By Alec Lautanen
Theme Editor
One might expect a bland movie-going experience when walking into an interwar British film about a stuttering monarch. Interestingly, Tom Hooper’s “The King’s Speech,” starring Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush, bucks this expectation with stellar performances all around. The combination of acting performance, expert direction, and dynamic cinematography brings the film together seamlessly.
Acting is the movie’s grounding force. Firth’s determined portrayal of King George VI is the crowning achievement of the film. From his reserved mannerisms to his infamous speech impediment, Firth’s performance as George is impeccable. Geoffrey Rush’s amused but confident demeanor as the speech therapist highlights him as another one of the movie’s strong points.
“The King’s Speech” began as a stage production, but was later passed on to director Tom Hooper and co-star/executive producer Geoffrey Rush. With a budget of only $15 million, the film was nominated for seven Golden Globes, one of which Firth took home.
One of the most remarkable features of The King’s Speech is the point/counterpoint relationship between George VI (Firth) and Lionel Logue (Rush), George’s speech therapist. The duality of George’s stiff demeanor and Logue’s disregard for his patient’s prestige creates a bond fraught with both scathing conflict and deep mutual respect.
Continuing the pattern of contrasts, another markedly unexpected aspect of the film was Rush’s performance trying to cure George’s stammering. Adding to the predicted solutions of muscle practice and tongue twisters, Logue’s unorthodox treatments include singing, waltzing and infuriating George. These scenes make for interesting and even humorous departures from the assumed course of the film.
The characters alone brought the film to life, but Hooper’s visual choices and cinematographer Danny Cohen’s stylistic influences layered “The King’s Speech.” Largely stiff camera movement creates tones of seriousness in some scenes and flowing shots give others a sense of motion and progress.
Production design and art direction were also two key elements of the film. What’s shown is a visually pleasing portrait of 1930s London along with all the nuances of royal pomp and circumstance. Careful attention is paid to each aspect of every setting, detailing the royal grandeur of Buckingham Palace and Westminster Abbey and the homey simplicity of Logue’s home and office.
Another aspect which brings”The King’s Speech” together is the score. Alexandre Desplat, whose last work was seen in “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” creates a much punctuated musical undertone for the film. Scenes are noticeably silent or garnished with complex orchestral or piano-laden harmonies.
In spite of its many impressive qualities, “The King’s Speech” failed to deliver on one important plot point. After much conflict and stressful rehearsal for George’s coronation including a personal argument with the Archbishop of Canterbury about Logue’s attendance, the actual event is never shown.
Arguably it would have diverted the focus from the achievement of George’s ultimate speech (the film’s namesake), a radio address concerning World War II; the artistic elements and personal payoff for Logue as a character would have outweighed the disruption to the plot.
“The King’s Speech” is a champion of recent dramas, showcasing the striking story of a struggling king who connects on a personal and emotional level with audiences. Firth delivers a strong follow-up performance to “A Single Man,” Rush is equally impressive and all involved in the film should have high expectations come Oscar time.
The King’s Speech is rated R and playing in theaters everywhere.
Leave a Reply