The King’s Speech

Colin Firth is Prince Albert, a shy and timid member of the Royal family, in the early 20th Century, who suffers from a paralysing stammer, despite being required to speak publicly as a representative of the English Monarchy, in The King’s Speech. Seeking help he comes to the attention of Lionel Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush) an Australian speech therapist with unorthodox and controversial methods. Along the way Albert reluctantly becomes King George VI and ultimately must speak before his entire country about the impending Second World War, in a time of expanding radio and broadcasting technology. Also featuring Helena Bonham Carter, Guy Pearce, Derek Jacobi and Michael Gambon, this film is based on the true story in English history, directed by Tom Hooper with the screenplay written by David Seidler.
The King’s Speech is a very formal film, which is a perfectly adequate approach to its story, one filled with excellently placed subtext of the social placement of different classes and the different people of function in its time and place. In fact that’s probably the most interesting piece of the entire film as it cleverly and very sweetly tells the story of two men of different ways of life who become close friends amidst their different lives in which they balance their desires and obligations. But make no mistake, there are other features of interest in this film.
The ensemble cast is wonderfully laden in a way that is almost comedically colourful, which oddly resembles real life in a way, yet subtly so. Firth shows real heroism and determination, hidden behind his character’s shyness and speaking disability as Rush shows an excellent counter balance while having a lovingly quirky and genuinely likable quality of his own. Other performances that really stood out for me were Helena Bonham Carter who plays Albert’s wife Queen Elizabeth, as well as Michael Gambon as George V and Guy Pearce as Edward VIII all of whom fulfill their purposes to the story admirably while maintaining individually entertaining performances of their own.
The film is a very good ensemble piece with an excellent story. Everyone really steps perfectly in place in not just who they are, but who they are to each other. The problem is that for this kind of story and tone The King’s Speech really ought to have been wound up and cut tighter. It’s hard to say where and when exactly, but there is a drifting phase in which the inherit goal of the movie wanders. That said it still accomplishes all that is needed, just not with the most fashionable timing and presentation.
Conclusively, The King’s Speech is a wonderful drama with a subtle quirky edge and a genuine sense of character, the redeeming features of which win out, in spite of a couple of pacing and structural issues.
4 out of 5
January 10, 2011 at 11:59 pm
I liked it a lot too. I reckoned that they could have put more in about the abdication issue. The only thing that surprised me (for want of a better word) is the prominence given to Winston Churchill, who was only a middle ranking cabinet member at the time.