The King's Speech

A cultured speech therapy drama about the power of the voice and the imaginary status of a king. A wonderfully blissful play of static semi-details, mannerist textures and refined interiors, against which the chaotic wallpaper of Dr. Logue proudly stands out, who understands that the king is king above all when his subjects believe him. And in the 1930s, they can trust his voice above all. It's all a typical Rocky template about an outsider who climbed to the top, even though no one believed in him. Even with its sensitively stylizing representation of history, it is the equivalent of the excellent drama Frost/Nixon. An acting concert, from Colin Firth's stressed-out creation to Helen Bonham Carter's light-legged ballet. Maybe over-modified, but I like it... more than a handsome, gelled Fincher mop of hair. (20/01/2011)

A typically British, perfectionistic, and old-fashioned film, which, although it has a number of undeniable merits starting with excellent casting, appropriate performances, and conservative but flawless direction, somehow did not enthuse me and captivate me. It deals with aristocratic "better" people bound by strict social rules, etiquette, and responsibility, not for themselves, but for the reputation and status of their family. These people have sympathy for the plebeians down below and feel responsibility for them about as much as a medieval feudal lord felt responsibility for his subjects. By the way, they reduce people to one group and even though they talk a great deal about that group, they are extremely careful not to get themselves dirty with the people below and actually do not even know them. Overall impression: 80%. (18/04/2011)

Very pleasant period piece. A series of speech therapy sessions is not an ideal premise for the silver screen, but they managed to turn it into a remarkable result. Colin Firth excels in the role of an uncertain stuttering king and his performance is undoubtedly Oscar-worthy, he feels very sincere and uncynical, unlike the rest of the film. The titular “king’s speech” at the end really got me. 9/10 (23/01/2011)

A very enjoyable intimate drama about real issues against the backdrop of historical events. The cast is great, of course, but in a way too much so, because each of the main three characters is such a distinct actor that they overshadow their characters. The set design also has no major flaws, which is good, although that’s almost a given nowadays. (06/10/2012)

Serious themes of an interesting era in the chronicle of humanity, the beauty of Victorian England (exteriors/interiors, aesthetics), and a lead cast of two. These are the three main assets in this formally meticulously done film, which lacks pull and a good dose of emotion. The sparkle is not enough. If Tom Hooper wasn't just a good craftsman, but a progressive innovator who could put his own distinctive spin on things (and there was a ton of room for that here), this would be downright great. Academics have lost their minds over something that isn’t nearly that great. (30/10/2015)