"The King's Speech" (2010) - Film about George VI of the United Kingdom

[dbarn67]

The Queen approves

'The King's Speech' Gets a Thumbs Up From the Queen - MOVIE TALK on Yahoo! Movies

[Jeniann]

Originally Posted by dbarn67

The Queen approves

'The King's Speech' Gets a Thumbs Up From the Queen - MOVIE TALK on Yahoo! Movies

I wouldn't trust that if I were you. The claim she saw and approves of the movie originates from a Daily Mail article that claims it comes from an unidentified "inside source". That's what tabloids say when they know there's no evidence for what they're saying. Check any tabloid. As far as I can tell no one in the Queen's family or on her staff is saying she's seen it. I think she will see it eventually, but I doubt she would have it screened for her now. She would probably prefer to get a copy of the DVD once it's out and watch it privately without people asking her what she thought and with the option of turning it off at any point.

If she has seen it I don't think the kind of people she would talk about it with would sell that information to the press. The Queen Mother did not want to see this movie made during her lifetime which indicates to me the subject matter is something they consider personal. I don't think the Queen would want to talk about the movie (whether she loved it or hated it) with anyone outside her inner circle. And I don't think anyone in her inner circle is giving information to the Daily Mail.

[CrownPrincess5]

Thanks a bunch Zonk & LQ!

[gfg02]

The King's Speech: The making of a very British smash hit

Read more: The King's Speech: The making of a very British smash hit | Mail Online

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by gfg02

The King's Speech: The making of a very British smash hit

Read more: The King's Speech: The making of a very British smash hit | Mail Online

Thanks for posting - this is wonderful!

I'm getting so aggravated by criticisms that this film is historically inaccurate. Winston Churchill is in King's Speech for all of about 5 minutes or so. As to George VI and appeasement, while that term has a nasty, nasty connotation, it also seems to imply unfairly that he was a Nazi sympathizer. History has already been written and has not judged this man overly harshly for it. President Lincoln at one time was all for sending African Americans back to Africa - and he's not killled for that, but rather historians praise him for the growth he showed between the time he espoused that belief and the time of the Emancipation Proclamation.

[Duchessmary]

Thanks for posting!! That was fascinating.

[COUNTESS]

I don't think he was a Nazi sympathizer. In the early years he might have said some foolish things, without knowing the devil. That doesn't make him anything. As for the queen, more's the pity that she doesn't say how she felt about this, because it would aid stutterers for family memebers to acknowledge the difficulty and accept the difficulty and say, what a great thing happened....Not to be "above" all of that. It is personnal information and that's why it has more value, if a family can discuss a problem and it was overcome.

[Lumutqueen]

The King's Speech won 7 BAFTA's tonight.
Best Actor (Colin Firth), Best Supporting Actress (Helena Bonham Carter), Best Supporting Actor (Geoffrey Rush), Best British Film, Best Film, Original Screenplay, Best Score.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/f...f-winners.html

[rominet09]

Wonderful ! Congratulations for all these prizes... now I SO HOPE for an oscar for Colin !

[Royal Fan]

VERY WELL DESERVED i too am hoping for an Acadamy Award

[nascarlucy]

Saw the movie Saturday afternoon with some friends. Wonderful movie. I wonder if Queen Elizabeth saw the movie.

I didn't see George VI as someone who had sympathy towards Hilter. It seems like he was concerned about how this would affect the world. This is at least the impression that I got while viewing the movie.

[Zonk]

I think its important to note that George VI as well as Edward VIII and those who lived thru WWI, didn't want the world to live thru the horrors of war again. WWI in terms of the loss of human life was such a large scale that I believe a lot of people rightly feared Hitler, but thought that appeasing him would avert such a war.

I recently did a tour of the Smithsonian Museum of American History, and they have a section dedicated to each of the wars that Americans fought in. What I didn't realize that as a result of medical advances, the loss of life in WWI while awful, there were a lot of soldiers who survived war and came back dramatically altered (missing limbs, blindness, etc.). The exhibit made it a point to mention that while this was not a new phenomeon, the advances in military warfare (canons, guns, etc.) made the wounded more pronounced in society. Suddenly there more wounded surviving. If that makes sense. Much like many wounded soldiers survive today as a result of medical advances whereas 20 years ago they wouldn't have.

Anyway to bring it back on point: you have the loss of life (I read Unquiet Souls which touches on the fact that a lot of the British aristrocacy lost their sons in WWI) in addition to the maimed soliders (and civilians). So I think a lot of George's generation were very keen to avoid such a situation again. Hence the appeasement of Hitler until war was unavoidable.

Its hard when a movie focuses on one aspect of a persons life, and if you aren't familiar with the remaining parts of it. You make assumptions about the character. When you really need to know the full story.

[Maura724]

Good point, Zonk. Since there is no WWI population surviving today and hasn't been for many years, it's not really something that's part of our consciousness. We're all well-versed in WWII as something that seems to have happened in "recent" history, but not so much with the first war. But WWI was absolutely horrific, and it was like no war Europe had ever seen. It was considered "the war to end all wars" for a reason. And when you look at the history, it was a rather pointless war and a situation that could have been solved diplomatically.

The generation that had to make decisions about what to do with Hitler had just lived through WWI a mere 20 years earlier. It was a very vivid memory, and Europe had not recovered physically, emotionally, psychologically, or financially. Quite naturally, no one wanted to live through anything like it ever again, especially not so soon. I still think appeasement was a terrible policy and this doesn't justify it - obviously, there were people who had lived through WWI who didn't take the appeasement attitude, like Churchill - but it's easier to understand if you remember the historical context.

Once the war started, the recent WWI history made it all the more horrifying. Unlike the start of WWI, when the general sentiment had been that the boys would be home by Christmas, everyone knew what kind of devastation was coming. It must have seemed to people that there would now be a vast world war everyone quarter century.

A story Queen Mum once told demonstrates the experience of the double wars for her generation: She was sitting somewhere next to the young Princess Margaret - I think it was a church service - and started to tear up over the war dead. Margaret turned to her with a look that seemed to wonder what was wrong, and the Queen suddenly recalled having the same moment with her own mother as a child. She wondered at the time if Margaret would have the same experience with her daughter in another 20 years.

[nascarlucy]

Unless you have lived through a certain period, it's difficult to understand. My grandmother lived through both World Wars and families members were in each of these wars. My mother was 11 years old when the United States entered World War II and was 15 when it ended. Whenever I would hear my grandmother talked about both wars, especially World War I, it was like in a different era or time period.

World War I and World II were not fought on American soil. A lot of Americans lost famly members in those wars (those serving in the military) but the civilian population was pretty much spared what Europeans suffered. They suffered badly. The last major war found on American soil was the civil war. We read about this in history books. No one is alive today who took part in this war. When World War I started, the civil war had only ended about 55 years earlier.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by nascarlucy

Saw the movie Saturday afternoon with some friends. Wonderful movie. I wonder if Queen Elizabeth saw the movie.

I didn't see George VI as someone who had sympathy towards Hilter. It seems like he was concerned about how this would affect the world. This is at least the impression that I got while viewing the movie.

The problem is people like Christopher Hitchens getting all up in arms about George VI supporting appeasement. People need to understand that being an appeaser didn't mean you supported Hitler; from what I gather, if you were of a certain generation that remembered WW I, you wanted to do all you could to avoid another war. Why some folks are getting up in arms about a movie is beyond me. What is the big deal that they portrayed Churchill as supporting George VI? He was in the movie for all of 5 minutes. The nitpicking is beyond maddening; if they want truth in movies, then let these critics rip Madonna's upcoming movie.

[Maura724]

Totally agreed. To expect a movie to be 100% accurate is impossible - if you want that, go watch a documentary. The Churchill issue is silly. He's not significant in this movie in the slightest.

As for the appeasement thing, I didn't necessarily get the impression in the movie that Bertie was gung ho to go to war. He seemed more nervous about the situation (in the wine cellar conversation with David) than anything.

[COUNTESS]

Bertie was not a fan of Hitler. Put that tp rest. How to rest,the situation was a dfferent thing. Lots of decisions were made poorly at that time. Bertie was not great intellect and cannot be blamed for his conceptions. It is a movie, what Churchill felt or didn't feel was not the issue of this movie. Churchill hated Hitler, but wasn't in power. Christopher Hitchens sees everything in his own light. My Mom was alive during WWI and is still here and, of course, was very young and just tonight said, no one kowns what it felt like. No one knows what anything was like, unless they lived it.

[gfg02]

The real story behind 'The King's Speech'

The real story behind 'The King's Speech' - CSMonitor.com

[Mermaid1962]

Exactly. Britain would have done almost anything to avoid a war. WWI caused social upheaval as well as death. It gave way to an entirely new, chaotic way of thinking. A nation wouldn't go to war unless they absolutely had to in 1939.

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

People need to understand that being an appeaser didn't mean you supported Hitler; from what I gather, if you were of a certain generation that remembered WW I, you wanted to do all you could to avoid another war.

[Lumutqueen]

Nazi links revealed that could derail The King's Speech's success | Mail Online

Sorry but if he won the BRITISH academy film and telvision award for Best Actor. Why should he not get an Oscar, no one in that category is as good as him.