The KING'S SPEECH

“The KING’S SPEECH” (Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush & Helena Bonham Carter)

When I first heard about this film (from dbm) I thought it would be the type of ‘art house’ rubbish that apparently I can’t stand (according to movie luva)
In some ways it is that – any story involving Britain’s royal family is going to be snobbish, there’s no way around it – and in the beginning I didn’t like Helena Bonham Carter’s Duchess of York, nor Colin Firth’s Duke. They thought they were better than everyone else. ‘Common’ people shouldn’t even be allowed to gaze upon them, let alone associate with someone of their superior bloodline. So when Elizabeth (Bonham Carter) engages Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) to be her husband’s speech therapist and help to cure his stuttering problem, she acts as though Mr. Logue should be honored to help a member of the royal family and not expect to be paid for his efforts. I sneered at her every time she stuck her snooty nose in the air as though Lionel’s abode had a distasteful odor that her pristine nostrils shouldn’t have to inhale. I then prepared myself to dislike this film as much as I disliked the Duchess.
Then Colin Firth appears as the Duke, second son of King George V and he’s an even bigger snob than his stuck-up wife... until he speaks. ‘Bertie’ (as Lionel calls him, much to his dismay) has a very pronounced stutter. “Know any jokes?” Lionel asks.
“T-t-t-timing isn’t my s-strong s-s-suit,” the Duke replies. Suddenly, the Duke appears human and almost likable.
That’s what separates ‘The King’s Speech’ from other ‘historical’ films involving the Royal family – it has a very pronounced sense of humor – One might even call it a snob/com.
Lionel bets the Duke that he can have him reciting Shakespeare without stammering during their first lesson. He hands his royal highness a copy of ‘Hamlet’ (Piglet’s father) and then places a set of headphones upon the Duke’s head with loud orchestral music playing.
“I can’t hear a bloody word I’m saying!” Bertie yells.
“Surely a Prince’s brain knows what its mouth is doing?” Lionel asks.
“You’re obviously not well acquainted with Princes, are you?” the Prince smirks.
Firth and Rush are outstanding; especially Colin as the stuttering ‘man who would be king’ – they play off of one another effortlessly. When the future King tells Logue he’s ‘peculiar’ – Lionel responds, “I’ll take that as a compliment.”
This film works because the ‘common’ speech therapist doesn’t accept that members of the royal family are any better than anyone else – Yet, at the same time, he WANTS to help the Duke conquer his impediment because that is what he’s paid to do.
Slowly, begrudgingly, ‘Bertie’ sees that Lionel is not only an excellent speech therapist, but an advantageous advisor as well – Did the royal family begin to lose a bit of that snootiness because King George VI brought Lionel Logue into the palace to guide him through his many speeches during WWII?
Sure, it’s reminiscent of ‘Driving Miss Daisy’ in storyline, but that film overcame its title character’s prejudice to make her lovable as well.
My complaints are few and miniscule; Guy Pearce seemed quite bland as King George V’s eldest son who gives up the throne after his father’s death to marry a divorced American woman (Gasp!) For all the controversy surrounding King Edward’s promiscuous behavior which leads to his abdicating of the throne, Pearce didn’t play the role with any pizzazz. And Timothy Spall played Winston Churchill like he was channeling the ghost of Alfred Hitchcock instead. I kept waiting for him to drawl, “Good evening...”
Yes, the critic that hates ‘art house’ movies found one he enjoyed thoroughly in ‘The King’s Speech’ and the chief reason is the humor.
I have been accused lately of not liking the movies that EVERYONE else likes.
I recently read a list of the top grossing films of 2010 & yes, I thought most of them were junk – I don’t see how anyone could think that ‘Toy Story 3’ is a better cartoon than “Despicable Me’, but I guess that’s what separates me from the sheep.
It wasn’t my idea to start writing movie reviews – I was asked to do it at the radio station I once worked for to simply add a little substance to the station’s website. From the beginning I said that I wasn’t a professional critic – I’m a normal movie fan that isn’t going to favor foreign films or stuffy crap that usually wins Oscars (Hoity Toity art house flicks and those dreadful musicals) I wanted to write for the ‘commoner’ – to give an honest opinion on the types of movies we regular schmucks go to see. Along the way I’ve been enticed to see films that I normally would avoid because ‘someone’ wants to see what I would write about it (thank goodness I never gave in & paid money to see ‘Borat’)
But I have learned that I’m not a commoner; Commoners like car chases & explosions & movies that look keen. So instead I present my thoughts using my own unique niche (I hope) and even though you may totally disagree with what I’ve said about a film you enjoyed, you still came to this blog to see what I had to say about it because you’re not going to get your run-of-the-mill review. I appreciate comments from my regulars and encourage anyone that hasn’t added their opinion to please do so.
Movie Luva is probably my favorite because she has on more than one occasion said that she went to see a film based on what I had written about it (& enjoyed them)
So I have a question for her – You wrote that you knew if I went to see ‘Black Swan’ that I wouldn’t like it – Did you think that I would love ‘The King’s Speech’? Because, until I saw the trailer, I had no interest in it whatsoever – Now, I hope it wins Best Picture. Because it’s the only one being touted as a contender that I liked; along with ‘The Fighter’ – but I was more impressed with Christian Bale’s acting than I was in the overall film. And I would be shocked if Colin Firth doesn’t win for Best Actor & Geoffrey Rush should finish second (behind Bale) for Supporting Actor. So, M. L., did you see THAT coming?