The King's award winning Speech

The 2011 Oscar nominations have been announced, and it would be fair to say that The King's Speech has dominated most categories. Is it a deserved nominee?

The simple answer would be yes. I held off from seeing the film immediately, namely because I was slightly dubious as to the cinematic possibilities of such a simple subject. My misgivings were allayed by the amount of positive praise that the film began to receive upon its release, so I went to see the film.

Cinematically, the film relies on the strength of its story and acting as opposed to blockbusting effects. The audience develops a level relationship with the central character Bertie, the Prince and reluctant King, via his insecurities as a man and leader which manifests itself as a speech impediment. The story is simple, perhaps even sounding rather bland. Prince Albert, suffering from a chronic stammer exacerbated by his duties to large crowds, makes one last ditch attempt to control his speech by seeing a somewhat unconventional therapist. In the course of his treatment, his father King George V dies, and his eldest brother abdicates in favour of a tempestuous relationship with an American divorcee Wallace Simpson. Thus, Bertie takes to the throne and must broadcast a live wireless announcement to the nation (and world) that the war with Germany and the Nazis has begun. Of course, his mastery of his speech impediment is a forgone conclusion. But it is the fact that the film is based on a real, albeit historical, story which is the main draw. In a modern era which is increasingly becoming disconnected from our social past as a nation, instead focusing upon economic and political turmoil, I would suggest that the audience of this film are looking to a more idealised and simplistic age. The film's backdrop of the beginning of World War Two also harks back to the age when Britain was indeed a major influence within worldwide affairs, a stance that has decreased considerably today. It is perhaps no coincidence that the audience demographic when I went to see the film were people in their later years.

The film had just the right amount of political and social context alongside the individual relationships and emotional complexities. Colin Firth's depiction of the troubled monarch was excellently pitched, demonstrating Bertie's internal struggles between his family life and impending duty as a king. In particular, Firth's interactions with Helena Bonham Carter as his wife Elizabeth, and with Geoffrey Rush as his therapist Lionel Logue, are the stand-out moments of the film. I can't really praise the acting enough, or the minute period details which are lovingly adhered to. The grandeur of Bertie's lifestyle is a stark comparison to Logue's office on Harley Street which is ironically where we meet the true insecure prince. In fact, Bertie's final achievement occurs within a small, uninspiring room inside the palace, confirming that the film is supremely relationship and interaction based.

Despite the sarcastic remark of the person I saw the film with ('well that didn't have many explosions in'), I think the film deserves all the praise and awards it can garner. It is an uplifting, accomplished tale which chooses to focus upon the human condition: our emotions, anxieties and achievements. It enforces the age-old adage that with a little bit of work and help, you too can achieve anything no matter the struggles you face. Like its topic, it harks back to a simpler cinematic age and is just as fulfilling as a 3D blockbuster epic, even more so. A true period masterpiece.