|
The King's Speech After the death of his father, King George V (Michael Gambon), and the scandalous abdication of King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce), Bertie (Colin Firth), who has suffered from a debilitating speech impediment all his life, is suddenly crowned King George VI of England...more The King's Speech With his country on the brink of war and in desperate need of a leader, his wife, Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter), the future Queen Mother, arranges for her husband to see an eccentric speech therapist, Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush). After a rough start, the two delve into an unorthodox course of treatment and eventually form an unbreakable bond. With the support of Logue, his family, his government and Winston Churchill (Timothy Spall), the King will overcome his stammer and deliver a radio-address that inspires his people and unites them in battle. Widely praised by critics, The King's Speech received 12 Academy Award nominations, winning Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director (Tom Hooper), Best Actor (Colin Firth), and Best Original Screenplay (David Seidler). Technical Details: The King's Speech I saw this film some weeks after it first came out at Brixton's Ritzy cinema. It was a freezing cold Sunday afternoon yet the cinema was absolutely packed. People who hadn't had the foresight to book in advance mingled outside mumbling astonishment at how popular the film was. And I had to confess to myself that I hadn't seen such numbers at a cinema in years. Week after week, up and down the country, the film played to packed audiences. People I knew who previously had next to no interest in anything royal, described the film as 'astonishing', 'wonderful' and other such hyperbole. Indeed, I know of no-one who didn't at least like the film. But why? Why would such a film grab the nation's affection? On paper this is a film that just shouldn't work. After all, the basis of the film is a man's speech impediment...hardly the basis for a popularity akin to a Hollywood blockbuster or for it becoming the nation's favourite movie, at least of recent years. Moreover, let's be brutally honest about King George V: he is, at best, thought of with respect today rather than anything stronger. Maybe to those of the 2nd World War generation who had him as their King there was more affection but can anyone today say that they hold him in the same awe as his daughter or that there is the same interest in him as for his brother (though admittedly not liking)? I don't think so. To many who remember him at all it is because he was the husband of the Queen Mother. Nothing more, nothing less... It has to be remembered that King George VI never wanted to be king and was never prepared for it. When it was suddenly thrust on him because of the Abdication he was a slightly dull man out-of-his-depth. So there is nothing obvious to suggest that this film could work on a commercial level. But it does. Why? Well, the friend I went to see this with suggested that it was because of a yearning from the public to reconnect to patriotism through the Royal Family. The country had lost its way, lost its identity, and was searching for something to hold on to. A kind of embracing nostalgia, for the good things that had past. I can understand that at least from a starting basis for why the film was a success. But fundamentally I think its success is in the way the story is told and because of the unpromising subject matter. It is a story of a not especially special man against all odds overcoming a debilitating disability to become the voice of his people at a time of extraordinary flux (the 2nd World War). And this film does not try to hide the weaknesses of the King; rather it embraces them as the barriers he must cross to get to his goal. Thus, the sullenness or shyness which imprison him are characteristics millions of us can identify with. We can feel the pain of his crippling impediment as if it was our own. Beginning with the King's stuttering speech at the close of the 1925 British Empire Exhibition at Wembley Stadium and concluding with his 1939 speech to the nation after the declaration of war with Germany, all that is in-between is basically the relationship between him and his Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue, and, of course, how he overcame his stutter. Colin Firth as the King is good but Geoffrey Rush as Logue is better. Bonham Carter as his wife is adequate and could be no more than that as befitting the supporting role she must play to her husband there isn't really the scope to be brilliant. Timothy Spall is unintentionally hilarious as Winston CHurchill while Guy Pearce as the Edward, the Prince of Wales is perhaps the best of the bunch for he captures his flawed character to perfection. It is beautifully shot, evocatively capturing the era. The attention to detail is extraordinary. The script is taut and refuses to be sidetracked from the telling of the story of the friendship between the two...everything about the film faithfully captures Britain in 1930s perfectly. I would not call this a 'deep' film. You don't come away thinking any big thoughts or that it changes your perspective on that era in any way. Rather it is just a good story to enjoy for a couple of hours. |
(UK) | 
(US) | 
(UK) | 
(US)
