After making a name for herself in 2006's 'The Devil Wears Prada,' Emily Blunt has looked to secure that next rite of passage for an actress with big career aspirations: the Victorian period drama.

And she's mostly well-received by critics for her work in the independently distributed 'The Young Victoria,' even though the consensus is -- as is typical with this slow-paced genre -- the movie comes off a little flat. Read the reviews and tell us what you think.
div>After making a name for herself in 2006's 'The Devil Wears Prada,' Emily Blunt has looked to secure that next rite of passage for an actress with big career aspirations: the Victorian period drama.

And she's mostly well-received by critics for her work in the independently distributed 'The Young Victoria,' even though the consensus is -- as is typical with this slow-paced genre -- the movie comes off a little flat. Read the reviews and tell us what you think.

The New Yorker: "From the start, it feels handsome, steady, and stuck; the ties that bind the historical bio-pic are no looser than those which constrain a royal personage, and the frustration to which Victoria would later admit ('I had led a very unhappy life as a child -- had no scope for my very violent feelings of affection') is legible in the face of Emily Blunt, who takes the title role."

Boxoffice Magazine: "The term "heritage cinema" seems to have been invented for British films that dwell on elements of the nation's chequered history, much of which finds a ready market overseas. The 'Young Victoria' is no exception -- a beautifully mounted and costumed odyssey into the early life of the monarch. With a script by Julian Fellowes, who won an Oscar for his screenplay for Gosford Park, 'The Young Victoria' positively sizzles with impeccable pedigree."