Let me quell the suspense. The King’s Speech was a great movie. It is probably my favorite from last year and its 12 Oscar nominations are definitely warranted.
In the shock of the century, this movie is about a king and his speech. That is to say, his speech impediment, but he also has to give speeches. That’s right, it’s word play.
To be honest though, this movie is just as much about a relationship between two men in 1930’s England. Men who may be on opposite ends of the spectrum economically, but both suffer from a lack of confidence.
They are able to find it with the help of the other.
One of the men is King George VI, expertly played by Colin Firth. Apparently, Firth made some good role-decisions a couple of years ago as once again, he is nominated for an Oscar and deservedly so.
He plays the title role of the stuttering king who should never have been king. His brother was in direct-line and did hold the kingship for a bit, but preferred marrying an already married and multiple divorced American named Wallis Simpson.
To be honest, he also thought that being king was a little too much work for him.
Anyway, I’m not an actor, but I’d imagine that memorizing lines and embodying a real person (or even a made-up one) is difficult. It must be doubly so to learn lines with a stutter.
Beyond a stutter, he is able to convey an immense amount of dread and anxiety in his face and really makes you feel for him, especially when he gives speeches.
This dread amplifies when it becomes clear that his brother will be giving up the throne and giving it to him.
Personally, I don’t commonly feel too bad for the super-wealthy, but Firth makes me feel bad for his King George VI.
On the opposite end of things, you feel relieved and happy for him when he is able to give his pre-war speech without any stammering.
The other man is Lionel Logue, who is played by Geoffrey Rush. Logue is a failed actor who is a speech therapist. He does not have a degree, but he helped soldiers with their speech after the first war.
Logue’s wife points out that he is not merely helping George with a speech impediment, but he is also helping himself. He is definitely a man with something to prove, even though he has supreme confidence in what he is doing with the king.
Oh, and hello Helena Bonham Carter! I’ll admit, it’s weird to see her in a “normal” role where she doesn’t look like a witch or a high school goth. She plays George’s wife, who seems to have more confidence in him than he does.
It’s because of her that Logue and the king meet, so hopefully the two of them bought her something nice. You know, to make her feel like a queen.
In general, you really get convinced that two men’s lives are at stake here.
The movie has some really witty dialogue as well, especially in the exchanges between the king and Logue, since Logue isn’t especially concerned with formalities.
Perhaps this is not the most original plot. The tale of two economically different people who need the help of each other has been told before. Opposites are always shown in movies, whether it is platonic or romantic.
Despite this, the movie feels fresh. That’s a testament to how well made this movie is. The filmmakers add just the right ingredients to turn a common plot into a compelling one.
Here’s hoping that Oscar takes further notice.
