This is the article I am going to be using for The Kings Speech DPS, I have edited this article slightly as colloquialisms were used quite frequently throughout it and I wanted to make it a little more formal. The writer of the article was also American and so I had some grammatical changes to make as Velvet Liaison is an English magazine and I wanted the grammar and spelling to reflect this. I also felt this was quite integral to the DPS as the film is about the quintessentially English film about a great British Monarch.
The King’s Speech details the reluctant rise of Prince Albert to the throne of King of England in 1936. Specifically, the story is told through the lens of his speech defect, Prince Albert had a severe stutter, and had difficulty speaking publicly and privately. Thematically, the film is about overcoming obstacles including sibling rivalry, bullying, public perception, and perhaps most importantly, the obstacle of one’s self and lack of self-esteem. The film is exquisitely made, and will no doubt be rewarded for its many merits, including spectacular performances all around.
Based on the true story of England’s King George VI, the story begins with Prince Albert (Colin Firth) and his wife Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) ascending the stairs at Wembley Stadium in 1925. Prince Albert has to deliver a speech. It is pure pain, as he stammers and pauses for inordinate amounts of time. It’s as painful for everyone listening as it is for Albert and Elizabeth.
Elizabeth seeks help for him, in the form of Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a speech therapist that comes highly recommended. She visits his dilapidated office/studio, and entreats him to help her husband. Logue will only see patients at his shabby studio. He will not travel; they must come to him. Unaccustomed to this kind of hindrance, Elizabeth reluctantly agrees.
The film is serious, moving, and hilarious all at the same time. It is tricky to do a film that is based on actual events, one doesn’t want to take liberties, especially when dealing with someone as revered (and publicly chronicled) as a monarch. The King’s Speech treads lightly through some sticky territory, and ultimately succeeds because the key characters are so likeable. Moments of ugliness (and one can only imagine that in reality there were ugly, ugly moments) were dealt with in an impressionistic manner, and this worked well to keep the momentum of the film skipping along in a hopeful direction.
In this film, everyone faces obstacles. Albert has, of course, his speech impediment. He also has a bully of a brother, an overbearing and insensitive father, and a cold mother. In addition to the stammer, he had stomach ailments and knock-knees, and was constantly teased for these perceived shortcomings. For as privileged a life as he had growing up, he faced the same obstacles that many children do today, all around the world, in all economic brackets.
Logue faces obstacles in the film as well ñ his antipodean heritage, his lack of degree in speech therapy, and his desire (but ultimate inability) to act well. On this level, they seem to find common ground. Logue serves as both speech therapist and emotional therapist to Albert. Logue seems to understand the connection between the emotional and the physical, which there is almost always an emotional/psychological component to stuttering that requires exploration and reconciliation before healing can occur.
The costumes in this film are absolutely perfect. It was such a joy to watch and to look forward to the next scene, to the next costume change. The costumes were in no way distracting, but they were impeccable, and Jenny Beavan and her crew deserve recognition for their excellent work.
There is no shortage of research material with regard to Albert/King George VI and his family. There are mountains of photographs and newsreels. When you have a master like Jenny Beavan executing the look, her attention to detail and adherence to what was ìrealisticî is a foregone conclusion. What is impressive is the way in which the costumes serve the story, and this is no accident.
Albert/George VI is pure aristocratic perfection. His suits are bespoke and they fit him like a glove. He is every bit as upper crust as they come. You see the finest fabrics and tailoring, and he looks every inch the monarch.
His ceremonial uniform is exquisite. The fit is flawless, and all of the trimming and ribbons are amazing.
Geoffrey Rush as Logue is a revelation. He is superb in this role as the eccentric linguist, and his costumes reflect the deep divide between ìcommonerî and ìaristocratî. His tweedy, less-fitted three-piece suits blend seamlessly with his shabby, scarred studio. The production design is superb, as well, and these elements together help to unambiguously define Logue and his loosely sketched world. The contrast between loosely sketched and tightly buttoned is stark and executed to perfection.
The real jewel in all of this, however, is Elizabeth (we now know her as the ìQueen Mumî). Every single one of her costumes is exquisite ñ from dressing gown to evening gown, she looks just as a royal should.
When she first meets Logue, her veil makes a bit of a statement to 2010ís eyes: I shield myself from you. There is a divide between her world and Logueís. Back in the 1930s, a veil was not at all uncommon, but seen through todayís lens, there is a certain distance created by a veil that we donít have.
There were thousands of background players, and they all looked remarkably well dressed whether they were factory workers or assistants to the royal family. The sheer number of BG was staggering, and I wondered how much second-unit shooting they must have done to get all of the coverage. It was really brilliant work, and the costume supervisor (Marco Scotti) and assistant costume designer (Alison Beard) certainly must take some credit for that, as well. I strongly recommend this film to you not only for the beautiful costumes, but also for the lovely story and fantastic performances. It is a satisfying film-going experience, and I hope that this film gets all the attention it deserves for telling a wonderful and compelling story. Definitely not for kids based on a few hilarious foul-mouthed scenes, but adult audiences will walk away with a smile.
No comments:
Post a Comment