zeev-lieber

Some things are a bit artificial and take away from the experience in a bid to make it more "fine art" sort of film - overly long shots of sunflower fields, close-ups on actors' eyes, etc.

The story and characters are a bit typical like the weak commander, mistakes and poor judgement in battle or death of a character in a specially tragic or sensitive moment. There is essentially no story or character development. The little there is, was already done in "Beaufort" two years prior.

One should abstract oneself from any political context when viewing this film and judge it for what it is. However, the sensitivity of the topic has obviously contributed to the film's acclaim.

Great work by virtually all of the actors should be noted though. This could have been a much better film if the actors were given more space (in terms of plot and characters) to really shine.

A fantastic historical drama about King George VI and his Australian speech therapist Lionel Logue.

The movie captures your attention right from the start and keeps it there. It is beautifully shot and played; While the events it covers are by no means funny, the film shows the lighter side at times without taking away from the seriousness of the plot.

The film does a great job exploring the complex relations that form between all parties, within the King's family and outside.

You walk away moved and with a lot to think about, and after all this is what you should be after with this kind of movie.

I had high expectations given the Palme d'Or, but was disappointed on multiple levels.

First of all, the film watches like a political statement, and not a wisest or deepest one at that. Best illustrated by the court scene, which was supposed to have viewer sympathy on the poor woman's side but in practice was just a bit primitive altogether.

Everything is absolute in the film: all British are bad (except for single "good" ones), all rich are just ripping off the poor, all anti-Treaty forces are principled people, while pro-Treaty are motivated by opportunism. I'm neither Irish nor British and English is my second language, so I couldn't care less about either side, but I just know (from experience in other conflict zones) that life is usually more complex than that.

On top of that, the dialogue is at times very unrealistic; whenever there is a bit of tension everybody just yells their heads off, especially the British. Sometimes the lines are downright primitive, trying to over-emphasize the political points in case someone missed them.

The plot itself can be summed up in four lines, and would take much less then 2-hour movie to convey.

Overall, seems like an attempt to capitalize on (exploit?) a topic that I guess is controversial for some audiences. To an outside observer this looked like a lot of anxiety and emotion (on the part of film's creators) with very little substance.