The King’s Speech
Being that The King’s Speech was critically acclaimed and nominated for a few Oscars, I was pretty excited to see it on the list of movies for this course. However, I was disappointed in the film. The acting by Colin Firth as King George VI really stole the show in my opinion. The agony and frustration that he struggled with seemed very real. The thing that most impressed me with his acting was the outbursts that he went thru when he became frustrated with the other characters in the film. They seemed so genuine and that really pulled me into the film. However, it was just not enough in my opinion to keep my full interest. I wasn’t emotionally connected enough to feel like the film was great. It was alright, but mostly boring and very slow moving due to the slow moving plot and the immense focus on dialogue.
To start, I found it very confusing to decipher who the characters were. Obviously, I figured it out, but I feel like I may have missed a few things because I didn’t know who the characters were. I was immensely impressed by the set and the dress that was included in the film. Being that the film was set in the 1930’s and 1940’s; the film looked exactly like I would expect things to look like in that time period. The thing that really kept my interest was that the movie surrounded World War 2. I thoroughly enjoy history, so this fact definitely held my interest. However, the movie just wasn’t all it was cracked up to be for me.
The movie contained a plot that was very much unified. By that, I mean everything stemmed from King George VI struggling with speaking and his speech impediment. The training and the struggles involved with it were a major part of the film along with the apprehension of people around him about owning the throne. Suspense was also involved in the film, but not in a way that most people would think of a suspenseful film. The most interesting part of the film for me, was wondering if the king would overcome his speech impediment, so there was suspense. The movie wasn’t even close to what I would call a thriller, but many of the viewers could relate to the personal triumph that the king experienced at the end of the film.
There was a strong indication of characterization of King George VI thru his dialogue. While most people would characterize characters by what they say, King George VI was characterized by how he spoke and his struggles with speaking. I found it ironic because we often see leaders as great speakers and being very strong linguistically. In the film, I felt that the king was characterized as less intelligent because of his speech by others around him in the film. This can be seen by how he is mocked by his brothers as well as the apprehension people show in the film when he is in line to ascend to the throne when his brother gives it up. Obviously, as viewers we know that this characterization is false, but the characters in the movie often seem to look down on George VI because of his speech.
The title of the film is also very important. Before seeing the film, I automatically assumed it was about a speech the king had given or was going to give in the film. While I was correct, I also think the argument can be made that the film is literally about how he spoke. So, the title has a double meaning in my opinion. It is literally about a speech he gave regarding England declaring war on Germany
The most riveting part of the movie was the end. I am sure this is how the writers and director wanted it. I was literally waiting for King George VI to screw up as I’m sure a lot of viewers were. This was very interesting as this was a great story of personal triumph over something that a person was struggling greatly with. As viewers, we could really relate to working for something extensively and being put in a heated situation where our work is put to the test. I liked the film, but not as much as I thought I would. I rate the film a 6 out of 10.
No comments:
Post a Comment