It's not a small irony that a film about an English king is nearly stolen by one Australian actor and ably supported by another (although the latter, Guy Pearce, in a delicious twist, was actually British-born). Even more so given the open antipathy expressed by said king (George VI) towards said Australians.
That aside, King's Speech is an earnest, well-acted, immaculately filmed, often amusing representation of both the individual and collective trials of the early half of the 20th Century, particularly from the viewpoint of the monarchy. As the then price's father ,George V, says ruefully on noting the increased encroachment of media in the lives the royals, "We've been reduced to that very lowest rung of society....we've become actors."
The details of this particular drama - notwithstanding the debate about George VI's stance towards Hitler and Nazism - are fairly well known. Even before his ascension to the British throne by virtue of the abdication of his brother Edward VIII (Pearce) George, referred in part by his given first name of Albert, is somewhat desperate seeking therapy to correct his severe stammer.
That search, largely handled by his wife Elizabeth (later to be known as the Queen Mother, not to be confused with current monarch Elizabeth II), played with an intriguing delicacy by Helena Bonham-Carter, leads them to Lionel Logue, frustrated Shakespearean actor and - as we later learn - counselor to shell-shocked Ozzie soldiers during the First World War.
Logue's unconventional style and reliance on informality (he immediately calls the prince "Bertie" without any leave or remorse) throw off the royal couple at first but, as is inevitably the case, one can't argue with the results. what then ensues is a combination of speech therapy and mental therapy, with both characters gradually revealing more of themselves , building up to the film's momentous climax, the wartime speech of the title.
Firth is excellent of course, retaining both the humanity and the imperious dignity of the character with no apparent effort. But he should be thankful that the role of Logue was not classified as a co-lead, otherwise he'd have serious competition for the Oscar (Rush, of course, is up for Best supporting Actor). Rush is super lative in every frame that he's in, at once a deferential and reluctant hero and a brash, egotistical showman.
However valid the concerns about historical accuracy, The King's Speech is a narrative and photoplay that can be enjoyed on their own merits. As far as well-intentioned, superbly played period pieces go, its this year's model, and that's all it needs be.
That aside, King's Speech is an earnest, well-acted, immaculately filmed, often amusing representation of both the individual and collective trials of the early half of the 20th Century, particularly from the viewpoint of the monarchy. As the then price's father ,George V, says ruefully on noting the increased encroachment of media in the lives the royals, "We've been reduced to that very lowest rung of society....we've become actors."
The details of this particular drama - notwithstanding the debate about George VI's stance towards Hitler and Nazism - are fairly well known. Even before his ascension to the British throne by virtue of the abdication of his brother Edward VIII (Pearce) George, referred in part by his given first name of Albert, is somewhat desperate seeking therapy to correct his severe stammer.
That search, largely handled by his wife Elizabeth (later to be known as the Queen Mother, not to be confused with current monarch Elizabeth II), played with an intriguing delicacy by Helena Bonham-Carter, leads them to Lionel Logue, frustrated Shakespearean actor and - as we later learn - counselor to shell-shocked Ozzie soldiers during the First World War.
Logue's unconventional style and reliance on informality (he immediately calls the prince "Bertie" without any leave or remorse) throw off the royal couple at first but, as is inevitably the case, one can't argue with the results. what then ensues is a combination of speech therapy and mental therapy, with both characters gradually revealing more of themselves , building up to the film's momentous climax, the wartime speech of the title.
Firth is excellent of course, retaining both the humanity and the imperious dignity of the character with no apparent effort. But he should be thankful that the role of Logue was not classified as a co-lead, otherwise he'd have serious competition for the Oscar (Rush, of course, is up for Best supporting Actor). Rush is super lative in every frame that he's in, at once a deferential and reluctant hero and a brash, egotistical showman.
However valid the concerns about historical accuracy, The King's Speech is a narrative and photoplay that can be enjoyed on their own merits. As far as well-intentioned, superbly played period pieces go, its this year's model, and that's all it needs be.
No comments:
Post a Comment