IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,9/10
17.463
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Prinz Seretse Khama von Botswana verursacht internationalen Aufruhr, als er Ende der 1940er-Jahre eine weiße Frau aus London heiratet.Prinz Seretse Khama von Botswana verursacht internationalen Aufruhr, als er Ende der 1940er-Jahre eine weiße Frau aus London heiratet.Prinz Seretse Khama von Botswana verursacht internationalen Aufruhr, als er Ende der 1940er-Jahre eine weiße Frau aus London heiratet.
- Auszeichnungen
- 6 Gewinne & 5 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
10pyor66
I lived in Botswana for twenty-five odd years and enjoyed every single moment of it, almost certainly due in large measure to Seretse's enlightened politics and the genuine and natural warmth of the Botswana people. I knew both main characters quite well. Seretse was a very approachable man, even as president, and it was a pleasure to spend some time in his company. He was a man well loved by everyone, black and white. In fact, in Botswana one scarcely thought in those terms. As a politician he had huge charisma and was a great orator. He was also a born leader. I remember well being told by insiders that government Ministers who were in trouble for minor abuse of office or the like, would tremble in fear outside his office when they were to be 'carpeted'.
Ruth was an extraordinarily capable woman and even in her later years had more stamina than almost anyone I have known. She was at work in her office in Gaborone from early morning to the end of the day, patron of the Red Cross, Botswana Council of Women etc etc. Contrary, however, to one reviewer's criticism, Rosalind Pike's portrayal was quite accurate. She was not a strident campaigner but a very effective mover who enjoyed a social life and had many friends. In her widowhood she received constant visits from senior members of the tribe and government and was widely loved and respected by her people. She was most certainly "Mohumagadi" - Mother of the Nation.
This film portrays their personalities pretty accurately and the characterisation of the actors is extraordinarily true to life. Both David Oyelowo and Rosamund Pike were absolutely convincing. The quality of the acting very quickly overcame my initial niggling concern that the physical likenesses were not quite there. The photography of Botswana was outstanding and the familiar views of Serowe from the Palapye 'road' and the scenes in the kgotla were quite emotional for me; I unexpectedly found I had a lump in my throat.
I can understand that, for others, the film may not have the immediacy it has for me, perhaps, but previous criticisms of 'cold' and 'unemotional' - No! Leaving aside my personal interest, it deserved to be the opener for the London Film Festival. Maybe not a total "blockbuster" but an unusual and great film nonetheless. Very close to fact.
Ruth was an extraordinarily capable woman and even in her later years had more stamina than almost anyone I have known. She was at work in her office in Gaborone from early morning to the end of the day, patron of the Red Cross, Botswana Council of Women etc etc. Contrary, however, to one reviewer's criticism, Rosalind Pike's portrayal was quite accurate. She was not a strident campaigner but a very effective mover who enjoyed a social life and had many friends. In her widowhood she received constant visits from senior members of the tribe and government and was widely loved and respected by her people. She was most certainly "Mohumagadi" - Mother of the Nation.
This film portrays their personalities pretty accurately and the characterisation of the actors is extraordinarily true to life. Both David Oyelowo and Rosamund Pike were absolutely convincing. The quality of the acting very quickly overcame my initial niggling concern that the physical likenesses were not quite there. The photography of Botswana was outstanding and the familiar views of Serowe from the Palapye 'road' and the scenes in the kgotla were quite emotional for me; I unexpectedly found I had a lump in my throat.
I can understand that, for others, the film may not have the immediacy it has for me, perhaps, but previous criticisms of 'cold' and 'unemotional' - No! Leaving aside my personal interest, it deserved to be the opener for the London Film Festival. Maybe not a total "blockbuster" but an unusual and great film nonetheless. Very close to fact.
I love it when a story is told that many of us haven't heard of or known much about.
Although possibly oversimplified due to the necessity of keeping the movie within a normal viewing time, nonetheless, it's a very good story about an amazing piece of history.
Well acted, well directed and beautifully filmed, this is a film I'm very happy to have seen. It's an inspirational look at enduring love and intelligence, at people power and a nation's faith in their leader, as well as credibly showing yet again how the British Empire and their bevy of crooked prime ministers deem to destroy nations for greed and profit, and to boot, having the gall to treat anyone but themselves as underdogs.
An excellent film for what it is and I would recommend it.
Although possibly oversimplified due to the necessity of keeping the movie within a normal viewing time, nonetheless, it's a very good story about an amazing piece of history.
Well acted, well directed and beautifully filmed, this is a film I'm very happy to have seen. It's an inspirational look at enduring love and intelligence, at people power and a nation's faith in their leader, as well as credibly showing yet again how the British Empire and their bevy of crooked prime ministers deem to destroy nations for greed and profit, and to boot, having the gall to treat anyone but themselves as underdogs.
An excellent film for what it is and I would recommend it.
This is an outstanding film about a story I knew nothing about. However, my review is more a review of IMDb and its voting system.
I note that this film has, at the time of writing twenty-two 1 star reviews. Maybe these are genuine but I suspect they are not. For one thing the film has not had many screenings so have as many as twenty-two different people really hated it that much?
Secondly, 1 star films do not get selected for the Toronto Film Festival or for the opening night film for the London Film Festival. The programmers and selectors of these highly regarded festivals are at the top of their game and each year they are offered several thousand films. None of them are going to risk their hard fought reputations on selecting a bad 1-star film.
My feeling is that these 22 people are members of the KKK who hate black people or else they are people who are jealous of the those involved in the production.
Either way IMDb needs to have an algorithm that can deduce whether these people are genuine, or not. Maybe they are and the press reviews so far, which rave about the film, are wrong, but maybe these people are racist bitter bigots who hate the success of others because they themselves are failures and they have nothing better to do in their small sad lives but set up false IMDb accounts and vent their spleen in the only way they can.
Time as they say will tell.
I note that this film has, at the time of writing twenty-two 1 star reviews. Maybe these are genuine but I suspect they are not. For one thing the film has not had many screenings so have as many as twenty-two different people really hated it that much?
Secondly, 1 star films do not get selected for the Toronto Film Festival or for the opening night film for the London Film Festival. The programmers and selectors of these highly regarded festivals are at the top of their game and each year they are offered several thousand films. None of them are going to risk their hard fought reputations on selecting a bad 1-star film.
My feeling is that these 22 people are members of the KKK who hate black people or else they are people who are jealous of the those involved in the production.
Either way IMDb needs to have an algorithm that can deduce whether these people are genuine, or not. Maybe they are and the press reviews so far, which rave about the film, are wrong, but maybe these people are racist bitter bigots who hate the success of others because they themselves are failures and they have nothing better to do in their small sad lives but set up false IMDb accounts and vent their spleen in the only way they can.
Time as they say will tell.
A United Kingdom is a true and gripping tale which handles it true historical source material with aplomb. With fantastic performances from Oyelowo and especially Pike, the central characters plight is beautifully illustrated. It's not perfect; some of the writing is a little clunky, but the character chemistry is there, and you leave the movie theatre feeling like a part of the story.
Quite how this movie receives the rating it does is completely beyond me. I can only imagine that half the voters didn't in fact see the movie.
Quite how this movie receives the rating it does is completely beyond me. I can only imagine that half the voters didn't in fact see the movie.
"A United Kingdom" is based on the true-life relationship between Sir Seretse Khama, an African chieftain from what was then the Bechuanaland Protectorate, and a white British woman, Ruth Williams. The film implies that he was the King of Bechuanaland, but in fact no single individual ever held this position; Khama was the ruler of the Bangwatho, one of a number of tribes making up the Tswana nation, the largest ethnic group in the country. In Botswana, as Bechuanaland is now known, Khama and Ruth are today revered figures, as he was the leader of the country's independence movement and its first President when independence was achieved in 1966; unlike most other former colonies in Africa Botswana has remained a democracy ever since, and their son is the current President.
Khama's marriage to Ruth Williams (they met while he was studying in London in 1948) was highly controversial at the time. Many of Khama's own people, led by his uncle, refused to accept Ruth as their Queen. The South African government, which was just starting to introduce its policy of apartheid, objected furiously to the idea of a high-profile black leader in a neighbouring country marrying a white woman. Clement Attlee's Labour government, anxious to placate the South Africans who were threatening to leave the Commonwealth, intervened, exiling Khama from Bechuanaland and forbidding him to return. Winston Churchill, at the time leader of the Opposition, initially made sympathetic noises, but after the Conservatives were returned to power in 1951 he took an even harder line than Attlee. The situation was complicated by the discovery of diamonds in the territory; the British government, using the rift between Khama and his uncle as a pretext, threatened to revoke Bechuanaland's status as a Protectorate and declare it a Crown Colony. (The real reason was that in a Protectorate mineral rights belonged to the local people, whereas in a colony they belonged to the colonial power). One of Khama's few British allies was the Labour MP Tony Benn.
The action switches between an austere, drab post-war Britain and a bright sunlit Africa. The recreation of historical detail is well done and both the leading actors, David Oyelowo as Khama and Rosamund Pike as Ruth, are excellent. The film is an interesting look at a historical romance which made the headlines at the time but which today is largely forgotten, at least in Britain. 7/10
Some goofs. We hear a radio broadcast on the eve of Indian independence in 1947 telling us that Indians would go to bed "subjects of the Queen". Britain still had a King, George VI, in 1947. We are told that Queen Victoria made Bechuanaland a Protectorate to protect its people from "racist South Africa", but the Protectorate was created in 1885, twenty-five years before South Africa came into existence as a single nation. (In 1885 it was still a patchwork of British colonies and Boer republics). Prime Minister Attlee claims that the Presidents of South Africa, South-West Africa and the two Rhodesias were all opposed to Khama's marriage to Ruth. During Attlee's term of office (1945-51) none of these territories had a President.
Khama's marriage to Ruth Williams (they met while he was studying in London in 1948) was highly controversial at the time. Many of Khama's own people, led by his uncle, refused to accept Ruth as their Queen. The South African government, which was just starting to introduce its policy of apartheid, objected furiously to the idea of a high-profile black leader in a neighbouring country marrying a white woman. Clement Attlee's Labour government, anxious to placate the South Africans who were threatening to leave the Commonwealth, intervened, exiling Khama from Bechuanaland and forbidding him to return. Winston Churchill, at the time leader of the Opposition, initially made sympathetic noises, but after the Conservatives were returned to power in 1951 he took an even harder line than Attlee. The situation was complicated by the discovery of diamonds in the territory; the British government, using the rift between Khama and his uncle as a pretext, threatened to revoke Bechuanaland's status as a Protectorate and declare it a Crown Colony. (The real reason was that in a Protectorate mineral rights belonged to the local people, whereas in a colony they belonged to the colonial power). One of Khama's few British allies was the Labour MP Tony Benn.
The action switches between an austere, drab post-war Britain and a bright sunlit Africa. The recreation of historical detail is well done and both the leading actors, David Oyelowo as Khama and Rosamund Pike as Ruth, are excellent. The film is an interesting look at a historical romance which made the headlines at the time but which today is largely forgotten, at least in Britain. 7/10
Some goofs. We hear a radio broadcast on the eve of Indian independence in 1947 telling us that Indians would go to bed "subjects of the Queen". Britain still had a King, George VI, in 1947. We are told that Queen Victoria made Bechuanaland a Protectorate to protect its people from "racist South Africa", but the Protectorate was created in 1885, twenty-five years before South Africa came into existence as a single nation. (In 1885 it was still a patchwork of British colonies and Boer republics). Prime Minister Attlee claims that the Presidents of South Africa, South-West Africa and the two Rhodesias were all opposed to Khama's marriage to Ruth. During Attlee's term of office (1945-51) none of these territories had a President.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe house used as Ruth & Seretse's home in the film was the home of the real Ruth & Seretse.
- PatzerAt about 1'17, the civil servant refers to the new Prime Minister as Sir Winston Churchill. He was not knighted until 1953.
- Zitate
Seretse Khama: No man is free who is not master of himself.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Film '72: Folge #45.8 (2016)
- SoundtracksNo Baby, No Nobody But You
Lyrics and Music by Seger Ellis
Performed by Stan Kenton and June Christy
Published by EMI United Partnership Ltd/EMI Music Publishing Ltd
Licensed Courtesy of Capitol Records Inc.
Under Licence from Universal Music Operations Ltd
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is A United Kingdom?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsländer
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- A United Kingdom
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 14.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 3.902.185 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 66.510 $
- 12. Feb. 2017
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 14.459.330 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 51 Min.(111 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen