Review of The King's Speech (2010) by Edgar C — 21 Jul 2013

Please spell me out the "clichéd" and "formulaic" elements in The King's Speech, because even if it is a doubtful Academy Awards conqueror, Tom Hooper built a proper historical account about the struggle of a man to become a symbol of national resistance in imminent war times that were about to shape the world. It has been accused of being "predictable" as well. Maybe that's because the story was based on true events? The art of cinema retelling true stories resides in the ability to properly, yet respectfully carry on the task of dramatization, one of the main successes of The King's Speech.

I applaud the performances and the execution. Dialogue handling was impeccable, and the cinematography was worthy of a disciple of Carol Reed, capturing the size of the scenarios, the tension of the situations and the psychological difficulties faced by King George VI. I wonder, therefore, what would the opinion of the audiences be if this had been a film directed by Carol Reed in the 40s. Perhaps they would have been quicker to applaud. Do not let the debated Academy Awards be distractions to you.

78/100.