The King's Speech Review

If I were asked to conceive and create a movie that was guaranteed to win a bunch of Oscars, the result would probably look a lot like “The King’s Speech.”

It’s got everything you’d need to suck in Oscar voters:

1. A respected cast. (Past Oscar nominees Colin Firth, Helena Bonham Carter and past winner Geoffrey Rush.)

2. A historical setting centered on a true-life figure. (Ooh, period costumes!)

3. A historical setting centered on a true-life BRITISH figure. (Ooh, accents!)

4. A lead character with an affliction. (Yes, a stammer is a far cry from going “full retard”, but it still gives Colin Firth plenty to chew on.)

The only bullet point “The King’s Speech” misses is that it doesn’t feature an actress “uglying herself up” for the movie. In fact, Helena Bonham Carter seems to have gotten confused and has been turning up to real-life red carpet events looking like this. (Ok, that was mean — Helena’s great!)

And yet despite the fact that the movie seems to have been genetically engineered to win Oscars (which can be off-putting), “The King’s Speech” is a triumph because it tells a seemingly simple story in a confident, heartfelt and impressive way.

We first meet Firth as Prince Albert — known as “Bertie” to those closest to him — the man who will become King George VI. We also quickly learn that he suffers from a near-debilitating stammer. At the urging of his wife Queen Elizabeth (Bonham Carter), he goes to see Lionel Logue, an unconventional speech therapist. (Though I’d argue the guy who forced Bertie to shove all the marbles in his mouth was the “unconventional” one.)

The movie is called “The King’s Speech”, so we’re all perfectly aware that, at some point, the king is going to have to make a pivotal, um, speech. (Especially with World War II looming on the horizon.)

However, the movie’s secret is that it’s really a buddy movie (often a really funny one, for that matter) dressed up as a hoity-toity costume drama. My favorite part of David Seidler’s Oscar-nominated screenplay is that it found a way to present the origins of the king’s affliction (daddy issues/sibling rivalry) in a way most people could relate to.

The real joy is watching Firth and Rush work together as their characters inch closer and closer to each other and, hopefully, toward a solution for the king’s problem.

Firth continues his recent, career-best streak as Bertie. The actor cuts a dashing, charming figure in real life (perfect for playing a monarch), but is equally convincing as the insecure, damaged king.

As good as Firth is, I actually think Rush steals the movie. His freewheeling Australian character is clearly meant to be a crowd-pleaser and is obviously more fun to play, but it’s the warmth and compassion (with Bertie, with Lionel’s own family) that puts Rush over the top.

Carter is also strong as the Queen, in the movie’s least flashy main role. The actress is up for Best Supporting Actress, but if the category were called Best Supportive Actress, she’d probably be a lock.

The power trio gets an assist from a rakish Guy Pearce as Bertie’s older brother (despite the fact that Pearce is CLEARLY younger than Firth). Michael Gambon, as their father, doesn’t have a lot of screen time, but uses the little he has to give us a good idea of the kind of stern father he was (and why Bertie developed the stammer).

Other than framing certain shots in slightly off-kilter ways (to convey the discomfort Bertie initially feels during his speech therapy?), director Tom Hooper is smart enough to mostly get out of the way and let his great actors do their thing. I just wish Hooper hadn’t relied quite so much on his score (and on Beethoven) to do his storytelling for him.

In the end, “The King’s Speech” isn’t the most spectacular or showy film that you’ll see this year, and that’s perfectly ok. Instead, the filmmakers have told an extraordinary story in a way that will appeal (and has appealed) to a large number of people.

The King’s Speech…A-