By KATHERINE GYPSON
Observer Staff
March 5, 2008

A truly great historical film finds a way to connect the emotional truth of its characters with a particular moment in time, interlacing the larger dramas of history with the narrative arc of an individual. Historically dubious films such as “Braveheart” and “Gladiator” managed to overcome deficiencies in accuracy by introducing the audience to characters full of heart and soul – people with problems that seemed organic to their times.

Ignoring the complexities of the historical record, “The Other Boleyn Girl” (Columbia Pictures) tries very hard to be one of those movies that, at the very least, get the emotional truth right.

Photo courtesy of Sony Pictures Entertainment.
Rival sisters Anne (Natalie Portman) and Mary Boleyn (Scarlett Johanson) watch for the arrival of Henry VIII (Eric Bana).

We first meet the two Boleyn sisters, Mary (an oddly cast but effective Scarlett Johansson) and the spirited and gutsy Anne (a strong Natalie Portman), as children frolicking in a field. All too soon, they grow up to be pawns in their father’s and uncle’s elaborate power schemes at the court of Henry VIII (Eric Bana). The kingdom is without an heir and the king is ready for a mistress. Each sister takes her turn in the royal bed, with varying dynastic and foreign policy implications. The film does a nice job of portraying the damage done to the women themselves as the very least of the men’s concerns.

The emotional center of the film shifts back and forth, from one sister to another and even, for a time, to Henry VIII, portrayed here both as a deeply misguided leader and as a man who craves love and affection. Some have already criticized Eric Bana’s performance as wooden, but in a screenplay devoted to the power and powerlessness of women, this is hardly his movie. He appears as a distant figure, as unknowable to the audience as he is to the two Boleyn women.

The film circles around these lovers, desperately trying to make the audience care. Consequently, the tone of the movie varies wildly, from finely played drama (any scene involving Henry’s first wife, Catherine of Aragon) to over-the-top soap opera to a surprisingly dark finish with a squirm-inducing incest subplot.

It makes for a movie that is almost there; a movie full of emotionally heavy scenes that play either as far too overdramatic or curiously missing a beat. In particular, Anne’s transformation from a feisty girl into a young woman well acquainted with the ways of manipulation plays false. A key event affecting her character goes by so quickly it is difficult to accept her motivations for the rest of the movie.

Director Justin Chadwick (“The Queen,” “The Last King of Scotland”) favors long establishing shots and seems enamored with viewing action through screens and blurry windowpanes – a technique that was used to greater effect ten years ago in Shekhar Kapur’s “Elizabeth.” The costume designs are truly terrible, with some of the gown materials resembling that of a tablecloth.

Oddly enough, the movie finds its heart in the final shot, as it tracks Anne’s child, the future Elizabeth I, running through a field. Ahead of her lies a future of knowledge and power never available to the Boleyn sisters. But then, that story belongs to another movie.

In theaters now. Rated PG-13 for mature thematic elements, sexual content and some violent images.