I'll keep this relatively short (at least for me). At this point, I'd imagine almost all of the readers here at Inconsiderate Prick have seen this film anyway.
*I don't give a damn about the bombing as host. While Firth had a stellar supporting cast, Franco carried the weight of 127 Hours on his shoulders. He was in every scene, had to convey the complexity of hopelessness, resolve, claustrophobia, joie de vivre, desperation, and humor, and managed to make a movie that largely happens in space confined to three feet wide immensely entertaining. More of 127 Hours' success was owing to Franco.
It feels like the reaction to the film, however, is perhaps a bit overblown. Yes, it was a great film. It managed to rise above the standard British Oscar trash that appeals to the older voters in the Academy. Hell, Tom Hooper & Co. managed to turn a story about a privileged man with a stammer into a compelling movie. For this they deserve all the credit in the world.
It's just that of the seven Best Picture nominees I saw this past year, I liked four of them more than The King's Speech. I liked The Fighter more. I liked True Grit more. I loved 127 Hours and The Social Network and would have been completely happy if either film had won Best Picture. Now I really liked those four movies a lot. This is no strike against The King's Speech. It just felt to me that The King's Speech was a little traditional. I feel like I've seen the overcoming adversity movie a thousand times over. Yes, the talent involved in this film was of an atypically high caliber, but the heartstrings were pulled in the same way that every other film of its ilk have been.
2 comments:
I totally agree on all points. King's Speech was fine, but it was up against such amazing movies. Ones that I would have preferred to see win, but whatever...
Honestly, my biggest problem with The King's Speech was one plot hole that made none of it seem important. The headphones thing in the beginning. He could have just worn headphones for any speech until he conquered his lisp. Yes, that would not have worked outside, but the payoff of the movie was a speech to rally the nation- that he delivered in a box. No one would have seen him. Just put on the headphones. Problem solved!
Anyway, rant over. This is your blog for that kind of thing.
But, if you get a chance you should click on our blog and check out the show we do there. That's where I get my chance to go on those rants.
I liked it a lot. As for the above comment, I'd agree with the headphones if this was a work of fiction, but since isn't and given the research and real-life inspiration, I can't fault the film for that.
Post a Comment