Royally Ever After

source: Royally Ever After

I like the main characters, for the most part. But the female lead (the pretty teacher) has got to be the stupidest "smart" person on the planet. Common sense says you don't admit to picking royal flowers while you're sitting at the dinner table with King, Queen, and other royal guests. Or talk about the gardener, or the cook. Anyone with half a brain should know that. So yeah, the writers make her out to be an idiot; in fact, she seems to have a knack for saying the exact wrong thing. I guess it's supposed to come off as her being "down-to-earth" or charming, or something, but .... sorry, it doesn't work out that way. Quite the opposite: it's an epic fail.

Amazing direction! Fantastic performances! Just the romantic respite needed in days of so much negativity. The cinematography is stunning and overall it's just lovely. I saw some negative posts about the film and simply don't understand all the seriousness. This is Hallmark people. We go watch these for romantic escape, love, and a happy ending. Sarah's character is not obsessed royalty or tabloids. I get it. Neither am I! I would have made, largely, many of her faux pas'. In addition, it's a rom-com people! And it perfectly echos what happened in reality regarding a "change in tradition" - thank god! I loved it! Kudos to all involved!

Hallmark really disappointed me with this one. It had no emotion, no "magic", no "fireworks" and no appeal. The actors were OK but they had nothing with which to work. The script was horrendous, and direction even worse. The story showed the writer had no imagination at all. I only gave it 2 stars because of the actors. Not worth watching.

I love to watch Hallmark movies - they are like Xanax for my cynical heart - taking me back to my 'tweens when I devoured Harlequin and Regency Romances by the hundreds and believed in True Love with a tall, handsome laconic man with piercing green/blue/grey eyes. This offering looks like a rush job cobbled together to maximize on the Prince Harry/Meghan Markle real-life fairy tale and it shows - poorly. The average American girl is nauseatingly sweet and perfect - saint-like almost, in her virtue and kindness, beloved by all. Her parents, however, are a cruel caricature of gauche, classless and buffoonish colonials daring to impose themselves upon those who think that they are "better" thanks to adhering to ancient, feudal traditions of patronizing insular superiority. The way that this alleged "Prince" treats this paragon with whom he is so besotted is appalling, resembling the loving courtesy with which Harry has demonstrated to Meghan about as much as his grandmother resembles Kris Jenner. This ignoble man springs the fact of his real identity hours before he plans to whisk her away to his castle, entreating her to join him, knowing that she will be clueless about protocol, lacking the wardrobe one needs to spend time with a leisure class where one is expected to make three full changes of exquisite clothing per day, and utterly without support. Harry, and William before him, and their father before that- made sure that their girlfriends were privately schooled in the art of the monarchy. Family members, friends and staff made sure that these women were secure in the many odd rules that govern the behavior of the royal family before they were introduced to the Queen, who must approve the marriage of the next six people in line for the throne. Diana needed only some additional training, having been part of that world her entire life; Katherine, as a member of a wealthy commoner family who lived in those elite circles to a degree thanks to her long relationship with William, needed to learn more about protocol and rules. Being British, she grew up at least somewhat aware of the traditions of the monarchy. Meghan, like poor Sara, was American and did have the constant awareness of the pageantry and ancient customs which even the most republican or underprivileged British child has. Yet Harry and his supporters protected her and worked to make sure that she would be letter perfect in her new role as a royal. This selfish rat, unlike Harry, threw his beloved into the deep end and watched her wallow as his piranha like family nibbled away at her bewildered and bewildering (to them) behavior. He is either as thoughtless and superior as they are or he is a complete dolt who thought that her innate perfection would conquer reality. Any person who truly loves someone would have the kindness and consideration to prepare her for meeting his family - regardless of who they are. He would warn her of each members' quirks, and if there are significant differences in social standing, culture or history, he would explain and advise her so that she could put her best self forward. Of course the peons adored her - schmoozing with the servants, sharing plebian recipes with the Cordon Bleu chef, bestowing muffins on the palace guards - clearly demonstrating her saintly perfection as far superior to the centuries of careful breeding of her hosts and fiancé. The writers of this script must be misogynistic Mean Girls who mistake thinly disguised virtue-signaling about income inequality and cruel mockery of that with which they do not agree as entertainment. The end should have been a shot of Sara kicking him in the nether regions and stalking off right after he told her that he was a prince.

I love Hallmark movies! But this movie could have been better with another lead actress. I lost interest after 33 mins.

Not up to your standard. Made lead actress appear foolish. In this day and age women should not be portrayed this way.

Why make movies that make the American "commoner" seem so dumb and the "English" like they have broomsticks up them? Coffee? Yes we have it in UK.

Even though this movie is not going to win anyone any academy awards, I am a bit surprised by how harshly people have rated it! Hallmark has been hammering in the royal movies (definitely in an attempt to capitalize on the royal wedding craze) and this movie is no different from any that have come prior---as a matter of fact, it is nearly a carbon copy of Hallmark's "A Royal Christmas," minus the Christmas themes and some of the charm that Lacey Chabert brings to every movie she is part of. That being said, I do think it was a rather sweet film. The two leads, Fiona Gubelmann as Sarah and Torrance Coombs as Daniel, were adorable together. We are told more about the development of their relationship than we actually see it, especially at the beginning, which is a shame, but this is understandably done to make room for the oodles of drama the movie has to cram in later. The two of them had nice chemistry, and I found a few of their scenes quite sweet, like when they dance together on the palace's patio. That being said, this movie falls into its own cliches a little bit too hard. Fiona overacts like crazy on multiple occasions, and whether this is bad direction or a bad script or just bad acting, it's hard to tell. Sarah's awkwardness when meeting her prince boyfriend's family is so overdone that it instantly reminded me of the scene from Friends when Phoebe, after meeting Mike's bouegie parents, says, "I'm sorry, I've never met a boyfriend's parents before!" to which Mike replies, "But you have met people before, right?" Sarah does successfully charm all the non-high society people though, such as the employees at the castle, all in a transparent attempt to get us, the viewers, to adore her. She can't seem to win over the stuffy family, though, which is a common denominator for all of these royal movies---the family, usually just the queen, are so deeply ingrained in their own traditions and prejudices that they cannot learn to love their son's girlfriend until they have learned a valuable lesson. In this case, this valuable lesson is learned rather abruptly about three quarters of the way through the film, at which point the parents are suddenly quite fond of Sarah. Not so easily won over is Daniel's sister Fiona, who is in line for the throne and will become queen should Daniel forfeit his princehood by marrying a commoner, and thus, a plan is born. I will say, the scheming sister is a new one for these movies---it's usually a regal acquaintance of the family/former flame of the prince desperate to hold a crown who is vying for this position of Evil Stock Character. Fiona, however, has a face absolutely meant for nefarious plans, and plays her role convincingly enough. My main complaint (which is unfortunately a rather large one) is that this movie has been done so many times before that the entire idea of it seems tired. I don't think surprise princes is a plot that's been worn out yet, but the way Hallmark is executing it is always a cookie cutter of its previous royal film that they are slightly boring to watch. How about a conflict that doesn't resolve around disapproving parents? How about the man is the commoner and the woman is the princess (I have only seen this iteration done once by Hallmark, in Once Upon A Holiday)? These are the sorts of films that we will never see sequels for, because as far as Hallmark is concerned, now that the family is won over and the throne's integrity is still intact, there is absolutely nothing left to do. I would love to see these sorts of movies shake things up a bit. Lastly, as a bit of a nitpick: can Hallmark please find formal gowns that don't look like they came straight out of the bargain bin at a prom store? That blue dress was just atrocious!

I have a big rant to impart, but will leave the verdict to one of my oldest friends, with whom I watched this. We thought it would be funny, but it got under both our skin. He said it best: {He asked to be introduced so all would know this comes from}..."an ex-ladyboy born in Vietnam who left at the end of the American war. A grown man who loves being a man but hates to see anyone, anywhere be put in a box because of what they looked like when they were born" He dictates: "Seriously, Hallmark is putting out this trash? You know they just want to get old ladies flipping through the channel guide...the ones who are into the royal wedding. And that's so insulting. Like, they may be interested in the wedding because it's exotic and beautiful and the clothes are amazing and it's just fun to watch all those rich-ass royals finally do the fun stuff they used to do back in the old days. But those ladies aren't stupid. They don't want to watch this crap. Give it some romance, not this 'Oh, I never noticed this boy is obviously hiding something' nonsense. Girl, if he gives it up, he's secretly rich. If he doesn't, he's secretly gay. Just be happy you're on the good end of that because they're never secretly gay and rich. Really, it's just insulting to anyone who's into men and isn't a b***h. Yeah, he's a prince, but the minute he tells you that, you also know he's a liar. Not just a liar, but the kind that has a whole plan about how to lie to you and get away with it. That's good for some medieval Cinderella nonsense, but now, these days? What kind of awful movie tells people that lying about who you are is okay?" That is verbatim, and I have no further comment.