W.E. 2011

David Germain, Associated Press: The question that needs to be asked about Madonna's "W.E." is why? Read more

Manohla Dargis, New York Times: Instead of a film about a love that conquered a king and nearly undid a kingdom, Madonna has come up with a female friendship movie, which would be fine if she weren't busy trying to prove her art-film bona fides. Read more

John Anderson, Wall Street Journal: The director's apparent blindness to the epic banality of her subjects suggests that the whole project is one royally misguided mess. Read more

Claudia Puig, USA Today: The disparate strands of the two stories never make much sense the way they're braided together. Read more

Moira MacDonald, Seattle Times: "W.E." is a mess, but it's certainly an attractive one; the characters are underdeveloped, yet so relentlessly art- directed that at least there's always something lovely to look at. Read more

Nathan Rabin, AV Club: Calling W.E. a film gives Madonna and her collaborators too much credit. Read more

Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic: The production is nice looking, and telling the Edward-and-Wallis story from her side is an interesting idea, but it's one that Madonna simply can't pull off here. Read more

Ty Burr, Boston Globe: [It] tries awfully hard. In the end it tries our patience. Read more

Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: Madonna as a director has no discernible idea of how to locate a tone, or a provocative blend of tones. Her camera makes circles around its subjects every chance it gets in ways that evoke - nothing. Read more

Lisa Kennedy, Denver Post: The film is stylishly shot. And, in weaving the stories of Wally and Wallis, Madonna trusts viewers to move from mood to mood, era to era without overexplanation, the way music-video editing long ago trained us to. Read more

Tom Long, Detroit News: "W.E." is not awful. It looks quite nice at times, and Riseborough delivers an exquisite if overdrawn performance as Wallis. Read more

Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly: The movie is a folly, a desultory vanity project for its director and co-writer. Read more

William Goss, Film.com: It would be one thing if W.E. were strictly a swooning counterpoint to Speech's scowling dismissal of Wallis and Edward's relationship, an embellishment of an already notorious romance rather than a twice-lathered soap opera. Read more

Todd McCarthy, Hollywood Reporter: Madonna's second foray into directing is pleasing to the eyes and ears, but lacking anything for the soul. Read more

Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: "W.E.," Madonna's second go at directing a feature film, leaves one wishing she'd find other creative outlets for those times when she's bored with the pop-star life. Read more

Connie Ogle, Miami Herald: A movie more concerned with how things look than how they feel. Read more

Anthony Lane, New Yorker: What on earth is the point of a Madonna product, in any medium, if it contains not a single orgy? Read more

Elizabeth Weitzman, New York Daily News: Madonna's second shot at directing is a definite step up from her first, 2008's "Filth and Wisdom." Unfortunately, that's faint praise at best. Read more

Kyle Smith, New York Post: I found the movie fascinating. Except for the boring bits. Read more

Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer: Madonna the director deserves a script better than the one Madonna the screenwriter handed off to her. Read more

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: "W.E." is an elegant, ambitious and relentlessly monotonous film. Read more

Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: Director Madonna's tenacity deserves praise, unlike anything else in this torturously torpid costume drama, except the costumes which gleam with period elegance. Read more

Andrew O'Hehir, Salon.com: You can't call "W.E." a total disaster; it's too pretty, too nonsensical and finally too insignificant for that. Read more

Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: As a director, Madonna has flair without ability, but she does have flair. Read more

Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune: With "W.E." Madonna gorges on glamour, architectural porn and haute couture but starves the mind. Read more

Joe Williams, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: It's hard to hate a movie that escorts us to such lovely locales, but instead of marking the territory as her own, Madonna has directed a potentially provocative story like a virgin. Read more

Rick Groen, Globe and Mail: For Madonna, what better symbol than a vanity mirror for her vanity project - both are stylish and both reflect nothing more than their own emptiness. Read more

Leah Rozen, TheWrap: No matter her audacity, the Material Girl is only as good as her material, and Madonna has only half a movie here. Read more

Dave Calhoun, Time Out: Riseborough's acting offers total commitment in the face of lunacy, but it's a shame she's flapping around in a film with such a terrible script and warped sense of purpose. Read more

Linda Barnard, Toronto Star: W.E. is a glorious mess of a disappointing costume drama, which shows all the directing restraint of a kid with a new box of paints and not much more focus. Read more

Leslie Felperin, Variety: Burdened with risible dialogue and weak performances, pic doesn't have much going for it apart from lavish production design and terrific, well-researched costumes. Read more

Karina Longworth, Village Voice: Certainly, W.E. is the work of a woman who apparently hasn't spent time with normal human beings in a while. Read more

Ann Hornaday, Washington Post: A movie that's less about people than the fetishistic obsession with style. Read more