MovieChat Forums > Whatever Love Means (2005) Discussion > Softer side of...

Softer side of...

posted 12 years ago by valsobo
3 replies | jump to latest

Story of a nearly life-long love affair between two people equally matched on both emotional and maturity levels. This movie humanizes two people who are regularly vilified, giving us an idea of the loving and supportive relationship they have provided for one another, regardless of their wanton disregard for the feelings, responsibilities, commitments or expectations of everybody around them.

Please let’s do remember that there have really been only two self-declared and publicly acknowledged royal whores in the 20th Century - - Camilla Parker-Bowles and her great-grandmother Alice Keppel. Quite the legacy.

This movie shows that they may have felt pressured and/or manipulated to make the choices they made that originally kept them apart. I’m sure they each have a hundred reasons as to why they subsequently felt justified to break the rules – and the hearts of so many around them – to get what they wanted in the end. Yes, this movie presents these two ‘lovers’ in a softer light than we’ve seen before. However, the simple fact remains that they are weak-willed, selfish adulterers, as well as disrespectful children AND somewhat heartless irresponsible parents. All in all they are both rather pitiful human beings, but I’m glad they have each other.

Good movie about the softer side of two despicable human beings.

[–] brunhilda2013 9 years ago

If this movie was supposed to generate sympathy for them, it failed mightily IMHO, especially when it came to Camilla. Charles was obviously in love her, enough to renouce the throne at least in the movie but she rejected that saying his life would be forever meaningless if he did. That's only partly true. They could have married for love, he could have renounced the throne if necessary but then put his education and money to use in ways that a prince can't. This could have been an opportunity to do some real good in world. What a shame that he listened to her rather than consider that.

[–] whoanelly (1558) 4 years ago

I highly doubt Camilla’s opinion is the only one he considered. I’m sure his parents’ opinion, and even more, his grandmother’s, weighed heavily in his decision. The pow was extremely close to his grandmother, and knew full well her feelings about Edward VIII’s abdication because of Wallis Simpson.

[–] whoanelly (1558) 4 years ago

I don’t disagree with most of your assertions, but I’m not inclined to have such a harsh, black-and-white view of them, either. Aside from Charles and Camilla’s infidelity, there were so many other problems with the Wales’s marriage.

Charles and Diana were a train wreck even before their marriage pulled out of the station. It was destined to fail, and not just because of Camilla. Diana Spencer was, perhaps, the young woman most ill-suited to adjusting to royal life in all of England. She was far too young and lacked the maturity and experience necessary to cope with extreme public scrutiny and royal Obligations. She came to the marriage with so much personal emotional baggage from her parents’ divorce: she was insecure, ungrounded, had zero support system, lacked sophistication and education, And was just far too young for Charles. And They had next to nothing in common.