthinkable happened. This movie is so boring that I forgot I'd already seen it before and watched it again only to fall victim to the same torturous boredom AGAIN! Do you see what I'm saying, it's that boring I forgot about it. This movie is 1 hour and 43 minutes of stifling yawns and trying to stay awake all while just waiting patiently for it to get even remotely more interesting. What a let down.

Despite the negative reviews, this reviewer saw 'Grace of Monaco' because of its subject matter, Grace Kelly being one of the most naturally beautiful and full-of-depth-and-grace classic film stars, and because Nicole Kidman has given a lot of good performances in her career.

Unfortunately 'Grace of Monaco' disappointed heavily. There are some great biopics around ('Amadeus' and 'The Elephant Man' being prime examples') but also some naff ones. While not quite as poor as 'Diana' or 'William and Kate', films with much worse editing and feel far more like Lifetime projects, 'Grace of Monaco' is one of the naff ones if not entirely without honour.

The best thing about 'Grace of Monaco' is the production values, the sumptuous costumes, sets and scenery looking absolutely breath-taking often. The film is very nicely shot too, though it's not without its dizzying or pedestrian moments in the editing.

It is agreed that Nicole Kidman is miscast, which will be and has been a turn-off for most, being at least a decade too old, four inches too tall (Kelly was tall but not as much as Kidman who is one of the tallest actresses in Hollywood) and not as natural a beauty as evident in some stiff and plastic facial expressions. However, it is whether she gave a good enough performance despite the miscasting that matters, and Kidman actually gives a very committed performance, that's charismatic and deeply felt too. The other good performance is the gleefully enjoyable Hitchcock of Roger Ashton-Griffiths, who does try to bring needed urgency to the proceedings, the culminating banquet actually being the film's dramatic highlight.

However, Tim Roth is too archetypal and too much of a dork as Rainier, while Robert Lindsay plays his very roughly drawn character too broadly and Derek Jacobi and particularly Frank Langella are wasted. There are some odd accents going on as well, as well as a lack of chemistry, and the characters are bland or annoying stereotypes, some not feeling relevant to the story and are as plastic as Kidman's Botox.

Faring worst are the very empty and half-baked script that sounds like soap opera past its sell by date, an overwrought and over-bearing music score that is too reminiscent of a comedy or a heavy-handed drama and the direction which sees violent and frequently jarring shifts in tone that suggests that those responsible had no idea what the film was trying to be or what to focus on. The story tries to be careful not to offend, but ends up being dull, dramatically soggy and laughably ridiculous with an overlong running time that makes some of the story feel stretched.

Overall, hugely disappointing, looks good and Kidman's performance is committed but what gives a film weight, depth and staying power is lost in translation. 3/10 Bethany Cox

Hahahaha I wonder why people are so comparing this movie with the real life of princess Grace, this is a movie of course not 100% of it depicts 100% real life story of a person. However this movie is excellent to realize one time event of life yup the event where France tried to overtake Monaco but indeed Grace managed to save the whole country and became awesome magnificent princess and mother of 2 for this movie.

Nicole Kidman acting wonderfully well which showed great struggle between staying in a foreign literally different culture with her liberal "freedom to speak" culture hometown, she obviously succeed showing her emotions and grace as the old nobility where "divorce" was taboo at that time. Tim Roth as prince Reiner showing great chemistry with her while not losing his excellent skill of acting. Most of the actors in this movie are great cast with wonderful scenery and setting. The director succeed bringing the best of the actors' skill and kept me watching this movie until the end without a hint of boringness.

I don't really know about the history of Grace Kelly and her family that well just knew her as a beautiful actress and a princess who loved her family dearly but through this movie I really admire her more since she could survive the bad phase of her life and conflicts even though it's not the end of her problems yet she continued her role model as a wonderful princess, wive, and mother.

When I found this film I thought it would be a biographical film around the figure of Grace Kelly, one of the most interesting in the cinematographic scene, since she was the only one who made the leap to royalty by marrying a prince from a country lost on Europe. However, the film focuses on the political events surrounding a crisis in the country's relations with De Gaulle's France, which wanted to impose French taxes on Monaco, as there were many French citizens living there to evade taxes.

The political and economic question behind the film is quite derisory, especially if we take into account that the world was then paralyzed in the face of the Cuban missile crisis. However, at the time, it was important for Monaco to show its sovereignty over its more powerful neighbor, and to continue with attractive taxes for millionaires and companies. Unfortunately, I have serious doubts about how much of this film is true, as everything is frankly exaggerated and stilted, and a diplomatic and fiscal crisis is transformed into an imminent threat of war in Central Europe! A bloody war that was halted by the energy and courage of an American princess... I really have serious doubts about all this!

Whatever the truth, the fact is that the film has an excellent Nicole Kidman. She is a good actress and has, herself, an aura of indisputable elegance, which she used to bring to life the former American actress, later princess. But even considering the good work of the actress, she is very different from the real Grace. The two don't look alike, even with the greatest goodwill. But she's not the only actress who seems to have been a casting mistake: who looked at Paz Vega and saw Maria Callas? In the midst of it all, Tim Roth would almost have escaped if it weren't for a tired, monotonic, tobacco-drenched portrayal of a prince struggling to control his tiny kingdom. Roger Ashton Griffiths works well as Hitchcock, but his appearance is occasional and unimportant. Frank Langella did well, but appears little, and the same can be said of Derek Jacobi.

In addition to Kidman's excellent performance and a super stilted and exaggerated story, with power struggles, behind-the-scenes moves and threats of war around a quiet little town near the Mediterranean, the film gives us excellent production values: if the audience looking for a film loaded with all the glamour of European royalty, this film is prepared to fulfill this desire. Luxurious dresses, jewelry, excellent costumes, palatial settings that make the most realistic dreams come true, and that make us really think that Grace Kelly had the life that many young women asked for. In addition, the film has good cinematography, good colors and light, and a relatively good pace, which doesn't waste much time on anything.