'The King's Speech' - A Review by Paul Schlieben

Many will see ‘The King’s Speech’ and ‘Social Network’ through the prism of class and privilege.  (Some see all films as political propaganda.)  In one film, you have a Prince afflicted with a debilitating stammer, who reluctantly becomes King when his older brother abdicates the throne of the King of England.  In the other film, you have a privileged, ambitious, brilliant Harvard student who goes on to create Facebook and become the world’s youngest billionaire.  No question about it, historian Howard Zinn would have abhorred them equally.

I admit to having grown weary of British period dramas — all dressed up with suitably starched upper lips and sphincter-choked accents — so I was not predisposed to like ‘The King’s Speech’ and was reluctant to see it.  But Colin Firth’s reputation combined with widespread praise for the film persuaded me to go.  My prejudice evaporated in the very first scene, as a fearful Prince (Colin Firth), attending some grand event being broadcast live on radio, approached a microphone as though being led to the gallows, and … is unable to speak.  As they say, you could feel his pain.

This week I saw 'The Kings Speech' for a second time.  I can't explain why I find it so entertaining – maybe I'm getting old and sentimental – but at its heart and stripped of its pomp, I believe it can be explained simply like this: it’s a film about two men who during the course of the film become friends.  Neither one, certainly not the Prince, would have described it that way, but inevitably, both might well have agreed years later.  That this friendship was improbable and true (or, at the least, "based on" a true story) and the historical context extraordinary, heightens the dramatic tension and makes us sit up and pay attention.   The Prince of Wales, Bertie, needs a voice coach to help him overcome a terrible stammer.  Ultimately, what will cure his stammer is to unburden himself to a friend, one who helps him identify the source of the stammer and overcome its effects.

Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a self-taught, unaccredited, and unorthodox voice coach and part-time actor, with a family to feed, needs clients.  While not the primary focus of the movie, one can imagine that Logue craves professional validation, as an actor and as a coach, and is equally in need of a friend.  Both have the love and support of their families, which seem to me to be important prerequisite to their forming their friendship.

That they were brought together out of necessity should not distract from the bond that emerges.  Friendships have been built on weaker foundations.  Some might say that Lionel’s desire for the King’s success is evidence of his living vicariously, but perhaps the best friendships are between people who, motivated by mutual affection, live vicariously through each other and celebrate each other’s successes.   In fact, that might serve as a definition of a good marriage. 

Successful drama must be emotionally engaging.  ‘The King’s Speech’ is successful because we feel every moment as if we were Bertie, one moment, and Lionel Logue, the next.   Much of the credit for this film’s success must go to Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush, who deliver performances so convincing I would not be surprised to learn they had become lifelong friends in the course of shooting this film (and disappointed if they had not.)   While I am happy to see Colin Firth as the likely recipient of the Academy Award’s Best Actor, I was more pleased to see Geoffrey Rush nominated for Best Supporting Actor.  He would get my vote. 

Sometimes a simple story of friendship, told well, trumps a more complex tale, no matter how brilliantly conceived.  I admired 'Social Network' and believe Aaron Sorkin to be the most brilliant screenwriters alive today, but 'The Kings Speech' broke through to my heart.  I'd vote with my heart. 

And, to give ‘The King’s Speech’ screenwriter David Seidler his due, his script was also brilliant.  Take, for instance, this dialogue:

Prince of Wales (Bertie): “I’ve had the very best voice coaches.”

Lionel Logue: “They’re idiots.”

Prince: “They’ve all been knighted.”

Logue: “Makes it official then.”

Or, when asked whether he knows any jokes, Bertie stutters this sardonic reply: “… T… T…Timing isn’t one of my strengths.”

Many believe that ‘Winter Bones’, that dark Appalachian tale of America’s desperate, poor meth-addicted underbelly, better represents the reality with which many American’s contend.  I agree.  Others will insist that ‘Social Network,’ with its clever plotting and dialogue is more deserving of an Oscar.  In some respect, they would be right.  But all these movies could be from different planets—isn’t there something absurd about having to pick one over the other?  Each film is original, brilliant and unique.   Throw in ‘True Grit’ as well.  That film was truly gritty, from beginning to end.  To pick one film over the others is a fruitless exercise.  We don’t need a ‘Best Picture’ category.  The nominations are sufficient.  Stop there.  Tune out the Academy Awards and just go see them all.

For print and download version -- Print version