Representation matters. The presence of diverse and relatable characters in literature and media plays a crucial role in enabling individuals to embrace and accept their true selves. Casey McQuiston's debut novel, Red, White, & Royal Blue, achieved bestselling status, in part due to its significant representation within the LGBTQ+ community. When I initially read the book in 2019, I celebrated its diverse ensemble, the queer love story it portrayed, and its profound impact as a form of representation for LGBTQ+ individuals. When news broke that Amazon had acquired the rights to adapt this beloved story into a film, I greeted the news with a blend of optimism and caution. Could the filmmakers capture the book's magic and do justice to its representation?
The film faithfully adheres to the core plot of the novel. Alex Claremont-Diaz, portrayed by Taylor Zakhar Perez, holds the esteemed position of First Son in the United States. His mother, performed by a Texas-drawled Uma Thurman, is the first woman to occupy the highest office in the nation. The narrative begins with Alex's intense rivalry with Prince Henry, played by Nicholas Galitzine, the younger member of the British royal family. Their disruptive behavior at the wedding of the Prince's elder brother, who is also the future king, threatens to spark a major international incident. They are compelled to fabricate a close friendship and embark on a goodwill visit to the United Kingdom to avert this crisis.
As the two navigate the complexities of this fabricated friendship, their rivalry gradually transforms into a genuine and profound connection, eventually blossoming into a romantic relationship. However, their path is fraught with challenges, especially the imperative to conceal their love amidst the relentless public scrutiny accompanying their high-profile lives. Royal traditions bind Henry, and Alex strives to uphold a carefully cultivated image during his mother's contentious re-election campaign. As their love for each other deepens, they must continue to work diligently to keep it hidden from the public eye.
The film adaptation of Red, White, & Royal Blue is about as good as one might expect from a straight-to-streaming adaptation. While the novel's core plot remains intact, the storyline has noticeable omissions. Some characters are condensed into one, and certain changes alter the story's impact compared to the book. This is understandable, given the time constraints of the film medium, but it does make the narrative feel forced compared to the original. The film includes some wide shots where the actors are clearly in front of green screens, and the backgrounds are obviously computer-generated landscapes. While this choice didn't significantly affect the movie, it gave it a simpler aesthetic reminiscent of productions you might find on the Disney Channel. Each time this occurred, I wished the shots had simply been omitted.
The film excels in portraying the chemistry and charisma of the two lead actors. The spark between Alex and Henry, present in the book, is brought to life authentically and keeps viewers invested in the film. The supporting cast also delivers fantastic performances, fully committing to their roles. While it may not be the best movie of the year, it effectively represents the themes that resonated with many readers of the novel. Ultimately, this representation strikes a chord with audiences, and the film will likely have a similar impact.
I always think the book is better when it comes to books vs. movies. But I'm glad there were good things about this particular movie version that worked well and resonated with you.
ReplyDeleteIt is pretty rare for the movie to be better, but I always get a thrill seeing scenes I read come to life.
DeleteI'll have to check out the movie at some point. I haven't read the book so I'll have nothing to compare it to.
ReplyDeleteIt is super cute!
DeleteI read the book. It was sort of meh, and the look at royals was so US centric lol
ReplyDeleteHaha it is definitely from an American POV
DeleteGlad to hear the film adaptation was a mostly a good one. Most are a disappointment in some way if I've read the book prior to watching the film. I find it's better if I read the book a long while back so the details aren't as fresh so I'm not seeing the deficits as much. I don't like green screen stuff either.
ReplyDeleteTime between definitely helps. In this case, the omissions were pretty glaring, but the overall plot was in tact.
DeleteI hadn't seen the film, but I would be sad if any of the friends were omitted. I actually wanted the book to become a series with each friend getting their story. Just saying.
ReplyDeleteYeah that kind of bummed me out. It definitely would have been more impactful as a series. Most of the side plots are removed.
DeleteI always get nervous when I hear a beloved book is being adapted for the screen. I generally just avoid the films/tv series because Hollywood gets them wrong SO much of the time. I'm glad this one does the book justice and that you enjoyed it overall.
ReplyDeleteIt always amazes me how Hollywood will take the things that made us enjoy a book and just completely remove them for the movie. Then they wonder why the movie isn't as successful as the book!
Delete