The King's Speech: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Spelling error, order of parameters in citations
Replaced not wholly reliable reference with a solid one. Moved paragraph on scripting to development
Line 73: Line 73:


Instead of trying to contact his agent Lane asked an Australian staff member to hand-deliver the script to Geoffrey Rush's house, not far away from hers in Melbourne. Unwin reports that he received a four page e-mail from Rush's manager admonishing them for the breach of etiquette, but ending with an invitation to discuss the project further. Iain Canning from [[See-Saw Films]] became involved and, in Gareth Unwin's words: "We worked with ex-chair of Bafta Richard Price, and started turning this story about two grumpy men sitting in a room into something bigger."<ref name='Unwin'/> Hooper liked the story, but thought that the original ending needed to be changed to reflect events more closely: "Originally, it had a Hollywood ending&nbsp;... If you hear the real speech, he's clearly coping with his stammer. But it's not a perfect performance. He's managing it."<ref name='Gritten'/>
Instead of trying to contact his agent Lane asked an Australian staff member to hand-deliver the script to Geoffrey Rush's house, not far away from hers in Melbourne. Unwin reports that he received a four page e-mail from Rush's manager admonishing them for the breach of etiquette, but ending with an invitation to discuss the project further. Iain Canning from [[See-Saw Films]] became involved and, in Gareth Unwin's words: "We worked with ex-chair of Bafta Richard Price, and started turning this story about two grumpy men sitting in a room into something bigger."<ref name='Unwin'/> Hooper liked the story, but thought that the original ending needed to be changed to reflect events more closely: "Originally, it had a Hollywood ending&nbsp;... If you hear the real speech, he's clearly coping with his stammer. But it's not a perfect performance. He's managing it."<ref name='Gritten'/>

The production team learned—some nine weeks prior to the start of filming—of a diary containing Logue's original notes on his treatment of the Duke.<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12116320 "Finding the real King's Speech"]. ''BBC''. 4 January 2011. Retrieved 8 January 2011.</ref> They then went back and re-worked the script to reflect what was in the notes. Hooper said some of the film's most memorable lines, such as at the climax, when Logue smiles, "you still stammered on the W" to the King, who replies "I had to throw in a few so they would know it was me" were direct quotations from Logue's notes.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-02-04/movies/27100846_1_bertie-shakespeare-movie|title=Q&A with 'King's Speech' director Tom Hooper|work=San Francisco Chronicle|first=Walter|last=Addiego|date=' February 2011|accessdate=2 September 2011}}</ref> Changes from the script to reflect the historical record included Michael Gambon improvising the ramblings of George V as he signed away authority, and the decision to dress the Duke in an overcoat rather than regal finery in the opening scene.<ref name='HooperDVD'/>


Seidler thought [[Paul Bettany]] would be a good choice to play King George&nbsp;VI, Tom Hooper preferred [[Hugh Grant]], though both actors refused the offer. Once they met with Firth and heard him read for the part, Seidler and Hooper were convinced of his suitability for the role.<ref name='3George'>Walker, T. (20 January 2011) [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/8269816/Colin-Firth-was-the-third-choice-to-play-George-VI-in-The-Kings-Speech.html "Colin Firth was the third choice to play George VI in The King's Speech"]. ''The Daily Telegraph''. Retrieved 20 August 2011.</ref>
Seidler thought [[Paul Bettany]] would be a good choice to play King George&nbsp;VI, Tom Hooper preferred [[Hugh Grant]], though both actors refused the offer. Once they met with Firth and heard him read for the part, Seidler and Hooper were convinced of his suitability for the role.<ref name='3George'>Walker, T. (20 January 2011) [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/8269816/Colin-Firth-was-the-third-choice-to-play-George-VI-in-The-Kings-Speech.html "Colin Firth was the third choice to play George VI in The King's Speech"]. ''The Daily Telegraph''. Retrieved 20 August 2011.</ref>

The [[UK Film Council]] awarded the production £1&nbsp;million in June 2009.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/awards?awardid=15651|title=Awards database The King's Speech|publisher=UK Film Council|accessdate=5 February 2011}}</ref> Filming began in December 2009, and lasted 39 days. Most was shot in the three weeks before Christmas because Rush would be preforming in a play in January. The schedule was further complicated Bonham-Carter's avaliability: she worked on ''[[Production of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows|Harry Potter]]'' during the week, so her scenes had to be filmed at at the weekend.<ref name='Unwin'/>
The [[UK Film Council]] awarded the production £1&nbsp;million in June 2009.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/awards?awardid=15651|title=Awards database The King's Speech|publisher=UK Film Council|accessdate=5 February 2011}}</ref> Filming began in December 2009, and lasted 39 days. Most was shot in the three weeks before Christmas because Rush would be preforming in a play in January. The schedule was further complicated Bonham-Carter's avaliability: she worked on ''[[Production of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows|Harry Potter]]'' during the week, so her scenes had to be filmed at at the weekend.<ref name='Unwin'/>


Line 112: Line 115:


== Historical accuracy ==
== Historical accuracy ==
Cathy Schultz pointed out that the film-makers tightened the chronology of the events to just a few years: the Duke of York in fact began to work with Lionel Logue in October 1926, ten years before the [[abdication crisis]], and the improvement in his speech was apparent in months rather than years, as is suggested by the film.<ref>{{cite web| last=Schultz |first=Cathy |title=History in the Movies |date=4 January 2011 |publisher=The Bulletin|accessdate=4 January 2011 |url=http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110104/NEWS0107/101040314/1020&nav_category=}}</ref> In a 1952 newspaper interview with [[John Gordon (journalist)|John Gordon]], Logue said that "Resonantly and without stuttering, he opened the Australian Parliament in Canberra in 1927"; this was just seven months after the Duke began to work with Logue.<ref>Meacham, S. (10 November 2011) [http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/kings-voice-coach-calmed-a-nation-20101109-17m2x.html?skin=text-only King's voice coach calmed a nation]. ''[[Sydney Morning Herald]]''. Retrieved 20 August 2011.</ref> Hugo Vickers, an adviser on the film, agreed that the alteration of historical details to preserve the essence of the dramatic story was sometimes necessary. The high ranking officials, for instance, would not have been present when the King made his speech, nor would Churchill have been involved at any level, "but the average viewer knows who Churchill is; he doesn't know who [[Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax|Lord Halifax]] and Lord Hoare [sc. [[Samuel Hoare, 1st Viscount Templewood|Sir Samuel Hoare]]] are."<ref>Henley, J. (9 January 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jan/09/how-historically-accurate-is-the-kings-speech?intcmp=239 "How historically accurate is the King's Speech?"]. ''[[The Guardian]]''. Retrieved 3 February 2011.</ref>
According to a BBC interview with Lionel Logue's grandson, the production team learned—some nine weeks prior to the start of filming—of a diary containing Logue's original notes on his treatment of the Duke.<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12116320 "Finding the real King's Speech"]. ''BBC''. 4 January 2011. Retrieved 8 January 2011.</ref> They then went back and re-worked the script to reflect what was in the notes. Hooper said some of the film's most memorable lines, such as at the climax, when Logue smiles, "You still stammered on the W" to the King, who replies "I had to throw in a few so they would know it was me" were direct quotations from Logue's notes.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://cutprintreview.com/interviews/interview-the-kings-speech-director-tom-hooper/|title=Interview: The King's Speech director Tom Hooper|publisher=Cut Print Review|first=Anders|last=Wotzke|date=12 December 2010|accessdate=20 August 2011}}</ref> Changes from the script to reflect the historical record included Michael Gambon improvising the ramblings of George V as he signed away authority, and the decision to dress the Duke in an overcoat rather than regal finery in the opening scene.<ref name='HooperDVD'/>

Other changes were made for [[artistic license|artistic or dramatic reasons]]. Cathy Schultz pointed out that the film-makers tightened the chronology of the events to just a few years: the Duke of York in fact began to work with Lionel Logue in October 1926, ten years before the [[abdication crisis]], and the improvement in his speech was apparent in months rather than years, as is suggested by the film.<ref>{{cite web| last=Schultz |first=Cathy |title=History in the Movies |date=4 January 2011 |publisher=The Bulletin|accessdate=4 January 2011 |url=http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110104/NEWS0107/101040314/1020&nav_category=}}</ref> In a 1952 newspaper interview with [[John Gordon (journalist)|John Gordon]], Logue said that "Resonantly and without stuttering, he opened the Australian Parliament in Canberra in 1927"; this was just seven months after the Duke began to work with Logue.<ref>Meacham, S. (10 November 2011) [http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/kings-voice-coach-calmed-a-nation-20101109-17m2x.html?skin=text-only King's voice coach calmed a nation]. ''[[Sydney Morning Herald]]''. Retrieved 20 August 2011.</ref> Hugo Vickers, an adviser on the film, agreed that the alteration of historical details to preserve the essence of the dramatic story was sometimes necessary. The high ranking officials, for instance, would not have been present when the King made his speech, nor would Churchill have been involved at any level, "but the average viewer knows who Churchill is; he doesn't know who [[Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax|Lord Halifax]] and Lord Hoare [sc. [[Samuel Hoare, 1st Viscount Templewood|Sir Samuel Hoare]]] are."<ref>Henley, J. (9 January 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jan/09/how-historically-accurate-is-the-kings-speech?intcmp=239 "How historically accurate is the King's Speech?"]. ''[[The Guardian]]''. Retrieved 3 February 2011.</ref>
[[File:Lionel Logue 2 crop.jpg|270px|left|thumb|alt=A black and white photograph of a smiling man seated at a desk. He is holding a pen, with a jotter open in front of him and a photograph on the desk.|Mr. Lionel Logue in London, c. 1930, exact date unknown. The real Logue would never have sworn to the Prince, nor addressed him casually.<ref name='RobertLogue'/>]]
[[File:Lionel Logue 2 crop.jpg|270px|left|thumb|alt=A black and white photograph of a smiling man seated at a desk. He is holding a pen, with a jotter open in front of him and a photograph on the desk.|Mr. Lionel Logue in London, c. 1930, exact date unknown. The real Logue would never have sworn to the Prince, nor addressed him casually.<ref name='RobertLogue'/>]]
Robert Logue, a grandson of Lionel, doubted the film's depiction of the speech therapist, stating "I don't think he ever swore in front of the King and he certainly never called him 'Bertie".<ref name='RobertLogue'>{{Cite news| title=Lionel Logue 'never swore in front of King George VI' | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/leicester/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_9377000/9377098.stm | newspaper=''[[BBC Radio Leicester]]'' | date=27 January 2011 |accessdate=27 January 2011}}</ref> [[Andrew Roberts (historian)|Andrew Roberts]], an English historian, states that the severity of the King's stammer was exaggerated and the characters of Edward VIII, Wallis Simpson, and George V made more antagonistic than they really were, to increase the dramatic effect.<ref name='Roberts'>{{cite web|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/8244564/How-the-King-found-his-voice.html |title=How the King found his voice |author=Roberts, A. |work=The Daily Telegraph|date=6 January 2011 |accessdate=30 January 2011}}</ref>
Robert Logue, a grandson of Lionel, doubted the film's depiction of the speech therapist, stating "I don't think he ever swore in front of the King and he certainly never called him 'Bertie".<ref name='RobertLogue'>{{Cite news| title=Lionel Logue 'never swore in front of King George VI' | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/leicester/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_9377000/9377098.stm | newspaper=''[[BBC Radio Leicester]]'' | date=27 January 2011 |accessdate=27 January 2011}}</ref> [[Andrew Roberts (historian)|Andrew Roberts]], an English historian, states that the severity of the King's stammer was exaggerated and the characters of Edward VIII, Wallis Simpson, and George V made more antagonistic than they really were, to increase the dramatic effect.<ref name='Roberts'>{{cite web|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/8244564/How-the-King-found-his-voice.html |title=How the King found his voice |author=Roberts, A. |work=The Daily Telegraph|date=6 January 2011 |accessdate=30 January 2011}}</ref>
Line 120: Line 121:
[[Christopher Hitchens]] and Isaac Chotiner challenged the film's portrayal of Winston Churchill's role in the abdication crisis.<ref>Chotiner, I. (6 January 2011). [http://www.tnr.com/article/film/80948/the-kings-speech-film-royal-mess "Royal Mess"]. ''The New Republic''. Retrieved 9 January 2011.</ref><ref name="Zohn">{{cite web|author=Zohn, Patricia|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/patricia-zohn/off-the-chuff-oscar-nomin_b_821071.html|title=David Seidler Protects and Defends The King’s Speech|publisher=Huffington Post|date=11 February 2011|accessdate=4 August 2011}}</ref> It is well established that Churchill encouraged Edward VIII to resist pressure to abdicate, whereas he is portrayed in the film as strongly supportive of Prince Albert and not opposed to the abdication.<ref>For critiques of the film, see e.g., Hitchens FN 47 and Chotiner FN 44. For historical sources substantiating Churchill's stance during the abdication crisis, see e.g., Roy Jenkins's biography of Churchill (2001) and Frances Donaldson's biography of Edward VIII (1976).</ref> Hitchens attributes this treatment to the "cult" surrounding Churchill's legacy. In a smart, well-made film, "would the true story not have been fractionally more interesting for the audience?" he wondered.<ref name='Hitchens'/> They also criticised the film for failing to indict the [[appeasement]] of the era. While the film never directly mentions the issue, Hitchens and Chotiner argue that it implies that George VI was against appeasement, especially in the final scene portraying "Churchill and the King at Buckingham Palace and a speech of unity and resistance being readied for delivery".<ref name="Hitchens">{{Cite news|author=Hitchens, Christopher|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2282194|title=Churchill Didn't Say That|publisher=''Slate''|date=24 January 2011|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Far from distancing himself from Chamberlain's appeasement policy, King George VI despatched a car to meet [[Neville Chamberlain]] when he returned from signing the [[Munich Agreement]] with Hitler in September 1938. The King and Chamberlain then stood on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, acclaimed by cheering crowds. This led historian [[Steven Runciman]] to write that by acting as he did to endorse Chamberlain's foreign policy, King George VI perpetrated "the biggest constitutional blunder that has been made by any sovereign this century."<ref name='Filler'/> ''[[The Guardian]]'' corrected the portrayal of [[Stanley Baldwin]] as having resigned due to his refusal to order Britain's re-armament, when he in fact stepped down as "a national hero, exhausted by more than a decade at the top".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/29/editorial-unthinkable-historically-accurate-films|title=Unthinkable? Historically accurate films|publisher=''The Guardian''|date=29 January 2011| accessdate =23 July 2011}}</ref>
[[Christopher Hitchens]] and Isaac Chotiner challenged the film's portrayal of Winston Churchill's role in the abdication crisis.<ref>Chotiner, I. (6 January 2011). [http://www.tnr.com/article/film/80948/the-kings-speech-film-royal-mess "Royal Mess"]. ''The New Republic''. Retrieved 9 January 2011.</ref><ref name="Zohn">{{cite web|author=Zohn, Patricia|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/patricia-zohn/off-the-chuff-oscar-nomin_b_821071.html|title=David Seidler Protects and Defends The King’s Speech|publisher=Huffington Post|date=11 February 2011|accessdate=4 August 2011}}</ref> It is well established that Churchill encouraged Edward VIII to resist pressure to abdicate, whereas he is portrayed in the film as strongly supportive of Prince Albert and not opposed to the abdication.<ref>For critiques of the film, see e.g., Hitchens FN 47 and Chotiner FN 44. For historical sources substantiating Churchill's stance during the abdication crisis, see e.g., Roy Jenkins's biography of Churchill (2001) and Frances Donaldson's biography of Edward VIII (1976).</ref> Hitchens attributes this treatment to the "cult" surrounding Churchill's legacy. In a smart, well-made film, "would the true story not have been fractionally more interesting for the audience?" he wondered.<ref name='Hitchens'/> They also criticised the film for failing to indict the [[appeasement]] of the era. While the film never directly mentions the issue, Hitchens and Chotiner argue that it implies that George VI was against appeasement, especially in the final scene portraying "Churchill and the King at Buckingham Palace and a speech of unity and resistance being readied for delivery".<ref name="Hitchens">{{Cite news|author=Hitchens, Christopher|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2282194|title=Churchill Didn't Say That|publisher=''Slate''|date=24 January 2011|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Far from distancing himself from Chamberlain's appeasement policy, King George VI despatched a car to meet [[Neville Chamberlain]] when he returned from signing the [[Munich Agreement]] with Hitler in September 1938. The King and Chamberlain then stood on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, acclaimed by cheering crowds. This led historian [[Steven Runciman]] to write that by acting as he did to endorse Chamberlain's foreign policy, King George VI perpetrated "the biggest constitutional blunder that has been made by any sovereign this century."<ref name='Filler'/> ''[[The Guardian]]'' corrected the portrayal of [[Stanley Baldwin]] as having resigned due to his refusal to order Britain's re-armament, when he in fact stepped down as "a national hero, exhausted by more than a decade at the top".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/29/editorial-unthinkable-historically-accurate-films|title=Unthinkable? Historically accurate films|publisher=''The Guardian''|date=29 January 2011| accessdate =23 July 2011}}</ref>


[[Martin Filler]] acknowledged that the film legitimately used artistic license to make valid dramatic points, such as in the probably-imagined scene when George V lectures his son on the importance of broadcasting. Filler cautions that George VI would never have tolerated Logue addressing him casually, nor swearing, and the King almost certainly would have understood a newsreel of Hitler speaking in German. Filler makes the larger point that both the King and his wife were, in reality, lukewarm towards Churchill because of the latter's support for his brother during the abdication crisis. They only warmed to Churchill later in the war, because of his performance as a wartime leader.<ref name='Filler'/>
[[Martin Filler]] acknowledged that the film legitimately used [[artistic license]] to make valid dramatic points, such as in the probably-imagined scene when George V lectures his son on the importance of broadcasting. Filler cautions that George VI would never have tolerated Logue addressing him casually, nor swearing, and the King almost certainly would have understood a newsreel of Hitler speaking in German. Filler makes the larger point that both the King and his wife were, in reality, lukewarm towards Churchill because of the latter's support for his brother during the abdication crisis. They only warmed to Churchill later in the war, because of his performance as a wartime leader.<ref name='Filler'/>


Commenting on the film's final scene on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, Andrew Roberts has written, "The scene is fairly absurd from a historical point of view – Neville Chamberlain and Winston Churchill were not present and there were no cheering crowds outside Buckingham Palace."<ref name='Roberts'/> Overall, Roberts praises the film as a sympathetic portrayal of the King's "quiet, unassuming heroism", and he states: "The portrayals by Firth and Bonham Carter are sympathetic and acute, and the movie’s occasional factual bêtises should not detract from that."<ref name='Roberts'/>
Commenting on the film's final scene on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, Andrew Roberts has written, "The scene is fairly absurd from a historical point of view – Neville Chamberlain and Winston Churchill were not present and there were no cheering crowds outside Buckingham Palace."<ref name='Roberts'/> Overall, Roberts praises the film as a sympathetic portrayal of the King's "quiet, unassuming heroism", and he states: "The portrayals by Firth and Bonham Carter are sympathetic and acute, and the movie’s occasional factual bêtises should not detract from that."<ref name='Roberts'/>

Revision as of 07:51, 2 September 2011

The King's Speech
A film poster showing two men framing a large, ornate window looking out onto London. Colin Firth, on the left, is wearing as naval uniform as King George VI. Geoffrey Rush, on the right, is wearing a suit and facing out the window, his back to the reader. The picture is overlaid with names and critical praise for the film.
Cinematic release poster
Directed byTom Hooper
Screenplay byDavid Seidler
Produced by
Starring
CinematographyDanny Cohen, BSC
Edited byTariq Anwar
Music byAlexandre Desplat
Production
companies
Distributed byThe Weinstein Company
Release dates
Running time
119 minutes
CountryTemplate:Film UK[1]
LanguageEnglish
BudgetGBP£8 million[2]
Box officeUSD$414,211,549[3] (GBP£250 million)

The King's Speech is a 2010 British historical drama film directed by Tom Hooper and written by David Seidler. Colin Firth plays King George VI who, to overcome stammering, sees Lionel Logue, an Australian speech therapist, played by Geoffrey Rush. The men become friends as they work together, and after his brother abdicates the throne, the new King relies on Logue to help him make a radio broadcast on Britain's declaration of war on Germany in 1939.

Seidler read about George VI's life after overcoming a stuttering condition he endured during his youth. He started writing about the men's relationship as early as the 1980s, but postponed work, at the Queen Mother's wishes, until her death in 2002. He later rewrote his screenplay for the stage to focus on the essential relationship between the two protagonists. Nine weeks before filming began, Logue's notebooks were discovered and quotations from them were incorporated into the script.

Principal photography took place in London and around Britain from November 2009 to January 2010. The opening scenes were filmed in Elland Road, Leeds, (for the since demolished Wembley Stadium), Buckingham Palace interiors in Lancaster House, and Ely Cathedral stood in for Westminster Abbey. The cinematography differs from other historical dramas; hard light was used to give the story a greater resonance and wider than normal lenses were used to recreate the King's feelings of constriction. A third technique Hooper employed was the off-centre framing of characters: in his first consultation with Logue, George VI is captured hunched on the side of a couch at the edge of the frame.

Released in the United Kingdom on 7 January 2011, The King's Speech was a major box office and critical success. Censors initially gave it adult ratings due to profanity, though these were later revised downwards after criticism by the makers and distributors in the UK; some instances of swearing in the film were muted in the US. On a budget of GB£8 million, it earned over US$400 million internationally (£250 million).[4] It was widely praised by film critics for its visual style, art direction, and acting. Other commentators discussed the film's representation of historical detail, especially the reversal of Winston Churchill's opposition to abdication. The film received many awards and nominations, particularly for Colin Firth's performance; his Golden Globe Award for Best Actor was the sole win at that ceremony from seven nominations. The King's Speech won seven BAFTAs, including Best Picture, Best Actor (Firth), Best Supporting Actor (Rush), and Best Supporting Actress (Bonham Carter). The film also won four Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Director (Hooper), Best Actor (Firth), and Best Original Screenplay (Seidler).

Synopsis

The film opens with Prince Albert, Duke of York (played by Colin Firth), the second son of King George V, stammering through his closing speech at the 1925 British Empire Exhibition at Wembley Stadium, with his wife, Elizabeth, Duchess of York (Helena Bonham Carter), by his side. The Duke despairs after several unsuccessful treatments, until his wife persuades him to see Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), an Australian speech therapist in London. During their first session, Logue requests that they address each other by their Christian names—a breach of royal etiquette—and proceeds to call the prince "Bertie". To persuade him to follow his treatment, Logue bets Prince Albert a shilling that he can read perfectly at that very moment, and gives him Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" soliloquy to read aloud, which he does while listening to loud music on headphones. Logue records Bertie's reading on a gramophone record; convinced he has stammered throughout, Bertie leaves in a huff, declaring his condition "hopeless." Logue offers him the recording as a keepsake.

After King George V (Michael Gambon) makes his 1934 Christmas address, he explains to his son how important broadcasting is to the modern monarchy. He declares that "David" (Edward, Prince of Wales, played by Guy Pearce), Prince Albert's older brother, will bring ruin to the family and the country as king. King George demands that Albert train himself, starting with a reading of his father's speech. After an agonising attempt to do so, Prince Albert plays Logue's recording and hears himself making an unbroken recitation of Shakespeare. He returns to Logue, and they work together on muscle relaxation and breath control, while Logue gently probes the psychological roots of his stuttering. The Duke soon reveals some of the pressures of his childhood: his strict father, the repression of his natural left-handedness, a painful treatment for knock-knees, a nanny who favoured his elder brother, and the early death of his younger brother, Prince John. As the treatment progresses, the two men become friends and confidants.

A well dressed man and woman standing side by side in period dress
Firth and Bonham Carter as the Duke and Duchess of York

In January 1936, George V dies, and David accedes to the throne as King Edward VIII, still wanting to marry Mrs Wallis Simpson (Eve Best), a socialite American divorcée. At Christmas in Balmoral Castle, Prince Albert points out that Edward cannot marry a divorced woman and retain the throne; Edward accuses his brother of a medieval-style plot to usurp him, cites his speech lessons as an attempt to ready himself, and resurrects his childhood taunt of "B-B-B-Bertie".

At his next session, the Duke has not forgotten the incident. He is frustrated that his speech has improved while talking to most people—except his own brother. Logue, observing that when he curses he does not stutter, has him swear out loud. After doing so, Albert briefs him on the extent of David's folly with Mrs Simpson, and Logue insists that Albert could be king. Outraged, he accuses Logue of treason and, in his anger, mocks Logue's failed acting career and humble origins, causing a rift in their friendship. When King Edward VIII does abdicate to marry, Prince Albert becomes King George VI. The new King realises that he needs Logue's help; he and the Queen visit the Logues' home to apologise. When the King insists that Logue be seated in the King's box during his coronation in Westminster Abbey, the Archbishop of Canterbury (Derek Jacobi), questions Logue's qualifications. This prompts another confrontation between George VI and Logue, who explains he began by treating shell-shocked soldiers during the war. When the King remains unsure of himself, Logue sits in King Edward's Chair and dismisses the Stone of Scone as a trifle. George VI remonstrates Logue for his disrespect, surprising himself with his own sudden eloquence.

Upon the September 1939 declaration of war with Nazi Germany, George VI summons Logue to Buckingham Palace to assist him in preparing for upcoming his radio address to Britain and the Empire. As millions of people listen to their radios, the King delivers his speech as if to Logue, who coaches him silently throughout. Afterwards, the King steps onto the balcony of the palace with his family, where thousands of Londoners have gathered to listen, cheer, and applaud.

A title card explains that Logue was always present at King George VI's speeches during World War II. It notes that in 1944 Logue was made a Commander of the Royal Victorian Order, in recognition of personal service to the Monarch. Also noted is the continuation of their friendship for the remainder of their lives.

Cast

A close up portrait of a middle aged man in a dinner jacket entering a film event
Third choice to play the lead,[5] Colin Firth's performance earned him BAFTA & Academy awards, among others.

Production

Development

Not a great deal was written about His Majesty's speech therapist, Lionel Logue, certainly not in the official biographies. Nor was much published about the Royal stutter; it appeared to be a source of profound embarrassment.[6]

— David Seidler

As a child, David Seidler developed a stammer, which he believes was caused by the emotional trauma of World War II and the murder of his grandparents during the Holocaust. King George VI's success in overcoming his stammer inspired the young Seidler, "Here was a stutterer who was a king and had to give radio speeches where everyone was listening to every syllable he uttered, and yet did so with passion and intensity." When Seidler became an adult, he resolved to write about King George VI. During the late 1970s and 1980s he voraciously researched the King, but found a dearth of information on Logue. Eventually Seidler contacted Dr. Valentine Logue, who agreed to discuss his father and make his notebooks available if the Queen Mother gave her permission. She asked him not to do so in her lifetime, and Seidler halted the project.[6]

A middle aged man's face, reddish, curly gray hair. Large nose. Gray suit with notched lapels and a white open-necked shirt
The film's producers broke etiquette by hand-delivering Geoffrey Rush the script, but he liked it and eventually performed in and produced the film.[7]

The Queen Mother died in 2002. Three years later, Seidler returned to the story during a bout of creative work inspired by a recovery from cancer. His research, including a chance encounter with an uncle whom Logue had treated, indicated he used mechanical breathing exercises combined with psychological counselling to probe the underlying causes of the condition. Thus prepared, Seidler imagined the sessions. He showed the finished screenplay to his wife, who liked it, but pronounced it too "seduced by cinematic technique". She suggested he rewrite it as a stage play to focus on the essential relationship between the King and Logue. After he had completed it, he sent it to a few friends who worked in theatre in London and New York for feedback.[6]

In 2005, Joan Lane of Wilde Thyme, a production company in London, received the script. Lane started talking with Simon Egan and Gareth Unwin of Bedlam Productions, and they invited Seidler to London to rewrite the play again, this time for the screen. Together, Lane and Bedlam Productions organised a reading of the play in Pleasance Theatre, a small house in north London, to a group of Australian expatriates, among whom was Tom Hooper's mother. She called her son and said, "I've found your next project".[8][9]

Instead of trying to contact his agent Lane asked an Australian staff member to hand-deliver the script to Geoffrey Rush's house, not far away from hers in Melbourne. Unwin reports that he received a four page e-mail from Rush's manager admonishing them for the breach of etiquette, but ending with an invitation to discuss the project further. Iain Canning from See-Saw Films became involved and, in Gareth Unwin's words: "We worked with ex-chair of Bafta Richard Price, and started turning this story about two grumpy men sitting in a room into something bigger."[9] Hooper liked the story, but thought that the original ending needed to be changed to reflect events more closely: "Originally, it had a Hollywood ending ... If you hear the real speech, he's clearly coping with his stammer. But it's not a perfect performance. He's managing it."[8]

The production team learned—some nine weeks prior to the start of filming—of a diary containing Logue's original notes on his treatment of the Duke.[10] They then went back and re-worked the script to reflect what was in the notes. Hooper said some of the film's most memorable lines, such as at the climax, when Logue smiles, "you still stammered on the W" to the King, who replies "I had to throw in a few so they would know it was me" were direct quotations from Logue's notes.[11] Changes from the script to reflect the historical record included Michael Gambon improvising the ramblings of George V as he signed away authority, and the decision to dress the Duke in an overcoat rather than regal finery in the opening scene.[12]

Seidler thought Paul Bettany would be a good choice to play King George VI, Tom Hooper preferred Hugh Grant, though both actors refused the offer. Once they met with Firth and heard him read for the part, Seidler and Hooper were convinced of his suitability for the role.[5]

The UK Film Council awarded the production £1 million in June 2009.[13] Filming began in December 2009, and lasted 39 days. Most was shot in the three weeks before Christmas because Rush would be preforming in a play in January. The schedule was further complicated Bonham-Carter's avaliability: she worked on Harry Potter during the week, so her scenes had to be filmed at at the weekend.[9]

Location and design

A white old fashioned couch sits in a high-ceilinged, period room.
The first meeting between the Duke of York and Lionel Logue was filmed in 33 Portland Place, where the Duke's nervousness was captured by framing him against the edge of the couch.[14] The effect on the wall behind was copied across the entire room by the production designer.[15]

The set design presented a challenge for the film-makers: period dramas rely to an extent on the quality of production, but their budget was a relatively limited £8 million. The film had to be authentic—combining regal opulence with scruffy, depression-era London.[15] On 25 November 2009, the crew took over the Pullens buildings in Southwark. The entire street was transformed into 1930s London. Large advertisements, for (among other things) Bovril and fascism were placed on the walls; streets were sprayed with grit and buildings with grime. A neighbour of Hooper's had told him the smog in London at the time was so thick that cars had to be guided by someone walking in front. To create this scene the crew pumped in so much artificial smoke that the fire alarms in a nearby boutique sounded. According to Hooper, the scene was a good opportunity to show Logue's socio-economic background.[12]

On 26 November, a week's filming with Firth, Rush, and Jacobi began at Ely Cathedral, the location used for Westminster Abbey. The production had asked for permission to film in the Abbey but were denied due to the demands of tourism.[12] Though Lincoln Cathedral is architecturally a closer match to the Abbey, they preferred Ely, a favoured filming location. Its size allowed them to build sets showing not just the coronation, but the preparations before it.[16][17][18]

Lancaster House, an opulent, government-owned period house in London, was used for the interiors of Buckingham Palace that the King walks through prior to making his speech and for the official photograph afterwards; it cost £20,000 a day to rent.[15] The 1936 Accession Council at St. James's Palace, where George VI swore an oath, was filmed in February in the Livery Hall of Drapers' Hall, after principal photography had been completed. The room, ornate and vast, met the occasion: the daunting nature of the new King's responsibilities was shown by surrounding him with rich detail, flags and royal portraiture.[19][20][21]

The crew investigated Logue's former consultation rooms, but they were too small to film in. Instead, they found a high, vaulted room not far away in 33 Portland Place. Eve Stewart, the production designer, liked the mottled, peeling wallpaper there so much that she recreated the effect throughout the entire room.[15] In his DVD commentary, Hooper said he liked Portland Place as a set because it felt "lived-in", unlike other period houses in London. The scenes of the Duke of York at home with his family were also filmed here; showing the Prince living in a townhouse "subverted" expectations of a royal drama.[12]

The opening scene, set at the closing ceremony of the 1925 British Empire Exhibition at Wembley Stadium, was filmed on location at Elland Road, home of Leeds United, and Odsal Stadium, home of the Bradford Bulls. Elland Road was used for the speech elements of the prince stammering his way through his first public address, and Odsal Stadium was selected because of the resemblance of its curved ends to Wembley Stadium in 1925.[22] The crew had access to the stadium only at 10 pm, after a football game. They filled the terraces with inflatable dummies and over 250 extras dressed in period costumes. Live actors were interspersed to give the impression of a crowd. Additional people, as well as more ranks of soldiers on the pitch, were added in post-production with visual effects.[15][23]

Other locations include Cumberland Lodge, Harley Street, Knebworth, Hatfield House, the Old Royal Naval College in Greenwich, Queen Street Mill Textile Museum in Burnley, and Battersea Power Station, which doubled as a BBC wireless control room.[24] The final cut of the film was completed on 31 August 2010.[25]

Dialogue

In developing his portrayal of George VI's stammer, Firth worked with Neil Swain, the voice coach for the film. His sister, Kate Firth, also a professional voice coach to actors, proposed exercises the King might have done with Logue, and made suggestions on how to imagine Logue's mix of physical and psychological coaching for the film.[26] In addition, Firth watched archive footage of the King speaking. In an interview with Allan Tyrer published by the British Stammering Association, Swain said: "[It] was very interesting while we were working on the film just to think tonally how far we could go and should go with the strength of George's stammer. I think a less courageous director than Tom [Hooper] – and indeed a less courageous actor than Colin [Firth] – might have felt the need to slightly sanitise the degree and authenticity of that stammer, and I'm really really pleased that neither of them did."[27] In May 2011 Firth said he was finding traces of the stammer difficult to eliminate: “You can probably hear even from this interview, there are moments when it’s quite infectious,” he said.“You find yourself doing it and if I start thinking about it the worse it gets, if nothing else it’s an insight in to what it feels like.”[28]

Music

The film's original score was composed by Alexandre Desplat. In a film about a man struggling to articulate himself, Desplat was wary of overshadowing the dramaturgy, "This is a film about the sound of the voice. Music has to deal with that. Music has to deal with silence. Music has to deal with time."[29] The score is a sparse arrangement of strings and piano (with the addition of oboe and harp in one cut), intended to convey the sadness of the King's muteness, and then the growing warmth of friendship between him and Logue. The minimalist approach emphasises the protagonist's struggle for control.[30] Desplat used the repetition of a single note to represent the stickiness of the King's speech.[29] As the film progresses, growing banks of warm strings swaddle the deepening friendship between the two leads. The music rises to a climax in the coronation scene. Hooper originally wanted to film the scene without music, but Desplat argued that it was the real climax of the story—the point when the friendship was ratified by their decision to trust each other. "That is really rare", said Desplat, "mostly you have love stories".[29] To create a dated sound, the score was recorded on old microphones extracted from the EMI archives which had been specially made for the royal family.[29] The music played during the broadcast of the 1939 radio speech at the climax of the film is from the 2nd movement (Allegretto) of Beethoven's 7th Symphony; it was added by Tariq Anwar, the editor. When Desplat later joined the team to write the music, he praised and defended Anwar's suggestion. Hooper further remarked that the piece's notoriety helps elevate the status of the speech to a public event.[31] The score was nominated for several awards, including "Best Original Score" at the Oscars, Golden Globes, and BAFTAs, winning the latter award.

Visual style

A man wrapped in a blue jacket and black hat looks down the scope of a large film camera. There is red, white, and blue bunting hanging overhead.
Tom Hooper operating a camera on location at Queen Street Mill Textile Museum, Lancashire

Hooper employed a number of cinematic techniques to evoke the King's feelings of constriction. He and cinematographer Danny Cohen used wider than normal lenses to photograph the film, typically 14mm, 18mm, 21mm, 25mm and 27mm, where the subtle distortion of the picture helps to convey the King's discomfort.[14][32] For instance, the subjective point of view shot during the Empire exhibition speech used a close up of the microphone with a wider lens, similar to the filming technique used for one of the Duke's early consultations with a physician.[12] In The New York Times, Manohla Dargis wrote that the feeling of entrapment inside the King's head was rendered overly literal with what she believed to be a fisheye lens, though in these scenes the wider lenses were used.[14][33] Hooper also discussed using the 18mm lens, one he likes "because it puts human beings in their context".[12]

Roger Ebert noted that the majority of the film was shot indoors, where oblong sets, corridors, and small spaces manifest constriction and tightness, in contrast to the usual emphasis on sweep and majesty in historical dramas.[34] Hooper used wide shots to capture the actors' body language, particularly Geoffrey Rush, who trained at the L'École Internationale de Théâtre Jacques Lecoq in Paris and "is consequently brilliant in the way he carries his body". Hooper widened his scope first to capture Rush's gestures, then full body movements and silhouettes. The approach carried over to Firth as well. In the first consultation scene, the Duke is squeezed against the end of a long couch framed against a large wall, "as if to use the arm of the sofa as a kind of friend, as a security blanket?".[14] Martin Filler praised the "low-wattage" cinematography of Danny Cohen, as making everything look like it has been "steeped in strong tea".[35]

At other times, the camera was positioned very close to the actors to catch the emotion in their faces: "If you put a lens 6 inches from somebody's face, you get more emotion than if you're on a long lens 20 feet away," Cohen said in an interview.[32] Hooper sought a second subtlety while filming the first consultation room scene between the two men, having placed the camera 18 inches from Colin Firth's face: "I wanted the nervousness of the first day to percolate into his performances."[14]

Historical dramas traditionally tend to use "soft light", but Hooper wanted to use a harsher glare, which gives a more contemporary feel, and thus a greater emotional resonance. To achieve the effect, the lighting team erected huge blackout tents over the Georgian buildings, and used large lights filtered through Egyptian cotton.[32]

Historical accuracy

Cathy Schultz pointed out that the film-makers tightened the chronology of the events to just a few years: the Duke of York in fact began to work with Lionel Logue in October 1926, ten years before the abdication crisis, and the improvement in his speech was apparent in months rather than years, as is suggested by the film.[36] In a 1952 newspaper interview with John Gordon, Logue said that "Resonantly and without stuttering, he opened the Australian Parliament in Canberra in 1927"; this was just seven months after the Duke began to work with Logue.[37] Hugo Vickers, an adviser on the film, agreed that the alteration of historical details to preserve the essence of the dramatic story was sometimes necessary. The high ranking officials, for instance, would not have been present when the King made his speech, nor would Churchill have been involved at any level, "but the average viewer knows who Churchill is; he doesn't know who Lord Halifax and Lord Hoare [sc. Sir Samuel Hoare] are."[38]

A black and white photograph of a smiling man seated at a desk. He is holding a pen, with a jotter open in front of him and a photograph on the desk.
Mr. Lionel Logue in London, c. 1930, exact date unknown. The real Logue would never have sworn to the Prince, nor addressed him casually.[39]

Robert Logue, a grandson of Lionel, doubted the film's depiction of the speech therapist, stating "I don't think he ever swore in front of the King and he certainly never called him 'Bertie".[39] Andrew Roberts, an English historian, states that the severity of the King's stammer was exaggerated and the characters of Edward VIII, Wallis Simpson, and George V made more antagonistic than they really were, to increase the dramatic effect.[40]

Christopher Hitchens and Isaac Chotiner challenged the film's portrayal of Winston Churchill's role in the abdication crisis.[41][42] It is well established that Churchill encouraged Edward VIII to resist pressure to abdicate, whereas he is portrayed in the film as strongly supportive of Prince Albert and not opposed to the abdication.[43] Hitchens attributes this treatment to the "cult" surrounding Churchill's legacy. In a smart, well-made film, "would the true story not have been fractionally more interesting for the audience?" he wondered.[44] They also criticised the film for failing to indict the appeasement of the era. While the film never directly mentions the issue, Hitchens and Chotiner argue that it implies that George VI was against appeasement, especially in the final scene portraying "Churchill and the King at Buckingham Palace and a speech of unity and resistance being readied for delivery".[44] Far from distancing himself from Chamberlain's appeasement policy, King George VI despatched a car to meet Neville Chamberlain when he returned from signing the Munich Agreement with Hitler in September 1938. The King and Chamberlain then stood on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, acclaimed by cheering crowds. This led historian Steven Runciman to write that by acting as he did to endorse Chamberlain's foreign policy, King George VI perpetrated "the biggest constitutional blunder that has been made by any sovereign this century."[35] The Guardian corrected the portrayal of Stanley Baldwin as having resigned due to his refusal to order Britain's re-armament, when he in fact stepped down as "a national hero, exhausted by more than a decade at the top".[45]

Martin Filler acknowledged that the film legitimately used artistic license to make valid dramatic points, such as in the probably-imagined scene when George V lectures his son on the importance of broadcasting. Filler cautions that George VI would never have tolerated Logue addressing him casually, nor swearing, and the King almost certainly would have understood a newsreel of Hitler speaking in German. Filler makes the larger point that both the King and his wife were, in reality, lukewarm towards Churchill because of the latter's support for his brother during the abdication crisis. They only warmed to Churchill later in the war, because of his performance as a wartime leader.[35]

Commenting on the film's final scene on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, Andrew Roberts has written, "The scene is fairly absurd from a historical point of view – Neville Chamberlain and Winston Churchill were not present and there were no cheering crowds outside Buckingham Palace."[40] Overall, Roberts praises the film as a sympathetic portrayal of the King's "quiet, unassuming heroism", and he states: "The portrayals by Firth and Bonham Carter are sympathetic and acute, and the movie’s occasional factual bêtises should not detract from that."[40]

Release

A yellow minimalist film poster, with an extreme close-up shot of a man's chin and jaw in front of an 1920s era microphone. The title "Le discours d'un roi" is in French as are the quotations from film critics.
French version of the alternative theatrical poster for The King's Speech

Theatrical release

The film had its world premiere on 6 September 2010 at the Telluride Film Festival in the United States.[25] It was screened at the 2010 Toronto International Film Festival, on Firth's 50th birthday, where it received a standing ovation and won the People's Choice Award.[46] The theatrical release poster was re-designed to show an extreme close-up of Firth's jaw and a microphone after Hooper criticised the first design as a "train smash".[47] Tim Appelo called the original, air-brushed effort, which showed the three leads, "shockingly awful" though the new one "really is worthwhile".[48]

The film was distributed by Transmission in Australia and by Momentum Pictures in the United Kingdom. The Weinstein Company distributed it in North America, Germany, Benelux, Scandinavia, China, Hong Kong, and Latin America.[49] The film was released in France on 2 February 2011, under the title Le discours d'un roi. It was distributed by Wild Bunch Distribution.[50]

Ratings controversy

The film was initially given a 15 certificate by the British Board of Film Classification, due to scenes where Logue encourages the King to shout profanities to relieve stress. At the London Film Festival, Hooper criticised the decision, questioning how the board could certify the film "15" for bad language but allow films such as Salt (2010) and Casino Royale (2006) to have "12A" ratings, despite their graphic torture scenes. Following Hooper's criticism, the board lowered the rating to "12A", allowing children under 12 years of age to see the film if they are accompanied by an adult.[51][52] Hooper levelled the same criticism at the Motion Picture Association of America, which gave the film an "R" rating, preventing anyone under the age of 17 from seeing the film without an adult.[53] In his review, Roger Ebert criticised the "R" rating, calling it "utterly inexplicable", and said, "This is an excellent film for teenagers".[34] In January 2011 Harvey Weinstein, the executive producer and distributor, said he was considering having the film re-edited to remove some profanity, so that it would receive a lower classification and reach a larger audience.[54]

Hooper, however, refused to cut the film, though he considered covering the swear words with bleeps. Helena Bonham Carter also defended the film, saying, "[The film] is not violent. It's full of humanity and wit. [It's] for people not with just a speech impediment, but who have got confidence [doubts]."[55] After receiving his Academy Award, Colin Firth noted that he does not support re-editing the film; while he does not condone the use of profanity, he maintains that its use was not offensive in this context. The scene serves a purpose.[56] An alternate version, with some of the profanities muted out, was classified as "PG-13" in the United States; this version was released to theatres on 1 April 2011, replacing the R-rated one.[57][58]

Reception

Box office

In the UK and Ireland, the film was the highest earning film on its opening weekend. It took in £3,510,000 from 395 cinemas. The Guardian said that it was one of the biggest takes in recent memory, and compared it to Slumdog Millionaire (2008), which, two years earlier, earned £1.5 million less.[59] The King's Speech continued a "stunning three weeks" atop the UK Box office, and earned over £3 million for four consecutive weekends, the first film to do so since Toy Story 3 (2010).[60] After five weeks on UK release, it was hailed as the most successful independent British film ever.[2]

In the United States The King's Speech opened with $355,450 (£220,000) in four theatres. It holds the record for the highest per-theatre gross of 2010.[61] It was widened to 700 screens on Christmas Day and 1,543 screens on 14 January 2011. It eventually made $138 million in North America overall.[3]

In Australia The King's Speech made more than AUD$6,281,686 (£4 million) in the first two weeks, according to figures collected by the Motion Picture Distributors Association of Australia. The executive director of Palace Cinemas, Benjamin Zeccola, said customer feedback on the film was spectacular. "It's our No.1 for all the period, all throughout the country. ... I think this is more successful than Slumdog Millionaire and a more uplifting film. It's a good example of a film that started out in the independent cinemas and then spread to the mainstream cinemas."[62]

Of the film's net profit, estimated to amount to $30–40 million (£20-25 million) from the theatrical release alone, roughly 20% will be split between Geoffrey Rush (as executive producer), Tom Hooper, and Colin Firth, who receive their bonuses before the other stakeholders. The remaining profit is to be split equally between the producers and the equity investors.[63] The UK Film Council invested £1 million of public funds from the United Kingdom lottery into the film. In March 2011 Variety estimated that the return could be between fifteen and twenty times that. The Council's merger into the British Film Institute means that the profits are to be returned to that body.[64]

Critical response

As the actor of the year in the film of the year, I can't think of enough adjectives to praise Firth properly. The King's Speech has left me speechless.[65]

—Rex Reed, New York Observer

The King's Speech has received widespread critical acclaim.[66][67] Review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a score of 95% based on reviews from 205 critics, with an average score of 8.6/10. It summarised the critical consensus as: "Colin Firth gives a masterful performance in The King's Speech, a predictable but stylishly produced and rousing period drama."[68] Metacritic gave the film a weighted score of 88/100, based on 41 critiques, which it ranks as "universal acclaim".[69] Empire gave the film five stars out of five, commenting, "You'll be lost for words."[70] Lisa Kennedy of the Denver Post gave the film full marks for its humane qualities and craftsmanship: "It is an intelligent, winning drama fit for a king – and the rest of us", she said.[71] Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times awarded the film a full four stars, commenting that "what we have here is a superior historical drama and a powerful personal one."[34] Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian gave four stars out of five, stating, "Tom Hooper's richly enjoyable and handsomely produced movie ... is a massively confident crowd-pleaser."[72]

Manohla Dargis, whilst generally ambivalent towards the film, called the lead performances one of its principal attractions. "With their volume turned up, the appealing, impeccably professional Mr. Firth and Mr. Rush rise to the acting occasion by twinkling and growling as their characters warily circle each other before settling into the therapeutic swing of things and unknowingly preparing for the big speech that partly gives the film its title," she wrote.[33] The Daily Telegraph called Guy Pearce's performance as Edward VIII "formidable ... with glamour, charisma and utter self-absorption".[73] Empire said he played the role well as "a flash harry flinty enough to shed a nation for a wife."[70] The New York Times thought he was able to create "a thorny tangle of complications in only a few abbreviated scenes".[33] Hooper praised the actor in the DVD commentary, saying he "nailed" the 1930s royal accent.[12]

The British Stammering Association welcomed the release of The King's Speech, congratulating the film makers on their "realistic depiction of the frustration and the fear of speaking faced by people who stammer on a daily basis". It said that "Colin Firth's portrayal of the King's stammer in particular strikes us as very authentic and accurate."[74] The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists welcomed the film, and launched their "Giving Voice" campaign around the time of its commercial release.[75]

Allociné, a French cinema website, gave the film an average of four out of five stars, based on a survey of 21 reviews.[76] Le Monde, which characterised the film as the "latest manifestation of British narcissism" and summarised it as "We are ugly and boring, but, By Jove!, we are right!", nevertheless admired the performances of Firth, Rush, and Bonham Carter. It said that, though the film swept British appeasement under the carpet, it was still enjoyable.[77]

Queen Elizabeth II, the reigning monarch of the Commonwealth realms and the daughter of King George VI, was sent two copies of the film before Christmas 2010. The Sun newspaper reported she had watched the film in a private screening at Sandringham House. A palace source described her reaction as being "touched by a moving portrayal of her father".[78] Seidler called the reports "the highest honour" the film could receive.[79]

Awards and nominations

Two middle aged men stand side by side wearing suits and open-necked shirts. One is holding the plaque of a Hollywood star of fame
Hooper and Firth in January 2011. Each received multiple award nominations for their work.

At the 83rd Academy Awards, The King's Speech won the Academy Award for Best Picture, Best Director (Hooper), Best Actor (Firth), and Best Original Screenplay (Seidler). The film had received 12 Oscar nominations, more than any other film. Besides the four categories it won, the film received nominations for Best Cinematography (Danny Cohen) and two for the supporting actors (Bonham Carter and Rush), as well as two for its mise-en-scène: Art Direction and Costumes.[80]

At the 64th British Academy Film Awards, it won seven awards, including Best Film, Outstanding British Film, Best Actor for Firth, Best Supporting Actor for Rush, Best Supporting Actress for Bonham Carter, Best Original Screenplay for Seidler, and Best Music for Alexandre Desplat. The film had been nominated for 14 BAFTAs, more than any other film.[81] At the 68th Golden Globe Awards, Firth won for Best Actor. The film won no other Golden Globes, despite earning seven nominations, more than any other film.[82]

At the 17th Screen Actors Guild Awards, Firth won the Best Actor award and the entire cast won Best Ensemble, meaning Firth went home with two acting awards in one evening.[83] Hooper won the Directors Guild of America Awards 2010 for Best Director.[84] The film won the Darryl F. Zanuck Award for Best Theatrical Motion Picture at the Producers Guild of America Awards 2010.[85]

The King's Speech won the People's Choice Award at the 2010 Toronto International Film Festival,[86] Best British Independent Film at the 2010 British Independent Film Awards,[87] and the 2011 Goya Award for Best European Film from the Academia de las Artes y las Ciencias Cinematográficas de España (Spanish Academy of Cinematic Art and Science).[88]

See also

References

  1. ^ Smith, N. (28 February 2011). "Oscars 2011: Film Council basks in King's Speech glory". BBC News. Retrieved 28 February 2011.
  2. ^ a b "Never mind the Baftas ... who will get The King's Speech riches?". The Guardian. Retrieved 28 February 2011.
  3. ^ a b "The King's Speech". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
  4. ^ As of 21 August 2011 all US Dollar-Sterling currency conversions were made using an exchange rate of US$1=GB£0.60
  5. ^ a b Walker, T. (20 January 2011) "Colin Firth was the third choice to play George VI in The King's Speech". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
  6. ^ a b c Seidler, D. (20 December 2010). "How the 'naughty word' cured the King's stutter (and mine)". Daily Mail. Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  7. ^ Spencer, Adam (21 January 2011). "The King's Speech: From Geoffrey Rush's letterbox to the big screen". 702 ABC Sydney. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
  8. ^ a b Gritten, D. (23 December 2010). "Tom Hooper Interview for the King's Speech". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 2 February 2011.
  9. ^ a b c Unwin, G. (3 January 2011). "Crowning Glory: How The King's Speech got made". The Independent. Retrieved 2 February 2011.
  10. ^ "Finding the real King's Speech". BBC. 4 January 2011. Retrieved 8 January 2011.
  11. ^ Addiego, Walter (' February 2011). "Q&A with 'King's Speech' director Tom Hooper". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2 September 2011. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  12. ^ a b c d e f g Thomas Hooper (Director) (9 May 2011). The King's Speech. Momentum Pictures Home Ent. ASIN: B0049MP72G. {{cite AV media}}: |format= requires |url= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |trans_title= (help)
  13. ^ "Awards database The King's Speech". UK Film Council. Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  14. ^ a b c d e Appelo, T. (31 January 2011). "The 5 Secrets of Tom Hooper’s ‘King’s Speech’ Success". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 9 February 2011.
  15. ^ a b c d e Bedell, G. (2 January 2011). "The King's Speech: How clever sets create a compelling picture of 1930s London" The Observer. Retrieved 2 February 2011.
  16. ^ Sparham, Laurie (10 December 2010). "The King's Speech: set report". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 28 May 2011.
  17. ^ Staff (25 November 2009). "Cathedral starring again in blockbuster". Cambridge News. Retrieved 6 December 2009.
  18. ^ Staff (4 December 2009). "The King's Speech: Colin Firth and Bonham Carter in Ely". BBC Cambridgeshire. Retrieved 6 December 2009.
  19. ^ "The King’s Speech film locations". www.movielocations.com. Retrieved 4 August 2011.
  20. ^ Palmer, Martyn (6 February 2011). "The making of a very British smash hit". Daily Mail. Retrieved 25 March 2011.
  21. ^ Huddleston, Tom. "On the set of 'The King's Speech'". Time Out. Retrieved 25 March 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work= (help)
  22. ^ "Firth is lost for words as the monarch whose dilemma gripped the country". Yorkshire Post. (3 January 2011). Retrieved 30 January 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  23. ^ "Dummies line terraces of Elland Road". Yorkshire Evening Post. (7 January 2011). Retrieved 30 January 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  24. ^ "The King's Speech". UK Film Council. Retrieved 6 October 2010.
  25. ^ a b Hoyle, Ben (9 September 2010). "Story of the King who was lost for words is an Oscar favourite". The Times. p. 23.
  26. ^ Dunbar, Polly (23 January 2011). "Revealed: The Little Sister Who Taught Colin Firth to Stammer". The Daily Mail. Retrieved 31 July 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work= (help)
  27. ^ "The King's Voice". British Stammering Association. May 2011. Retrieved 10 May 2011.
  28. ^ Ward, Victoria (5 May 2011). "Colin Firth admits he is struggling to lose his stutter". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 21 July 2011.
  29. ^ a b c d Martens, T. (26 November 2010). "The sound of silence: Alexandre Desplat on the music that 'just floats' throughout 'The King's Speech'". Pop & hiss (LA Times music blog). Retrieved 9 February 2011.
  30. ^ McNab, K. (27 January 2011). "The King's Speech score review". www.soundonsight.org. Retrieved 9 February 2011.
  31. ^ Hooper, Tom (21 January 2011). "The King's Speech director Tom Hooper answers your questions – live!". The Guardian Film blog Retrieved on 6 July 2011 (archived by WebCite on 6 July 2011).
  32. ^ a b c Oppenheimer, Jean (December 2010). "Production Slate: A Future King Finds His Voice". American Cinematographer (American Society of Cinematographers) 91 (12): pp. 18–22. Cite error: The named reference "Oppenheimer" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  33. ^ a b c Dargis, M. (25 November 2010). "The King’s English, Albeit With Twisted Tongue". The New York Times. Retrieved 6 February 2011.
  34. ^ a b c Ebert, Roger (15 December 2010). "The King's Speech :Review". Rogerebert.suntimes.com. Retrieved 30 January 2011. {{cite web}}: More than one of |author= and |last= specified (help)
  35. ^ a b c Filler, M. (25 January 2011). "Hollywood's Royal Stammer". NYR Blog. Retrieved 9 February 2011.
  36. ^ Schultz, Cathy (4 January 2011). "History in the Movies". The Bulletin. Retrieved 4 January 2011.
  37. ^ Meacham, S. (10 November 2011) King's voice coach calmed a nation. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
  38. ^ Henley, J. (9 January 2011). "How historically accurate is the King's Speech?". The Guardian. Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  39. ^ a b "Lionel Logue 'never swore in front of King George VI'". BBC Radio Leicester. 27 January 2011. Retrieved 27 January 2011. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |newspaper= (help)
  40. ^ a b c Roberts, A. (6 January 2011). "How the King found his voice". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 30 January 2011.
  41. ^ Chotiner, I. (6 January 2011). "Royal Mess". The New Republic. Retrieved 9 January 2011.
  42. ^ Zohn, Patricia (11 February 2011). "David Seidler Protects and Defends The King's Speech". Huffington Post. Retrieved 4 August 2011.
  43. ^ For critiques of the film, see e.g., Hitchens FN 47 and Chotiner FN 44. For historical sources substantiating Churchill's stance during the abdication crisis, see e.g., Roy Jenkins's biography of Churchill (2001) and Frances Donaldson's biography of Edward VIII (1976).
  44. ^ a b Hitchens, Christopher (24 January 2011). "Churchill Didn't Say That". Slate. Retrieved 9 February 2011. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  45. ^ "Unthinkable? Historically accurate films". The Guardian. 29 January 2011. Retrieved 23 July 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  46. ^ "Firth movie lands Toronto Film Festival prize". BBC News. Retrieved 6 October 2010. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  47. ^ "New Poster for 'The King's Speech' Keeps it Simple". The Film Stage. Retrieved 2 December 2010.
  48. ^ Appelo, T. (8 December 2010) "'The King's Speech' Poster and Queen Bonham Carter's Oscar Problem". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 19 August 2011.
  49. ^ Staff (2 September 2009). "The Weinstein Company Acquires The King's Speech". Comingsoon.net. Retrieved 6 December 2009.
  50. ^ "Accueil:Le discours d'un roi". www.allocine.fr. Retrieved 3 February 2011 Template:Fr
  51. ^ "Colin Firth welcomes censors' reclassification decision". BBC News. 22 October 2010. Retrieved on 23 October 2010 (archived on 3 January 2011).
  52. ^ "The King's Speech". British Board of Film Classification. Retrieved on 23 October 2010 (archived by WebCite on 3 January 2011).
  53. ^ Goldstein, Patrick (1 November 2010). "To the MPAA ratings board, 'The King's Speech' is just as bad as 'Saw 3D'". The Big Picture (Tribune Company). Retrieved on 7 November 2010 (archived by WebCite on 3 January 2011).
  54. ^ Child, B. (26 January 2011). "King's Speech re-edit could cut swearing". The Guardian. Retrieved 2 February 2011.
  55. ^ Labrecque, J. (31 January 2011). "Tom Hooper on PG-13 'King's Speech': 'I wouldn't support cutting the film in any way' – EXCLUSIVE". Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  56. ^ Kemp, Stuart (1 March 2011). "Firth rejects 'cleaned-up' version of film". The Independent. Retrieved 21 July 2011.
  57. ^ "Scrubbed 'King's Speech' gets PG-13 rating". Los Angeles Times. 26 February 2011. Retrieved 27 February 2011.
  58. ^ Vilkomerson, Sara (24 March 2011). "'The King's Speech' to be re-released as PG-13 version on April 1". Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved 28 May 2011.
  59. ^ Gant, C. (11 January 2011). "The King's Speech rouses Britain to the box office". The Guardian Blog Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  60. ^ Gant, C. (1 February 2011). "Tangled's revamped princess tale dethrones The King's Speech". The Guardian Blog Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  61. ^ "Arthouse Audit: 'King's Speech' Has Royal Debut". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  62. ^ Kwek, Glenda (6 January 2010). "Stutterly marvellous: why we clamour for the stammer story". The Sydney Morning Herald. Fairfax Media. Retrieved 7 January 2011.
  63. ^ Dawtrey, Adam (12 March 2011). "Slicing 'King's' profit pie". Variety. Retrieved 4 August 2011.
  64. ^ Staff. (12 March 2011) "U.K. Film Council had chunk of Speech". Variety. Retrieved 4 August 2011. (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/60gexco0N)
  65. ^ Reed, R. (22 November 2010). "Did I Stutter? The King’s Speech Is the Best Movie of the Year". New York Observer. Retrieved 8 February 2011.
  66. ^ Holland, James R. (4 January 2010). "Movie Review: The King's Speech". California Chronicle. Retrieved 4 January 2010.
  67. ^ Safaya, Rubin (17 December 2010). "The King’s Speech". www.cinemalogue.com. Retrieved 4 January 2010.
  68. ^ "The King's Speech Movie Reviews, Pictures". Rotten Tomatoes. Flixster. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
  69. ^ "Index:The King's Speech". www.metacritic.com. Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  70. ^ a b "The King's Speech Review | Empire". Empireonline.com. Retrieved 30 January 2011.
  71. ^ Kennedy, Lisa (24 December 2010). "Movie review: 'The King's Speech' is, in a word, excellent" The Denver Post. Retrieved 4 January 2010.
  72. ^ Bradshaw, Peter (21 October 2010). The King's Speech – review. The Guardian. Retrieved 30 January 2011.
  73. ^ Gritten, D. (21 October 2010)."The King's Speech, London Film Festival Review". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  74. ^ "British Stammering Association comments on The King's Speech". BSA. Retrieved 17 March 2011.
  75. ^ McVeigh, Tracy (6 February 2011). "The King's Speech: spending cuts threaten £765m legacy of speech and language therapy". The Guardian. Retrieved 8 June 2011.
  76. ^ "Discours d'un roi> Critiques Presse". www.allocine.fr. Retrieved 3 February 2011. Template:Fr
  77. ^ ""Le Discours d'un roi" : comment faire un roi d'un prince bègue". Le Monde. 1 February 2011. Retrieved 3 February 2011. Template:Fr
  78. ^ Larcombe, D. (4 February 2011). "The King's a hit with the Queen". The Sun. Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  79. ^ "Queen 'approves' of King's Speech". BBC News. 5 February 2011. Retrieved 6 February 2011.
  80. ^ "Winners and Nominees for the 83rd Academy Awards". www.oscars.org. 2011-08-04. Retrieved 4 August 2011 (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/60ghsJjST)
  81. ^ Reynolds, Simon (13 February 2011). "Live: BAFTA Film Awards 2011 Winners". Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi UK. Retrieved 13 February 2011.
  82. ^ "Glee and The Social Network dominate Golden Globes". BBC News. 17 January 2011. Retrieved 17 January 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  83. ^ Kilday, G. (3 February 2011). "Can Harvey Weinstein Keep 'The King's Speech' Oscar Mojo?". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 8 February 2011. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  84. ^ Germain, D. (30 January 2011). "Hooper earns top DGA prize for 'King's Speech'". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 8 February 2011.
  85. ^ McNary, D. (24 January 2011). "PGA prizes 'King's Speech'". Variety. Retrieved 9 February 2011.
  86. ^ "Firth movie lands Toronto Film Festival prize". BBC News. 20 September 2010. Retrieved 20 September 2010.
  87. ^ "King's Speech reigns at British Independent Film awards". BBC News. Retrieved 28 February 2011.
  88. ^ "King's Speech wins 'Spanish Oscar'". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 14 February 2011.

Further reading

External links