Jephson’s role made him an intimate witness to the disintegration of her marriage and the breakdown of her relationship with the Buckingham Palace hierarchy. He offers a rare perspective on “The Queen,” a much-acclaimed film directed by Stephen Frears that depicts the royal family in the traumatic week following the princess’s death in 1997.

The film, which opened in London on Sept. 15 and comes to New York on Sept. 29, shows how Queen Elizabeth II, played by Helen Mirren, yielded to relentless pressure to acknowledge popular grief with some public display of emotion. Mirren’s performance won her the best-actress award at the Venice Film Festival and she has become an early contender for an Academy Award. NEWSWEEK’s William Underhill spoke to Patrick Jephson about this latest dramatization of the Windsor family’s travails. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: As a former member of the royal household, you must have been worried about the accuracy of its depiction in the film.

Patrick Jephson: Like a lot of fictionalized accounts of royal life, I was afraid that it would get a few things right but a lot more wrong. Or it might get a whole lot of things correct but still represent events in a way that I thought biased.

And were those fears justified?

I’m not qualified to say if the prime minister kneels in a particular way when kissing [Queen Elizabeth II’s] hands, but the overall balance seemed beyond reasonable criticism to me.

In the film, Prime Minister Tony Blair tells the queen: “History will show that this was a good week for you.” Was it?

Yes, and also a lucky week. In the end, the right people did the right thing. It’s a powerful endorsement of the queen but not necessarily of the [royal] institution.

It does portray a monarchy that seems out of touch with public sentiment. Does that match your view?

The night before the funeral I walked through the large crowd to the palace gates. It was very somber and subdued, almost sullen in mood. I thought if only someone could put a lighted candle in a palace window or have a bagpiper playing a lament—just something to show that these peoples’ emotions were being acknowledged. So much about royalty is symbolic and there was a desperate need for a symbol.

Do you attribute that failing just to insensitivity—or to something more profound?

I think there is a real difficulty for the royal establishment in Diana being such an important symbol. And there was—and there still is in some quarters—a tendency to dismiss such public emotion as sentiment and therefore not to be taken seriously. The encouraging message of the film is that the queen was able to see that a little bit of flexibility was required.

Don’t the British want a monarch who shows a little emotional restraint?

There’s no virtue in emoting for its own sake, but we want them to be able to respect emotion even if they don’t necessarily share it. What this whole incident showed is that if you are in the dynasty business, you can’t afford to take public support for granted.

You spent many years close to the royal family. Did that change your own view of the monarchy?

It reinforced my respect for certain aspects which are embodied principally by the queen. I’m far less certain about its future. Its readiness to adopt a political style—news management, public relations—has already done great damage. People’s opinion of politicians is very low and the tactics of the royal spin doctors are now almost identical to those of the political spin doctors.

The film demonstrates the depth of the public’s affection for Diana. How do you think attitudes have changed since her death?

There have been subtle moves to downgrade her memory, and obviously the arrival of Camilla Parker Bowles [as wife to Prince Charles] has not sat easily with keeping Diana’s memory fresh, but as the years pass fair-minded historians will see that Diana was a huge asset to the Windsors.

I think people tend to see the Diana phenomenon exclusively as a historical experience. But its true importance will be seen in the lessons learned by future generations. The film will help because it makes it possible to talk about Diana and her impact on the Windsors in a rational, intelligent way. The Diana debate is maturing—and that’s good.