The King's Speech

[axordil]

It will be on Netflix eventually, right?

[N.E. Brigand]

Speaking of acting, Jennifer Ehle makes one of her rare appearences outside the theatre. I've only ever seen her in two miniseries (Pride and Prejudice and Wilde) ,and I've never seen her before on the big screen. It's a shame that we don't see her more often, because she is brilliant in every role. Although I expect filmgoers conditioned to expect Elizabeth Bennet are going to find her Australian accent disconcerting .

Was Wilde originally a miniseries? It was released in the U.S. as a feature film. I don't think I've ever seen Ehle, but for some reason I remembered that she was in István Szabó's 1999 film Sunshine; I happen to have a review near at hand:

The ultimate triumph is the acting. Ralph Fiennes changes just enough to be equally right, both similar and dissimilar, as Ignatz, Adam, and Ivan; Jennifer Ehle is adorable as the young Valerie; so, too is her real-life mother, Rosemary Harris, as the older one. Noteworthy too are James Frain and John Neville as the youthful and the elderly Gustave, respectively; Molly Parker (Hann); Rachel Weisz (Greta); William Hurt as a decent commissar; and the great Hungarian actress Mari Töröcsik as an elderly servant (Töröcsik's is a nonspeaking part, for the simple reason that the actress doesn't speak English.) I always have problems with Deborah Kara Unger, but her grasping, fickle Carola is properly predatory.

(Source: John Simon on Film: Criticism, 1982-2001)

If you're an Ehle fan, that may be a film worth seeing.

As for The King's Speech, I hope to catch it, though I note that one history buff complains that, "The basic facts and succession of events are accurate, but many of the details are wrong, and the feel of them is even wronger", while another finds the film a historical travesty, downplaying Edward VIII's admiration for Hitler and completely misrepresenting Churchill's actions.

[Túrin Turambar]

Speaking of acting, Jennifer Ehle makes one of her rare appearences outside the theatre. I've only ever seen her in two miniseries (Pride and Prejudice and Wilde) ,and I've never seen her before on the big screen. It's a shame that we don't see her more often, because she is brilliant in every role. Although I expect filmgoers conditioned to expect Elizabeth Bennet are going to find her Australian accent disconcerting .

Was Wilde originally a miniseries? It was released in the U.S. as a feature film. I don't think I've ever seen Ehle, but for some reason I remembered that she was in István Szabó's 1999 film Sunshine; I happen to have a review near at hand:

The ultimate triumph is the acting. Ralph Fiennes changes just enough to be equally right, both similar and dissimilar, as Ignatz, Adam, and Ivan; Jennifer Ehle is adorable as the young Valerie; so, too is her real-life mother, Rosemary Harris, as the older one. Noteworthy too are James Frain and John Neville as the youthful and the elderly Gustave, respectively; Molly Parker (Hann); Rachel Weisz (Greta); William Hurt as a decent commissar; and the great Hungarian actress Mari Töröcsik as an elderly servant (Töröcsik's is a nonspeaking part, for the simple reason that the actress doesn't speak English.) I always have problems with Deborah Kara Unger, but her grasping, fickle Carola is properly predatory.

(Source: John Simon on Film: Criticism, 1982-2001)

If you're an Ehle fan, that may be a film worth seeing.

As for The King's Speech, I hope to catch it, though I note that one history buff complains that, "The basic facts and succession of events are accurate, but many of the details are wrong, and the feel of them is even wronger", while another finds the film a historical travesty, downplaying Edward VIII's admiration for Hitler and completely misrepresenting Churchill's actions.

The film commits sins typical of historical dramas in that it simplifies and combines characters so that they can fill particular narrative or explanatory functions. I do find characters telling each other things that would have been blatantly obvious to them irritating, although I understand why filmmakers do it.

The second reviewer is broadly correct in that Edward VIII could have been shown as being more pro-Nazi, Churchill is, in my view, completely superfluous to the film and needn’t have been included at all, and George VI’s initial support for appeasement could have been played out as well. I have no idea what Baldwin actually said to the King when he resigned, but given his continued support for appeasement and opposition to re-armament afterwards I doubt it was anything like that.

Of course, it must be remembered that these people – George VI, Baldwin, Chamberlain, etc. – were all of a generation hugely affected by the First World War. It seems obvious to us in retrospect that Hitler wanted to conquer half of Europe and that only military force could stop him, but pacifism had dominated political discourse amongst the WWI Allies throughout the 20s and 30s, and people (like Churchill) who called for re-armament in the fact of the economic difficulties of the Depression were seen as extremists and warmongers. A repeat of the horrors of World War was inconceivable to most leaders at the time, and the idea of re-armament and risking starting a war over Austria or Czechoslovakia anathema to those who had seen millions of young men die in the trenches. It is a shame that post-war films never seem to reflect that, although I suppose the idea of appeasement=obviously bad is too ingrained into our popular culture these days.

BTW, Wilde may have been a film - I don't recall why I thought it was a Miniseries.

[vison]

I was annoyed at the portrayal of Edward VIII, too. But a lot. It would have taken a much longer film to develop THAT character.

You have to take it as it is, and it is a splendid movie when you overlook a few details such as that reviewer mentioned. It isn't "wrong" or "rewriting history", just making things hum along and, of course, trying to get the younger generations to understand something of what it was really like. I'm not really old enough to remember the King very well, but I do remember him. And Queen Mary, standing like a pillar of salt.

[Túrin Turambar]

Guy Pearce's Edward VIII seemed pretty close to how I've always pictured him based on what I've read, and he was certainly close to Edward Fox's highly-acclaimed portrayal in Edward and Mrs Simpson. He got his voice pretty much perfect.

Still, he was a minor character. But part of the film's strength is in the minor characters - George V, Queen Mary, etc.

[Pearly Di]

Saw it tonight. . Absolutely loved it. A flawlessly engaging film.

Colin Firth is just Awesomely good!

Everyone else is marvellous too - Helena Bonham Carter, Geoffrey Rush, Derek Jacobi as the stuffy old Archbishop, and I thought Timothy Spall was just a blast as Churchill.

Colin for an Oscar!!!!! I'll be rooting for him.

[yovargas]

I was particularly please with the smaller, subtler role of the wife. She was really wonderful.

I was trying to convince my family to go see it but they were afraid it'd be some stuffy artsy British period piece so we went to see The Tourist instead.

[N.E. Brigand]

I saw The King's Speech earlier this evening and enjoyed it very much; of the relatively few 2010 films I've seen, I place it just behind The Social Network, which I only just saw Friday on DVD.

It was very good of the film to mention George III, as the plot here has an obvious resemblance to The Madness of King George, with Nigel Hawthorne and Ian Holm in roles analogous to those taken here by Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush. I assume the early swallowed marble was a deliberate reference to My Fair Lady; I trust the same gag doesn't appear in Shaw's Pygmailion, or the characters themselves would have noted it. A friend reminded me that Derek Jacobi, prominent in the supporting cast, is perhaps most famous for playing a monarch who stuttered.

[River]

Saw it. A lovely movie. There were lots of moments that were just perfect, and the way the two brothers are contrasted with each other is subtle and yet perfect: Prince Albert, waiting patiently on the ground while his brother Prince David swoops in on an airplane. Also, the way the vise slowly squeezes on poor Albert - it's clear he's the responsible one, and then as the movie progresses, it's also clear King Edward will not rule for long. I have no idea how the typical British subject felt about the abdication but clearly being crowned was the very last thing George VI wanted.

That said, the moment that stood out the most for me was when the PM announced by radio broadcast that Britain was now at war. The scene is in the Logues' apartment. Lionel's eldest son walks in and Lionel looks him in the eye. The country is at war. The son is at an age to enlist. And they both know what's coming...

I caught George V's disapproving tone when talking about David's affairs, BTW, but to me it sounded more like he was more upset that David wasn't showing any signs of settling down than that David was dallying with married women.

And finally, you'd never think a prince would have a bad childhood. But clearly, Albert/George did.

[N.E. Brigand]

Interesting to read the Wikipedia entry on Logue and discover that he began treating the Prince about ten years before they meet in the film. He died at the age of 73 in 1953, fourteen months after the King, who was fifteen years younger. The entry doesn't indicate if any of Logue's three sons served in WWII, but they did survive him.

[yovargas]

A well-deserved Oscar victory.

[Primula Baggins]

I have seen it, and I agree. And for Colin Firth, and for the screenplay.

I do wish Geoffrey Rush had won best supporting actor. He was brilliant.

[yovargas]

I personally would have preferred Geoffrey Rush over Christian Bale but Bale was very, very impressive in The Fighter.

[Old_Tom_Bombadil]

Saw it. Enjoyed it. It deserved every accolade it received.

It will be on Netflix eventually, right?

Yes, of course. That's how I watch nearly every new release these days. The last movie I saw in the theatre was 'Sweeney Todd'.

[Lalaith]

We just watched it last night. Excellent! It was just brilliantly done.

There were so many poignant moments.

That said, the moment that stood out the most for me was when the PM announced by radio broadcast that Britain was now at war. The scene is in the Logues' apartment. Lionel's eldest son walks in and Lionel looks him in the eye. The country is at war. The son is at an age to enlist. And they both know what's coming...

That was one of the most poignant.

And, honestly, I'm not surprised that he had such a terrible childhood. After having read so many autobiographies of royalty, I'm convinced most of them had to have been pretty miserable...or at least warped.