The Young Victoria

In a more picture world, Sandra Bullock would have never received an Academy Award nomination. That fifth slot would have gone to Emily Blunt for her pitch-perfect dewy interpretation of the young Queen Victoria. Vulnerable but sexy, stubborn but still charming, she is scrumptious and deserved to be recognized. (And yes, she is far too attractive to look anything like the real Victoria.)

The Young Victoria shares much in common with the numerous other costume dramas of the past ten years, even if it is a step below Elizabeth it is miles better than The Other Boleyn Girl or Elizabeth: The Golden Age. It lacks the distinctness of Elizabeth’s visual palette and richness of emotional textures, but it’s a sweetly fluffy treat. Yes, the same kind of political satellite’s maneuver to control our young queen, and she mistakes being headstrong for being strong, but she is only a teenager after all. It does follow another pattern set by Elizabeth: who cares about historical accuracy when you’re trying to describe the emotions and mentality of this young monarch. I feel like I learned something about Victoria from this.

And, yes, since it is a historical costume drama it comes armed to the teeth with an amazing visual palette. The costumes are meticulously crafted and, quite honestly, things of rare and shimmering beauty. Blunt’s attractive face gets framed by all sorts of flowers, braids, buns, hats, scarves, lace, you name it. And the real sets – roughly, nine castles, stately manors, and, of course, Westminister Abbey – are always a glorious thing to behold, especially when they’re outfitted in such ornate and Baroque designs. Visually, this is fantastic, even if it’s all been used and seen before.

What can I say? I love a good period costume drama, especially if some kind of royalty and political intrigue is involved.