Yes, there's quite the story there, eh?
Just think who would be doing the bow today.
Posted on 01/17/2011 6:51:20 AM PST by Dr. Scarpetta
You will love “The King’s Speech,” a new movie about Great Britain in the '30s, a time of hesitation and then greatness, when the country reluctantly faced up to the challenge of Hitler and Nazism, two years before the United States similarly faced up.
As with many great films, “Speech” is a personal movie inside a historical movie.
The “personal” movie is the story of a character struggling to overcome a disability.
In “Speech,” the drama is the true story of the future King George VI, who had suffered from a severe stammer all his life.
The story begins in 1925, when Prince Albert (he didn’t take on the name “George” until he assumed the throne in 1936), attempts to give a brief speech at Wembley Stadium outside of London.
It’s a painful scene to watch, as the prince struggles to get his words out, as tens of thousands look on--and then look away from the pitiful spectacle.
After that embarrassment, he resolves never again to make a fool of himself in public.
Yet by the mid-30s, George V is dying, and it becomes obvious that the older brother is unqualified to be king.
Indeed, the stakes are now high: George V observes that Adolf Hitler seeks to control one half of Europe, and Josef Stalin seeks to control the other half. So what will England do?
The new medium of radio made it possible for a single leader to communicate across the planet. Hitler was doing it, with his message of hateful propaganda, and so his opponents had to master the radio waves.
Realizing that history would summon him to duty, like it or not, our prince--played with Oscar-grabbing understatement and poignancy by Colin Firth--resolves to improve his speech, seeking out the best speech therapists in London.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days - Trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAljVEG4tk
The White Rose - Tribute to the real characters from the movie. After seeing the movie, this tribute will have you balling like a baby.
Possibly it’s generational. And about money.
I admit I haven't seen it either. I believe I read some comments from FReepers months ago that "Social Network" is a pretty liberal movie. If so, then there's my answer as to why the American Foreign Press liked it so much...
I don't know if it's because of money, but I think you're right about Social Network appealing to younger generations. Every "young and hip" person we know went out to see The Social Network right away after it was released.
I’ll see Social Network, only if it comes to my local $3 theater. I paid full price to see The King’s Choice, and I thought it was well worth it. It was a great evening out...
Late 60s/Early 70s when the name was “officially” changed to the “United Kingdom”.
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom
and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain
Not to pick nits, but I believe you’ll find that the United Kingdom has existed since 1800, with its name changed in the late 20’s to reflect formation of the Irish Republic.
Thanks for the ping.
Colin Firth won best actor at the Golden Globes last night for his role as King George VI.
This is usually a good portent for the Oscars ( a deserving one too ).
Yeah that's about where I am concerning Social Network - it might be worth 3 bucks.
The King's Speech was WELL worth the full price, although we just happened to see it during a matinee on a Wednesday at about 4:30pm ($8.00). The theater was pretty full, mostly with "older folks"... everyone loved the film. Even the fairly young guy collecting the tickets out front was raving about King's Speech - said "everyone comes out of the movie raving about how good it was".
You’re welcome!
The theater where I saw it was packed, and everyone applauded at the end.
Yes, there's quite the story there, eh?
Just think who would be doing the bow today.
“Not to pick nits”. Then don’t.
Ping
People have a prejudice about speaking skill. They associate the ability to communicate clearly with intelligence. Of course it is plainly evident, when we stop to think about it, that the two things really have no relationship to one another. I suspect people thought that any criticism of Bush's speaking ability was an insult to his intelligence.
Will do, NavyCanDo!
“Can someone tell me why The King’s Speech lost so many Golden Globes last night (including Best Picture) to The Social Network? (I assume it has something to do with the uber-liberal Foreign Press) “
You assume right. Aaron Sorkin (the writer of ‘The Social Network’) is a darling of Hollywood, here and abroad. His rabid lib ‘hate Bush/Sarah Palin’ credentials are on the record and solid.
‘The Social Network’ is about smart young privileged people betraying each other and fighting over money. There are no heroes. You come away hating everyone. No love, no friendships, nothing said sincerely. It’s overwritten and glib and cynical, just like Sorkin’s old show ‘The West Wing.’ In short, easy to snicker at and digest — like the Twizzlers you just bought at the concession counter.
“The King’s Speech” makes grown men tear up and want to have a friend like Lionel Logue and marry a woman like Elizabeth. It never had a chance with the Hollywood Foreign Press Association.
P.S. I loathe Twizzlers.
That was the Act of Union establishing the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain was established by the 1707 Act of Union.
Let me recommend “The Red Violin” and “Atonement” as other movies recent worth seeing.
Well, there you go.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.