The King's Speech

The death of Princess Diana in the 1990s was an event I can remember. I remember all the news reports and the silence of the royal family. So when I saw The Queen back in early 2007, I remember thinking to myself that it was the first movie I could recall were the events being portrayed were ones I more or less witnessed. I bring this up because as I was exiting The King's Speech, an old couple was in front of me and as we went, the elderly man said he remembered a lot of the historical events portrayed in the film. And how odd it was that he said that since The Queen of course was about Queen Elizabeth and the current film was about her father King George VI.

I did not need that brief conversation to decide the movie was good but it certainly was a nice affirmation that the film felt real. Seemingly having a pedestrian or even boring premise, as my father put it "once I found out it was about a speech therapist, I said pass", the truth is it is much more than about a speech therapist. OR perhaps its that to paraphrase Roger Ebert, it is how it is about being a movie about a speech therapist. It was somewhat into the movie when I remembered that King George VI took on the crown when his older brother King Edward VIII denounced his crown for love. And some might say well now there is a story. A man destined to be king gives it up to be with the woman he loves.

And I suppose you wouldn't be wrong, but there was something quite extraordinary about George overcoming speech problems and being a source of comfort for the English people during the hard days of World War II. Frankly I only know a handful of things about speech therapy but I did laugh early in the movie when the court doctor is suggesting the strategy that Demosthenes used to cure his impediment. At least as Plutarch claimed it. The first time I read that in Plutarch I was sceptical but apparently not 1930s doctors. But as I said it really isn't a movie about speech therapy. I could list off a slew of things that I interpret the movie to be about but the basic thing that it is is good.

The story is engaging and the principal actors are wholly enjoyable to watch. Michael Gambon and Guy Pearce have memorable roles as King George V and Edward VIII respectfully. Gambon as particularly stern with George VI but who apparently saw in him the best of his sons. Pearce plays Edward as quite selfish, a quite nice opposite take on the notion of him following his heart. Following his heart yes but abandoning his duty. This is actually one of the more interesting dynamics of the film. Helena Bonham Carter is perhaps the most subtle in her role as George VI's wife.

Of course the show belongs to Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue and Colin Firth as George VI. Firth shows a strength and sensitivity that is quite appealing making a larger than life Royal Figure human and at times tragic. Rush is lively and having fun but never so over the top that you don't believe the relationship the two develop. As the whole movie seems to hang on Rush and Firth's relationship, it is well that the two have great screen chemistry.

By the time the rousing finale roles around I was smiling and happy that I had chosen this film to watch. Great story backed by great actors are a difficult combo to upset. It doesn't hurt that it put a smile on my face as well.