I’m occasionally asked whether I consider myself a royalist or not. And in the past my response has been a guarded “it depends”. But you can’t live as long as I have without accepting that the one constant has been the current Queen.
Same for most people in this country, and indeed the world.
Queen Elizabeth II has been on the throne longer than any British monarch in history, and whatever anyone’s opinion of the various components of the Royal Family, most people’s view of the Queen herself is almost entirely favourable.
And the new documentary Elizabeth – A Portrait in Part(s) shows why.
Photo: Screenshot
What it isn’t is a chronological account of Her Majesty’s life, though it does cover most of it. It’s more a collection of scrap-books, some long, some short, all themed in some ways.
There are playful digs at that famous, cut-glass voice over the years – she’s probably delivered more formal speeches than anyone in the world now. They even include her first broadcast with sister Margaret during the war.
I went into Elizabeth silently challenging it to come up with anything I didn’t already know. And although director, the late Roger Michell, and his crack editor Joanna Crickmay couldn’t claim to have unearthed brand-new material, they did produce a few insights.
Paul McCartney nailed something that anyone around in the 1950s knew, but may have forgotten.
Liz was a knockout in her day – and the film intercuts footage of her in full bling with some of her front-page rivals – Marilyn Monroe, Audrey Hepburn and Liz Taylor.
Another thing often overlooked in royal documentaries is she’s funny. Years of public speaking have honed her timing for a joke to perfection and her smile and laugh get a good outing here.
Not just when she does a sketch with James Bond and jumps out of a helicopter.
Also unlike previous films about Her Maj, the rest of the family only features as backup to the star of the show, Elizabeth.
You can’t completely avoid them, of course, particularly not the man who was seen as the power behind the throne, her late husband Prince Phillip.
But this time it’s not about the Royal Family. It’s about one person. When she’s on, the Queen is very much on her own. And often on a horse.
There was the famous occasion when she rode out in front of the annual Trooping of the Colour, surrounded by thousands and thousands of Londoners. One of whom had a gun.
It was loaded with blanks, fortunately, but no-one was to know that at the time, least of all the gunman’s target.
But watching the Queen first control the horse, then ride alone and without fuss to safety was impressive. Still, you get the idea that for her, that was the gig. Keep going and don’t scare the horses.
One thing I didn’t know, perhaps, was quite how keen the Queen was on horses. She liked riding them, seeing them race, and having a flutter on race day.
Watching her joy as she picked up her winnings after one race – 16 pounds, I think – was priceless.
I didn’t need reminding how “service” has always been the Queen’s guiding principle– she joined the ATC as a driver during the War.
But it was worth noting how much more impressive the royal women seem to be than the rather underwhelming chaps.
The Queen’s relationships with her Scottish mother, her sister Margaret and her daughter, the no-nonsense Princess Anne were obviously crucial. She and Anne are still a formidable team when confronted with unsavoury American visitors.
So, am I a royalist? When I came out of the cinema, I was reminded of that old song “Walking in Memphis”. Ma’am, I am tonight!
