The King's Speech
2010, Tom Hooper
A lovely movie whose settings barely matter in the face of the actors. That is The King's Speech, as you may be able to tell from reading a one-line plot blurb, is only worth watching if you want to see actors giving performances. The plot is dull, the writing trite, and the cinematography and music overwrought in the hopes of lending weight and emotion to a simple turn of tension: The first king of the civilized world totally on the airwaves has a frightening stammer.
Colin Firth surpasses an already stellar career. Geoffrey Rush is average Geoffrey Rush. Supporting cast of Helena Bonham Carter and Guy Pearce are fluid and engaging. This film is made for the physical personality of the Academy Awards. In fact, Firth and Rush are so good their chemistry outshines the romantic roles prominent in this years awards. As much as I love Marky Mark, he just can't deliver passion to my perfect Amy Adams as well as either of these men.
Otherwise, seriously, this movie just puts every effort possible into drama that simply can't be felt by a normal audience. The only blip of real energy in the film is in the last 9 minutes. In these last 9 minutes Firth delivers the speech of a generation—that given on September the 3rd, 1939 by George the third to the entire empire going up against Hitler.
The whole bloody plot leads to this, and no where in this plot do we care. However, the Anglophile audience member will have heard this speech delivered a dozen times, and teared up each time. Thus, an actor impersonating it, with a sweet montage of empire hoipoloi tearing up, cannot help but bring a bittersweet sting to the listener's ear.
Otherwise, almost a total waste of emotional investment and 2 hours of my time.
No comments:
Post a Comment