Hamilton Herald Masthead

Editorial


Front Page - Friday, February 4, 2011

The Critic's Corner


"The King's Speech"



Before writing my review of “The King’s Speech,” I scanned the Oscar nominations for 2010. As I scrolled through the nominees, I was pleased to see “The King’s Speech” listed time and time again: best picture, best director, best actor, best supporting actor, best supporting actress, best art direction, best cinematography, best costume design, best film editing, best music, best sound mixing, best original screenplay and best impersonation of Winston Churchill in a historical drama.
Okay, the last award might be a pipedream, but the other categories are legitimate, and in my opinion, the movie deserves every nomination it received except the one for film editing. “The King’s Speech” is beautifully shot, a treat for the ears, superbly directed, written with precision, and populated with actors who deliver memorable performances.
My beef with the editing nomination has nothing to do with the movie, but rather my opinion that other films were more deserving, such as “Inception,” in which the editor stitched together events taking place on multiple layers of reality. The only concern I can imagine the editor of “The King’s Speech” having is deciding which delightfully composed shot to insert next.
To take some of the nominations and extend them as a metaphor for the entire film, if “The King’s Speech” were music, there wouldn’t be a single sour note from beginning to end; if it were the written word, it would read like impeccably composed poetry; if it were a suit or a dress, there wouldn’t be a single stitch out of place, and it would be the most regal garment in any room.
“The King’s Speech” is the kind of movie that invites you to enter the theater, sit down and be drawn into the screen. I imagine the experience of viewing it is similar to what it was like to go the cinema in the ‘40s and ‘50s, when films weren’t in a hurry to end so you could leave and make room for the next group of ticket buyers. Your senses aren’t assaulted, and you won’t spend two hours trying to differentiate between the human actors and the special effects. This is a Movie, made in the classic sense of the term.
On the surface, “The King’s Speech” tells the true story of Prince Albert’s ascension to the throne of Britain in the 1920s and 1930s, and Lionel Logue, the speech therapist who helped him overcome a stuttering problem that made public speaking impossible. Deeper down, it tells the equally true story about the close and enduring friendship the men forged.
It’s hard to think of two actors more suitable for the roles. Colin Firth perfectly conveys the entitlement of an aristocrat and the shame of a man unable to overcome an incapacitating handicap. The opening scene, in which he delivers a radio address live during the 1925 Empire Exhibition at Wembly Stadium, is unforgettable. I cringed as every stammer and wet click of Albert’s throat reverberated loudly throughout the arena. His embarrassment is palpable.
Geoffrey Rush is good as well. He plays Logue as brilliant, optimistic, likeably peculiar and not easily offended. He makes it clear the man took his work seriously (despite his lack of credentials), adored his family, had a genuine sense of humor and didn’t back down when faced with a sizable challenge. Everyone needs a Logue in his or her life.
Although Helena Bonham Carter has a smaller role as the future Queen Elizabeth, her performance as the concerned, loving and stalwart spouse is a pleasure to watch. There’s a nice moment when Prince Albert is venting, and she listens attentively, and when he’s done, her expression changes to one of deeply felt sympathy and love. It seems so genuine, Bonham Carter must have been channeling the late queen.
To the film’s credit, there’s no miracle cure, nor is there a breakthrough moment when Prince Albert divulges The Key to his problem. Instead, he gradually reveal the details of his difficult childhood and his relationship with his overbearing father, he and Logue become friends, and his stutter subsides and a more confident man emerges.
Before I close, I want to mention the attention to visual detail in “The King’s Speech.” From the massive rooms filled with radio broadcasting equipment, to the dilapidated confines of Logue’s office, to the clothes the actors wear, “The King’s Speech” is a window into another time.
I could write more about the movie, which tells a simple story about as well as one could be told, but with all the trimmings of a grand and handsome production. However, it’s my hope I’ve said enough to encourage you to seek it out.
Rated “R” for harsh language used in the context of therapy. Four stars out of four.
Email David Laprad at dlaprad@hamiltoncountyherald.com.