The Kings Speech - a Critique

[fluteplayer07]

Saw it a second time today, even better the second time. Although this time I did note those glaringly obvious faulty collars.

 

[skyvue]

I'm not a big fan of Christopher Hitchens, but I found this critique of the movie compelling. I liked the movie and am not terribly knowledgable about history, but while watching it, even I noted a couple of issues he addresses in the piece:

http://www.slate.com/id/2282194/

 

[Mr Vim]

I felt that the film was very moving particularly when Bertie and Lionel are singing about his childhood, it was humorous and then it became such a sad but beautiful scene. I felt the comedy was just right to be realistic, all in all a masterpiece.

 

[Harp]

I'm not a big fan of Christopher Hitchens, but I found this critique of the movie compelling. I liked the movie and am not terribly knowledgable about history, but while watching it, even I noted a couple of issues he addresses in the piece:

http://www.slate.com/id/2282194/

As Camus remarked, silk hides eczema.

Hitchens is always good copy.
George though remains Emerson's fenris wolf buckling the web of Fate,
a gallant prince overshadowed by a cigar-chomping bulldog,
who rose above himself and attained heroic stature.

Black Swan for Oscar.

 

[Hereward]

The King's actual speeches were edited by a technical expert on recordings so that he appeared not to stutter, thus proving that this treatment did not work. That means the central idea of this film is not true and is why a good well-researched book beats most films anyday.

 

[Tomasso]

Once again folks: It's a story........... not a documentary.

 

[BinkieBaumont]

A Bit off topic I know............................But

 

[LizzieMaine]

At least some of George VI's speeches were indeed delivered live -- the Coronation address and the September 3rd address on the start of the war went out live without question, but were *re*broadcast from recordings after they'd already been heard. I have BBC Overseas Service airchecks from 9/3/39 of both the actual live broadcast by the King and a recorded rebroadcast from later in the day, and there is no noticeable editing present between the two broadcasts. There are heistancies, and the King's W-for-R "Elmer Fudd" speech impediment is evident at several points, but nothing has been cut from the recorded version when compared to the live broadcast.

Editing at the BBC between 1937 and 1939 was possible, but it was not something easily done. Most BBC recording at that time was done on the Blattnerphone, a huge machine using steel tape which had to be cut with tinsnips and spotwelded back together to accomplish splices -- and doing so weakened the tape and damaged the heads, so it wasn't done often. Editing on disc was even more complicated, and because it required dubbing from turntable to turntable it caused the audio to degrade between generations and so was frowned upon.

Later on, during the war era, the BBC began using the Miller-Phelps sound-on-film system which was much easier to edit, and if any of the King's later speeches were prerecorded and edited for broadcast, it would have been possible to do it easily enough on this device.

Meanwhile, back at the box office, "The King's Speech" is now officially our highest grossing film ever. We usually only run a film for one week -- it's now in its fourth, and the distributor is begging us to keep it for a fifth. If this is what it's going to be like, I'd love to go to an all-royal-family-films policy.

 

[Edward]

Did anyone see the new Upstairs Downstairs over Christmas? It covered this period, but unless I wasn't paying attention 'Bertie' appeared in it as a friend of the main character and appeared to have no stammer at all!

I think you're right, though he was really only a peripheral character. Actually, what was far more interesting in that show was the treatment of Mosley and the BUF, a significant part of that period's histroy that is all too often ignored in favour of the royal soap opera.

We're getting this for three weeks later this month, and I'm very enthusiastic. Anything dealing with the Royal Family is gold at the box office for us -- a lot of people round here are descended from Loyalists (me included), and pictures dealing with the monarchy always do well. Colin Firth is another big draw here -- the only way this could do better for us is if they'd found a way to get Judi Dench into the cast.

Personally I'm a big fan of George VI -- ten times the man that good-for-nothing lounge lizard of a brother of his was, speech impediment or not.

"lounge lizard".... lol

I have finally seen this, and what a great film. Just a lovely, lovely, well made, well acted, moving film. Colin Firth was excellent, as was the rest of the cast, and can I say that Helena Bonham Carter was perfect as Elizabeth. It will be interesting to see what happens come Oscar time.

What also interested me was that thought of what might have happened if Edward had given up Mrs Simpson and we had gone to war with him as King. Would it have made a difference? I do wonder.

I don't believe it would have been allowed to happen, but then I am firmly convinced that the real reason Edward VIII was pushed off the throne was his Nazi-sympathies; Wallace Simpson being a divorcee was simply a convenient excuse.

I'm not a big fan of Christopher Hitchens, but I found this critique of the movie compelling. I liked the movie and am not terribly knowledgable about history, but while watching it, even I noted a couple of issues he addresses in the piece:

http://www.slate.com/id/2282194/

Interesting piece. He's absolutely right about the power of the cult of Churchill the icon as opposed to the reality of the man.

 

[Shangas]

Did anyone see the new Upstairs Downstairs over Christmas? It covered this period, but unless I wasn't paying attention 'Bertie' appeared in it as a friend of the main character and appeared to have no stammer at all!

I've seen the new Upstairs Downstairs series.

That was not Bertie. That was George.

There were FOUR brothers.

David.
Bertie.
George.
John.

John died at the age of 13. David was the scoundrel who ran off with the Yank. Bertie became "Mad King George, The Stammerererer...". George was HRH the Duke of Kent and he was Sir Hallam's friend who appears in the series. George sadly died in 1942 when the airplane he was a passenger in, crashed in Scotland.

 

[LandGirl1980]

What also interested me was that thought of what might have happened if Edward had given up Mrs Simpson and we had gone to war with him as King. Would it have made a difference? I do wonder.

I think it would have made all the difference - considering how "sympathetic" he was to Hitler's "cause". I can't think that he took a tour of Nazi Germany out of spite after his abdication. I think those leanings had always been there. Or... perhaps it was all "that woman's" influence...? I need to read more to find out!

That aside (and it does make the mind go "hmmmmmmmmmm"!) I loved this film from beginning to end. I love it for it's focus on the era, the monarchy and the time we had to face as a nation ahead of us. But, beyond all of that - I love it for the development of a friendship between 2 men. Such a lovely thing to watch. Full review over at LandGirl's Library if your interested

My favourite bit? "It's Mam as in ham, nor Marm as in palm". Priceless. Oh and "Tits!"

 

[cookie]

Chris Hitchens Slate piece on the film and other matters


http://artoftheprank.com/2011/01/25/hitchens-churchill-didnt-say-that/

 

[BinkieBaumont]

I enjoyed it, but it seemed more like a BBC TV production than a Movie?, The British are good at making these feel good period pieces, (Mrs Henderson presents, Ladies in Lavender, tea with Mussolini ) films you can take your Nanna to see, consequently they make heaps of dosh!

 

[Effingham]

Personally I'm a big fan of George VI -- ten times the man that good-for-nothing lounge lizard of a brother of his was, speech impediment or not.

Hear, hear.

 

[HectorTorta]

There's no doubt that is was a well made, entertaining movie, but have no doubt - this thing was engineered to win oscars. The only thing oscar voters love more than british period pieces are tales of people with physical/mental handicaps that they triumphantly overcome in the third act. If this doesn't win best picture I'll eat my hat.

 

[Tomasso]

have no doubt - this thing was engineered to win oscars.

I could not care less.....In the final analysis it was a downright excellent flick!

 

[Tomasso]

The hidden letters behind "The King's Speech"

From 60 Minutes.

 

[randooch]

I could not care less.....In the final analysis it was a downright excellent flick!

Ah, but the final analysis isn't yet in.

 

[Tomasso]

Ah, but the final analysis isn't yet in.

OK, so it's a crappy film....Happy?......

Sometimes it's so tedious here in the film section. Really....a film with a $15m budget was engineered to win Oscars. :eusa_doh:

 

[dnjan]

One thing that distracted me throughout the film was the fit of a few of Firth's jackets, where there was serious gaping (space between shirt and jacket) at the collar. This is a glaring indication of a poorly fitted jacket and not something you would expect from the King's Savile Row tailors.

Since many of the jackets were vintage rather than made for the film, perhaps they were a bit hesitant to do too much re-tailoring.