The King's Speech: Now With Even Fewer Interesting Parts!


I'm sick and tired of these monkey-fighting snakes on this Monday-Friday plane!!!
Urgutha, you just need to own a very pointy knife. It solves all of life's little problems.

christianist pantywaists are winning

why not cgi all blood to kelly green

and digitally flatten all bulges in the upper thoracic or pelvic areas

and depict reproduction, where necessary to the storyline, as binary fission

and (hey there, 5280) suggest the presence of weapons, again only if essential to the tale, by purple pom-poms
Having finally seen this, I don't think it's the zomg b-b-b-best film ever (sorry) but the pointless scorn heaped on it by some people sort of goes wayyyyyyyyyy past "backlash". Ever since Charles had his bizarre outbursts about how terrible it was to glorify the royalty in any capacity, it's been... odd.

And if it makes kids with stutters and stammers feel better and get hope, then how it could be a bad thing at all? "Billy, it even happened to one of the most famous men of the 20th century!"
@4 - I agree. Not the best movie of last year, I'd have given that to True Grit or Black Swan, but far from a terrible movie. The swearing scenes are entertaining, but the story would function without them.

@Lindy - It actually kinda IS a heartwarming tale about two very different men who ended up becoming lifelong fwiends. You'll notice how the word "friendship" appears in BOTH taglines?

But no, it's not a cool movie. Battle: LA is a cool movie. And a terrible movie. The King's Speech is a pretty solid dorky movie.
@4 Well it was also horribly historically inaccurate. Did you read Hitchens takedown, Joe? It was pretty "effing" great.

But seriously, every member of the MPAA needs to be raped to death, just sayin'
Lulz. If your parents won't let you see The King's Speech in all of its R-rated glory (which has like 10 swear words), you have bigger problems than this movie can solve.

I also suspect that this will become a movie teenagers buy tickets for to sneak into other movies without wanting to arouse suspicion.
People join the MPAA to become terrorists because al-Qaeda thought they were too evil.

Just sayin'
@6 oh sure it's inaccurate, and I read it, yeah. But if I judged every historical film by that yardstick I'd be out of a lot of fun stuff to watch.
@6 - Thank you for that. I hadn't read it, and it's a very interesting article. I think it spends far too much time picking apart a character barely in the film, though. And maybe it didn't spend a LOT of time on Ed8's Nazi ties, but it was brought up, and I don't think anyone could possibly claim that Ed8 came off in a positive light in the film.

I don't know that I would call it "inaccurate" so much as disposed to leaving out events not related to the narrative it's trying to tell. Is lie-by-omission as grievous a sin as directly lying? That's up to the individual to decide. But it's pretty necessary when you've only got 2ish hours to tell a story taking place during one of the most conflict-ridden periods of the last hundred years.
Joe = voice of reason

Both taglines are terrible; there's only a slight difference in degrees of cheese. And future watchers will see this movie at home, not in the theatres, so the fact that it's been bowdlerized isn't such a big deal.

I do think they're jumping on this bullying bandwagon, but what can you say to that? Maybe it actually will help someone. My optimism and cynicism are pretty much equal, so I'm officially neutral on the issue.
I would let my niece and nephews (10 and 7/6 years old respectfully) watch the R rated version over any sanitized crap. A few fuck's here and there isn't going to make them cry like babies. Hell, my dad and I taught them how to say Schei├če.
Well, for what it's worth, I found the scene where he got his tongue caught under the boulder terrifying. I had to close my eyes during the part where he had to cut it off to save his own life. What is the use of living in a palace if a servant can't wander by once in a while to lend a hand?
I'm usually a big fan of English period pieces/Masterpiece theater intellectual soap operas.

Howsumever, I was bored by the King's Speech, and thought The Social Network, the better film.

Remove the swear words from King's Speech? Yeah, that much more booooooooooooooooooooring.
Absurd thing happening on April 1st...? Still plausible, but I retain suspicion.
The movie's not bad, but it sure as shit isn't cool. Removing the swearing certainly won't make it cooler. What the hell is Weinstein smoking?
@13 we're not supposed to give that away ...
My point is that it's just a dumb money-grab. A child can watch a movie with swearing in it.
oh, outer, christopher hitchens hates EVERYBODY who doesn't do what he wants them to do. he hasn't had a happy day in his life, poor fellow.
@19 Bravo.
I enjoyed the movie, but the subsequent book was far more compelling (and obviously, more historically accurate).
@19 Oh, I've seen enough interviews with Hitch to know that's a complete untruthatude, scary. And there's much happiness to be found in Letters to a Young Contrarian for example, it's just more a "fuck ya'll, I'm right and you just can't accept it" holier than thou happiness, and I don't see anything wrong with that.
Glad I took the kids to see it already.
Let them fiddle with it - it'll never replace the Mike Tyson version anyway.
Saying it's jumping on the bullying bandwagon is a bit unfair - the writer, a former stutterer, wanted to do it for years but held off at the request of the Queen Mother, who didn't want to remember what she considered to be very hard years.
I've been out o' the loop, apparently. I don't usually expect huge fanfare for one movie or the other, unless it's just earth shattering, but I thought this was a very good movie. I'm surprised that there is a popular outcry against it -- just thought my friend's contrarian cranky-old-man husband was the only one so hyper-critical. I was very entertained and touched, and I loved the actors, and I loved the simplicity of the plot.

A PG-13 version -- tacky.