News

Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search

News

First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni

News

Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend

News

Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library

News

Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty

Mrs. Henderson Presents

By Margot E. Edelman, Contributing Writer

Directed by Stephen Frears

The Weinstein Company

2 stars



The terms “full frontal nudity” and “Dame Judi Dench” do not normally go in the same sentence. Usually shunted aside by filmmakers as the tart older woman in favor of showcasing the youthful skin of Gwyneth Paltrow or Keira Knightley, Dench plays the title role in “Mrs. Henderson Presents,” a film that attempts to be at once a bawdy comedy of manners and a sentimental war-time drama.

Directed by Stephen Frears (“High Fidelity”), the film opens in late l930s London, with a recently widowed and very bored Mrs. Laura Henderson. Advised by her friend that widows are allowed hobbies or better yet, younger lovers, Henderson purchases a run-down theater and hires an experienced stage manager, Mr. Vivien Van Damm (Bob Hoskins of “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?”) to run it.

To make her show stand out, Dench decides to do an English version of the Moulin Rouge. In a hilarious scene, Henderson convinces the stuffy Lord Chamberlain, played with perfect deadpan by Christopher Guest, to allow nudity onstage. “But what about the midlands?” the Chamberlain asks, to which Dench replies “you mean the pussy?” Too prude for the Parisian approach to nudity, the Lord Chamberlain relents to nudity presented strictly as art; the girls onstage can’t move.

These beginning scenes displaying the conventions of British society and the conversations between Dench and her upper crust English friends are the movie’s greatest (if only) pleasure; they serve as a self-referential acknowledgement of the Brits’ own absurdity. Though a comedy of British manners is not new ground, it is wonderful to see Dench and her contemporaries do what they do best.

A major flaw in the film is the deflated dynamic of the relationship between Van Damm and Henderson, which should provide the backbone of the movie. The sparring between the two over control of the theater never really sparks, for Hoskins, solidly playing the straight man role, is no match for Dench. Delivering her lines with her usual acerbic and perfectly timed delivery, Dench demonstrates why she is the premier actress of the AARP set.

The romantic setup of the two also feels false; Hendersons’ crush is conveyed by Dench gazing wistfully away from the camera and turning unreasonably angry when she discovers that Van Damm is married. Why would a woman as independent as Henderson immediately fall for Van Damm?

The movie takes a serious downturn when World War II hits. Frears attempts to add gravity by using WWII themes, yet this only reveals how slight a comedy of manners the first part is. The director’s juxtaposition of actual stock footage of the war—including the bombing of London—against the theater’s musical numbers featuring naked girls highlights the falsity of the film’s recreation of the time.

Most boringly didactic are Van Damm’s speeches, comparing the show-must-go on mentality to wartime resilience, presumably the ultimate message of the film. Yet because the film’s treatment of wartime England is so shallow, this message comes off as clichéd. The movie should have remained a parody of British prudishness; as a sentimental tribute to the human spirit, the film is fatal.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags