It’s a feast from every aspect of cinema aesthetic. Especially noted the acting, directing and screenplay, they are no higher than a royal treat.

     To begin with, stammer is the core of the story, but shooting someone performing stammer interestingly is rather difficult. Director Tom Hooper’s choice is to let the mics always appear to be enormous and threatening, which implies a mountainous obstacle our hero needs to conquer. Somebody can speak through fluently, somebody cannot. “Leave it to the microphone,” they say, yet little do they know the obstacle looks as hopeless as the hand-pressing stone in 127 Hours. In the eyes of Duke of York, later becoming King George VI, it is a matter of life and death.

     In screenplay, Duke of York’s reason for speech hesitation gradually unfolds: he has a rather strict and uncaring family that always marks on his difficulty. Also because of his royal identity, he has to maintain his public image (“We've become actors!”) and be well-educated, which definitely not include his stammer. Therefore, this stern royal training directly results in his fear of his father, fear of his family, and further fear of country affairs as well as expectation from others.

     Chemistries between actors are another fun to enjoy. Colin Firth elaborates this character flawlessly. Helena Bonham Carter exudes a convincing scent of royalty with her tender but strong authoritativeness. No one would doubt she is the Queen upon the first eye.

     Geoffrey Rush, Michael Gambon, Guy Pearce, Timothy Spall and the rest of the performers does not waste any talent on the frame. Together they make it exquisitely enjoyable to watch.

     Despite many great works in Oscar 2011, The King’s Speech still holds its dominant place and royal attitude toward other competitors. It is an important movie about a man throws away the small and become someone great as a King. It is also a film truly deserves its throne, for defining what a pure art is.

arrow
arrow
    全站熱搜

    白蚓 發表在 痞客邦 留言(1) 人氣()