Victoria & Abdul 2017 123movies

Watch: Victoria & Abdul 2017 123movies, Full Movie Online – Abdul Karim (Ali Fazal) arrives from India to participate in Queen Victoria’s (Dame Judi Dench’s) golden jubilee. The young clerk is surprised to find favor with the Queen. As Victoria questions the constrictions of her long-held position, the two forge an unlikely and devoted alliance that her household and inner circle try to destroy. As their friendship deepens, the Queen begins to see a changing world through new eyes, joyfully reclaiming her humanity..
Plot: Queen Victoria strikes up an unlikely friendship with a young Indian clerk named Abdul Karim.
Smart Tags: #queen_of_england #unlikely_friendship #muslim #royal_court #courtier #racism #snob #silver_jubilee #servant #embroidery #glorification #loosely_based_on_historical_events #based_on_true_story #based_on_book #odd_couple #reference_to_the_queen_of_england #falling_asleep #british_royalty #crown_prince #british_empire #empress_of_india

Find Alternative – Victoria & Abdul 2017, Streaming Links:

123movies | FMmovies | Putlocker | GoMovies | SolarMovie | Soap2day

Ratings:

	6.8/10 Votes: 36,183
	66% | RottenTomatoes
	58/100 | MetaCritic
	N/A Votes: 1049 Popularity: 12.444 | TMDB

Reviews:

I wouldn’t say this is a memorable historical film, but it was interesting and entertaining enough to hold my attention. I researched the background a little bit, and I am not sure why they made some of their changes to how the unlikely friendship actually transpired. I assume it was to simplify the story.

And as it happens, It is surprising that the story has gotten told at all. Apparently extreme measures undertaken by the royals after to obliterate any record of the unlikely friendship after Queen Victoria’s death. anyone who has read about the history of British monarchs will recognize this attempt to control the narrative of the royals as they guard the parameters of the succession.

But it is worth a watch regardless about exactly how accurate the details are. History is written by the ones in control, and this is a cool exception.

**A good movie, on almost every level.**

I really like films with a historical background or those linked to the monarchy, which has a lot to do with my personal life, my birth family and also with my work as historian. I was very curious about this movie, and today I finally got to see it. And I can say that it was really good. I can’t say that everything is fine, there are several scenes and moments that seem too imaginative to have actually happened, but the overall picture is quite positive.

The relationship between the mighty Queen Victoria and this personal servant of hers was surely the subject of harsh criticism and enormous misunderstanding. The British court was then, like most of Europe, deeply prejudiced, racist and Eurocentric. There was really a belief that Europe was civilization and that the colonizing and imperialist efforts of the European powers would take some of that civilization to a barbaric world, with strange customs, lacking in Christian religion, education, manners, modern infrastructures that only white Europeans could manage. This was the British stance in India, and elsewhere in its empire. For us this may be shocking, and we have seen a wave of destruction of statues and monuments linked to the European colonial past because of this general feeling of shock and repudiation… but history will not disappear just because we sweep it under the rug. It is with the teachings of history, inside and outside the classroom, that we learn, and erasing the visible traces of a past that offends us (or that offends other peoples) is useless. I think we shouldn’t be ashamed of having been empires, and of having been present in other countries, or having dominated other peoples. For better or worse, this marked both sides (dominators and dominated), and the cultural exchanges that took place helped shape the countries and peoples we know today. I think it is much more productive to learn from all this: to learn not to make the same mistakes, and on the other hand, to make the best use of the bridges and links that this common past has established between different nations from several parts of the world. Sorry for the rant, but I think it comes in handy.

As the respectable reader has already noticed, the film explores the relationship between two very different people: the queen of the greatest empire of her time and a humble clerk who happened to serve her, becoming one of her favorites and shocking the racist and futile court. Much of what we know of this connection has been lost because the letters and documents were overwhelmingly burned after Victoria’s death, but I think the film really captured the essence of what happened there. Judi Dench is a great actress, who curiously has already given life to Victoria in an older film, and is perfectly suited for the role and manages to establish a very positive chemistry with Ali Fazal, who is charismatic, friendly and captures our interest and our affinity. There are several characters in the film that seem sketchy and uninteresting, and most royal court figures fall into this group. I liked, however, the performance of Michael Gambon, Tim Piggot Smith and Eddie Izzard. The end of the film is particularly touching.

On a technical level, I have to highlight the judicious and intelligent choice of filming locations, in particular Osborne House, a former royal residence closely linked to the monarch. The film uses that footage well, captures color and light very well, and builds an elegant, warm cinematography that’s pleasing to the eye and very engaging. Being a period film, an extra effort was put into the sets and costumes, and I can say that I haven’t noticed any major errors or problems here. The biggest criticism I can make is the difficulty I felt in understanding the passage of time: it would be difficult, for someone who didn’t know the story well, to say if the action of the film takes place in the course of just a few days or the course of several years. Also, the score by Thomas Newman, written for the film, turned out to be excellent.

Such a beautiful movie.
The first thing anyone will say after watching this movie is how utterly amazing Judi Dench is, and rightly so, she ones again dons the robes of Queen Victoria and gives a commanding performance as one of the most famous monarchs. A performance worthy of an Oscar, she is an actress with unrivalled talent. This film is so much more then Dench’s performance, spellbinding though it was.

Ali Fazal, also worthy of accolades and awards, for his superb performance as Indian servant Abdul Karim. His performance is actually rather captivating, The Queen was taken under his spell and as a viewer so was I. Such an intriguing, fascinating character, probably unlike any other man she’d ever encountered.

Superb production values throughout, the film was visually dazzling, sumptuous settings, jaw dropping costumes, this was a treat for the senses.

A film is meant to move, and allow for escapism, when it can educate as well, it’s worth of the elevated sore of 10/10.

Absolutely loved it.

The Loneliness of Power
First we had “Mrs Brown”, a film about the real-life relationship between Queen Victoria (played by Judi Dench) and one of her servants. And now we have “Victoria & Abdul, another film about the real-life relationship between Queen Victoria (played by Judi Dench) and one of her servants. The subject of the first film was the Scottish ghillie John Brown, whose friendship with the Queen proved controversial because it gave rise to rumours that the two were having a sexual relationship and even that they were secretly married (hence the title). I don’t think anyone believed that Victoria had married her Indian-born servant Abdul Karim- nobody ever called her “Mrs Karim”- but their relationship was nevertheless controversial. In an age when the supremacy of the white race was widely taken for granted, many British people would have regarded a close friendship between their Queen and an Indian, especially an Indian of humble social origins, as quite inappropriate.

The film relates how in 1887, the year of Victoria’s Golden Jubilee, Abdul Karim, a clerk from Agra, was one of two Indians selected to present her with a medal on behalf of the Indian Government. By the Queen’s wish the two men remained in England as her servants and a close relationship grew up between her and Karim after she asked him to teach her Urdu (or, as she referred to it “Hindustani”). He became her confidant and she gave him the title “Munshi”, meaning “teacher”; this was a reference not merely to his role as a teacher of Urdu but also implied that he was, in some sense, her philosophical and spiritual guide as well. (She was deeply impressed by his devotion to his Muslim faith). His closeness to the Queen, however, made him unpopular both with the senior members of the Royal Household (who resented the fact that a man they regarded as their inferior was being treated as their equal) and by the servants (who resented the fact that a man they regarded as, at best, their equal was being treated as their superior). Karim was also disliked by Victoria’s son Bertie, the future Edward VII, and as soon as the old Queen died he was shipped back to India on the new King’s orders.

Much of the criticism of the film has been political rather than artistic; director Stephen Frears has been accused of whitewashing colonialism and of depicting Abdul Karim as excessively servile. Yet it is a matter of historical record that Victoria was deeply attached to Karim and deplored any attempt to denigrate him, and indeed Indians in general, on account of their race or skin colour. The film’s depiction of her as a sort of proto-anti-racist is therefore, to some account, historically accurate. And as for allegations that Ali Fazal played Karim as “too servile”, he was, after all, a servant. It would have been very unwise for him to have treated the Queen, who was both his employer and his sovereign, in anything other than a deferential manner.

One might well ask why, if Queen Victoria was an anti-racist, she was happy to reign over an Empire founded upon the idea that all men are not created equal and that the white races had the duty to export, if need be by force of arms, their supposedly superior civilisation to other parts of the world. That would be a good question; all I can say is that the Victorian age did not see, as our age sees, a contradiction between a belief in the moral rightness of the British Empire and the belief that one should treat individual members of other races with the same courtesy and respect that one would extend to Europeans. The standard “white man’s burden” justification for imperialism strikes us as being at best patronising and at worst hypocritical. At the time it did not necessarily strike people in the same way.

There are a few historical errors. In a scene set in 1887, Liliuokalani is described as “Queen of Hawaii”; in that year she was still a Princess and did not become Queen until 1891. Victoria, who was regularly kept briefed by her ministers and who had access to government papers, would have been a lot more knowledgeable about the causes of the Indian Mutiny than she is shown here. Giacomo Puccini, born in 1858, would have been much younger in the 1890s than the character played here by the 68-year-old Simon Callow. By the time he became King, Edward VII was nearly bald; Eddie Izzard shows him with a full head of hair. The representation of the film’s central theme, the Victoria/Abdul relationship, however, seems to be relatively accurate.

As with “Mrs Brown”, one of the film’s main themes is the loneliness of power. The two films explore the thesis that, having lost her beloved husband relatively early in life, Victoria needed to form intense, if platonic, friendships with other men to support her in her immense responsibilities. I didn’t think that the film was quite as good as “Mrs Brown”, if only because Fazal never makes him quite as strong an individual as Billy Connolly did with his portrayal of John Brown. Some of the supporting cast, Callow being the worst offender, tend to play their parts as caricatures. Probably the best is Izzard. Some have complained that his portrayal of the Prince of Wales as a bad-tempered bigot is at odds with the image of Edward VII as a well-loved monarch, but I have long suspected that, beneath the façade of avuncular geniality which his subjects saw “Bertie” was actually a rather unpleasant individual. Dench, however, lives up to her normal high standards, making Victoria a regal figure but also bringing a measure of both humour and pathos to her portrayal. She shows us the woman as well as the Queen. 6/10

Other Information:

Original Language en
Runtime 1 hr 51 min (111 min)
Budget 0
Revenue 65421267
Status Released
Rated PG-13
Genre Biography, Drama, History
Director Stephen Frears
Writer Lee Hall, Shrabani Basu
Actors Judi Dench, Ali Fazal, Tim Pigott-Smith
Country United Kingdom, United States, China
Awards Nominated for 2 Oscars. 3 wins & 13 nominations total
Production Company N/A
Website N/A

Technical Information:

Sound Mix Dolby Digital
Aspect Ratio 2.35 : 1
Camera Arri Alexa (India locations), Red Epic Dragon, Zeiss Master Prime and Angenieux Optimo Lenses (UK locations)
Laboratory Goldcrest Post, London, UK (digital intermediate)
Film Length N/A
Negative Format Redcode RAW
Cinematographic Process Digital Intermediate (master format), Redcode RAW (6K) (source format)
Printed Film Format D-Cinema