12/22/2010
Review by David Anthony
As the Holiday season sets in, Santa is not the only one preoccupied with gift-giving. Hollywood and its myriad extensions all across the globe are hatching plans as well. In many cases, it is difficult, if not impossible, to speak of some cinematic offerings apart from the context of the awards process. “The King’s Speech” is surely such a vehicle. Even the casual filmgoer may now have heard that this movie has already been nominated for seven (count ‘em) Golden Globe awards, at least half for acting alone. And for good reason. The cast is sensational. And then there is the Academy….Colin Firth is the hesitant King George VI, second in line to succession to his robust, larger than life but quite mortal father, George V, played in stentorian tones by the great Michael Gambon. His elder brother, heir apparent, Edward, the dashing Duke of Windsor (Cornwall and Rothesay, as well as Prince of York, Cornwall and Wales), more preoccupied with connubial affairs than matters of state, is willing to risk, nay renounce England’s throne in favor of Baltimore divorcée, Wallis Simpson. No one is quite prepared for this turn of events, as George junior is catapulted into a crown bearer, in an era of incomparable international perils, as fascism looms above everyone and everything in the mid-thirties.
George has a crippling affliction for one for whom public speaking is a vital part of the job: He is an inveterate and profound stutterer, who, prior to the drama in the Royal Family had stammered into near-obscurity, as a second son might well have, largely ignored, had it not been for brother, King Edward VIII’s alarming abdication. The need to make use of the new and unprecedentedly powerful medium radio, to address the crisis in the House of Windsor and in the world at large therefore fell to a thoughtful monarch whose ability to form sentences was yet wholly unpredictable.
This is the premise for the docudrama, “The King’s Speech.” However one feels about royals vs. commoners and the ‘mawses and clawses’ of Britain, this portrayal of the situation facing the people and nation of England and Empire, is clearly compelling.
The film is distinguished in many ways, as a depiction of court life whose pageantry and pomp always enthralls viewers, especially we Yanks—whatever we feign to the contrary. The acting, however, is its strongest selling point, especially in the deeply gripping interplay between Lionel Logue, the self-styled speech therapist (Geoffrey Rush) and “Bertie,” Logue’s irreverent name for His Royal Highness. Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth (‘Royal Mum’ to the present Queen), is also especially fine.
You will undoubtedly hear much hype about this epic work: In this case, believe it.
For he KUSP Film Gang, this is David Anthony