Avis des utilisateurs

When the entire British royal family is wiped out in an "awful" accident, the American bar entertainer Ralph Jones (excellent: John Goodman, he makes up for most of the boring parts of the plot) becomes the new King of England. After a few adjustment problems with his new job (clothing, manners etc.) he falls in love with a young woman he meets at a local strip club. Problems emerge when his secretary tries to marry him to the Finnish princess to seal a business deal for a few English companies. All in all, a good movie with some great lines but also some boring parts.

So I don't consider this a classic, as some other reviewers have labeled it. You really have to stretch the imagination to accept the premise that the first 30 people or so in line for the crown are suddenly killed and England, one of the largest and most powerful economies of the world, has to ask some D list lounge singer to be their new king. But I get it; this is a just-for-laughs fish out of water story, not a serious what-if film.

John Goodman, whose career was built on playing the middle-aged working class every man, does a decent job here portraying a beer drinking, football loving regular Joe who just can't stop creating uncomfortable moments around stuffy British people.

The gags are a bit of a mixed bag. When they develop in a way that's organic to the character and moment, they work pretty well. But for every good setup there is the overly forced one, such as when Goodman's character accidentally launches a greasy bird off his plate at a state dinner while trying to cut into it. The ensuing chaos sees every glass along a long, long table fall over like dominoes for nearly 30 seconds. The scene feels so desperate to hit the laugh; you can practically see the little charges going off to keep the glasses falling in comedic fashion past the horrified diners. The problem is, comedy is really hard. Even a whiff of desperation for laughs like that scene has turns funny into sad really quick.

The other part of this movie that's hard to swallow is the romance subplot. Hollywood knows that one of their major target demographics, middle aged guys, will identify with Goodman and so they supply the dream girl for the viewers alter-ego. In this case the movie asks us to believe that an insanely gorgeous 26 year old is just dying to fall in love with her dream guy: an obese man nearly old enough to be her father. When the leading man is Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt, yah OK I can believe that. But Goodman? I don't know, I just think an actress more age appropriate would have been easier to believe. The two here just don't seem like they go together.

My enjoyment of the film may have been effected by the fact that I don't care much for the concept of a monarchy, and I find arguments that keeping families in an artificial state of wealth and privilege is a good thing because they "serve the people" facile and ignorant. Note that the fantasy is always that you get to suddenly become royalty, never that you get to suddenly be a subject who gets sent to prison for not bowing properly or mouthing off. Monarchies are an outdated and brutish form of government best left in the history books, imho.

All in all, I managed to watch the whole movie, even if I wasn't enthralled the whole way thru. Passable entertainment.

It's not stupid, it's charming. A bit old-fashioned and corny, yes, but entertaining and amusing and well worth the time! I just saw this for the second time on cable TV and liked it just as much as the first time!

Goodman performs bravely and exquisitely as the good-hearted buffoon who overcomes the stuffiness and snobbishness of a group of bluebloods too good for their own bodily functions.

Yes it was a little bit fun, but highly flawed. I counted three out-loud laughs as I watched this, which should probably get it a better rating from me. There was a lot of professionalism in the cast, particularly Peter O'Toole, who cannot do bad acting. This was clearly designed to be a vehicle for John Goodman, and I suppose it was successful enough at it. He is funny, and he is good. I quite liked Camille Coduri, with whom I was unfamiliar. She apparently has had quite a career in England. Too bad I haven't seen more of her. And please, don't comment on plot holes! This just isn't the sort of movie where that's relevant.

I wasn't sure whether King Ralph would be my style, seeing how much the critics panned it. But when I watched it, I was surprised at how much I liked it. It is not perfect, but one of the worst films ever? No, far from it. It is enjoyable, despite the sometimes weak script, uneven direction and one or two parts that felt rather slow and contrived. What redeems it though is the cast. John Goodman amiably bumbles his way through his role and gives some charm into a character that could have been bland and uninteresting, and Peter O'Toole and John Hurt seem to be having a whale of a time as the adviser and scheming courtier. Also, the film does actually look nice, the cinematography is good and the scenery is lovely. The soundtrack and score were enjoyable as well. Overall, it has its problems, but it isn't a bad film by all means. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Though this film got trashed in a lot of circles, I rather like it if for no other reasons than it gives Americans some notion of the function of the monarchy in Great Britain.

Sometimes having the head of state and the head of government does have its bad points. Watergate for instance might have not been the gut wrenching experience if in America we were a parliamentary democracy with a royal head of state. Richard Nixon would have been put up for a "no confidence" vote and out he would have been without all the drama.

Drama on the other side of the Atlantic is saved for the Royals. This film might give an American some idea of what the abdication crisis was all about. John Goodman as the American born King has his own Mrs. Simpson.

In fact how he got to the throne is quite the tale. On some grand occasion the extended royal family got together for what looks like a team picture like they take in spring training of the various baseball rosters. Someone left a loose electrical cable dangling on the metal bleachers and the whole lot of them were electrocuted.

Genealogists poured through the Windham family tree and found some member had renounced it all and gone to America. The heir of that forgotten branch is John Goodman, Ralph Jones who does a lounge act in Las Vegas and not in classier joints in Las Vegas.

Of course the free and easy and thoroughly American Goodman doesn't take readily to his new found job. He can't quite comprehend that he has to serve as well as be served. And he has the same problem the Duke of Windsor had when he was briefly Edward VIII. With a lot more excuse since Windsor was brought up in the tradition.

Peter O'Toole as the lord who tries to give him some on the job training and John Hurt who has his own reasons for wanting Goodman to flop both give stand out performances. Best scene the palace ball for Goodman's prospective bride when Goodman does his lounge act.

It's a funny film and in its own way educational. The Duke of Windsor should have seen it. His duty would have been clear.

It would be hard to make a film as witless as King Ralph without really trying. It's a shame, because the set-up (gauche, unclassy American takes over the stuffy British aristocracy) has good comic possibilities and Goodman is generally a fun actor to watch.

Most of the problems are directly due to the feeble script and weak direction. There are no surprises and none of the comedy set-pieces are handled with any wit or skill.

Avoid this film like the plague.

I LOVE this movie! I know that when it came out it was largely ignored...by both the critics and the movie going public...but I found this film to be just simply fun to watch...a wonderful movie to just get caught up into. It has no pre-texts of social or political idealism. It doesn't try to solve the worlds problems with it's message. And it doesn't aim to make us, the viewers, think overly hard about where the movie is leading us. It does, however, present us with totally believable characters who we quickly become emotionally invested in. Sure the opening plot structure is contrived but that is half of the charm of the film's setup. It is a good absurd introduction to the twists of the movie.

I must confess, being half Cherokee Indian and half English, I was drawn to this movie if for no other reason than I had always heard about that half of my family's history and imagined who they were and how they lived. As an American, I have also fallen prey to my own sometimes myopic world view. King Ralph was an enjoyable way to contemplate the place that a monarchy holds in the hearts of their countrymen.

I don't believe that there is anything inherently wrong with having a movie that doesn't try to enlighten or enrage us. I have always felt that too often Hollywood tries to insert a message or moral slant to a project just because they believe that to not include one makes the movie seem shallow or silly. I say whats wrong with having just a fun movie? To me King Ralph was just such a movie. Of course it had smatterings of political overtones and touches of social commentary, but I feel that this was used to propel the story rather than to try and impart some deeper philosophical meaning to us.

The best part about this movie is that we can now all use the movie's title as a clever nickname for fat people. For example, when playing a pick-up softball game back in 1996 Orens stepped to the plate and Baumann yelled from his first base position, "hey, it's King Ralph." This brought great joy to everyone who was lucky enough to hear the comment. That I feel is the greatest contribution of this clearly pathetic movie. I'll admit, I think I rented it when it came out on video, although I was very young so I will assume my mom rented it for me. Anyway, I remember little form the movie, maybe a part where some people get electrocuted during a photo, a potential fox hunt gone sour and a scene with a leader of an African country. I also recall King Ralph being a serious bowler. I do not recommend that you see this movie, however, I do recommend that you call fat people King Ralph for comedic purposes.

"King Ralph" was surprisingly entertaining and very funny, actually. However outrageous, implausible, ridiculous the plot, that doesn't matter. It was deliciously over the top to see Peter O'Toole and John Goodman, the most unlikely team ever, provide the spectacle of a cultural clash, to say the least. The movie cheerfully mocks both American and British culture and stereotypes, but it does it rather playfully, without being offensive to anybody. The joke is either on the hamburger and baseball loving Americans, or the stiff conservatory high-class Brits. People who describe this movie as "low-brow" comedy obviously have no idea what that means. This is good quality humor, no crude and tasteless jokes here. The actors are all top-rate and the acting is first class.

Who could have played the majestic, royal British type better than Peter O'Toole? Nobody! He's perfect, graceful and dignified as the King's adviser. John Goodman, on the other hand, is perfect as the average joe who doesn't know or care much about protocol, good manners or politics. John Hurt is another excellent choice to play the part of an evil, unscrupulous aristocrat hung up on power. Hurt obviously enjoyed doing this part and he's very funny. The movie tends to drag when Goodman's girlfriend shows up, but Princess Anna enters the stage to compensate. There are also some unnecessary exaggerations, but I didn't mind. The script is good, the jokes are over the top and performances are great all around. Hilarious stuff!

Okay, I must admit that I just saw the last half of this movie(I didn't make it in time for the start, as it just went on tv here), so I wont complain much about the movie, as there might be answers to my questions in the beginning of it.

I would just like to state that Finland does NOT have an royal family. The names they have used for the Finnish royal family are more typical in Norway/Denmark/Sweden, or at least I think so. (don't kill me if I'm wrong). Another thing is that if they were going to give the Finnish royal family heavy accents on their English, they might have gotten the accents to sound similar to the Finnish language!!! I get to often disappointed by this in American movies. WHY can't anyone just find an accent that is similar to the language they're supposed to talk????!

The main thing about this movie I cannot get is how the hell did an American get to be the 'only' one left to the British throne??? My older sister is really into the royal families in Europe, and she just found a list with around 600 (or was it 400?) people who would get the British throne.

Since I didn't watch the first part of this movie, I will probably sound stupid now, but was there some sort of an accident.... or several accidents all over the globe since all these people 'suddenly' died and left Ralph from America take over????

That would mean that most of the royalties in Europe (not counting the Catholics, as they have no claim for the British throne) were DEAD! Would there then be huge parties in Britain???

There were several things like these that kept me wondering during the movie. When I see something as unrealistic as this, I force myself to look at the whole movie as a big joke. NO ONE CAN BE THAT IGNORANT!

other than that, the movie was fairly ok. The singing/playing/dancing act of King Ralph was great, as I love that kind of music.

if you want to see this movie, watch it for fun, please don't watch it to look into the monarchy of ANY country, especially not Finland, which doesn't even have one!

John Goodman stars as the title monarch in this royal comedy.

Ralph is a Las Vegas lounge singer badly in the need for some

moolah when a group of British councilmen approach him one night

and bear him the news that Ralph is the new king of England

after the whole royal family has been wiped out in a freak

accident! Reluctantly, Ralph takes the job. At first, he seems

like a fish out of water, the fact being that he is an American

first of all, and that he is also a total slob! Being king might

not be so good after all.

This movie is funny because Goodman does a nice job being a

lovable slob trying his best to be the royal figurehead of the

Britain. Peter O'Toole is also good as Willingham, the

aristocrat whose job is to look after the newly appoi

I expected to see the now familiar "this film contains outdated concepts that some people may find offensive" description on Sky however for some reason, it didn't appear.

This film contains all of the stereotypical American views of Britain and I found it culturally offensive.

What surprised me most is that the cast, some of whom are British icons, were happy to take part in this mess. I only gave it 2 stars because of the cast. The rest is awful.

Also, it isn't funny.

I can't help but chuckle every time I see this film, but I know that just the thought of something like this happening makes about 100 people with calculators sit up and start crunching numbers of the possibility of something like this happening.

John Goodman plays a down on his luck performer that, as it turns out, goes from distant family to the throne of England to instant family on the throne. The only problem is that he's had no refinement and leaves a lot to be desired in the courtesy department. If one plus one equals two, then this combination equals a comedy that can't be matched...on ANY level.

I'm not saying this is the best comedy of all time, but what I am saying is that this film, if you rent it, is a nice quiet evening that will not offend many people and leaves the lead actor in a familiar base for him: a place where he's supposed to seem unfamiliar. Everybody remembers him as Dan Connor, but how many of you reading this remember he was the head football coach in Revenge of the Nerds? Goodman was an excellent choice for this part because of his range as an actor and his on-screen chemistry with Camille Coduri was priceless, too, as I felt that they represented the kind of relationship that everybody would like.

So, hats off (or crowns, if you will) to David S Ward for this film. I just got in here to give this comment and my next stop is to see what else this director has done. 7 out of 10 stars.

King Ralph (1991) is undeniably one of the top five worst films of the 1990's. The script was obviously and only written to cash in on the rise of John Goodman hype & hysteria in the early 90's. Goodman needs to stick to "Roseanne" comeback specials, Saturday Night Live appearances, and "Babe Ruth" type characters from now on. King Ralph falls short in every possible way because it lacks proper foresight and planning, and the whole title, plot, and idea is quite "outdated" even for early 90's standards. This is a cheap rental if you're really, really bored, or just love to watch John Goodman parading around as a goofy King with absolutely no direction in life. I'd recommend "Brewster's Millions" with Richard Pryor instead...now there's a comedy that ages gracefully with time...and with a much better cast, plot and vision.

Oh my God!

I've seen a lot of so-so movies with John Goodman in it, but this one is definitely the worse. Thanks god, this wonderful actor later had good opportunities to show us his talent.

Such a waste of good actors (Peter O'Toole! John Hurt! Richard Griffiths! Oh no!!) is a shame. The direction is cheap, the script is cheap, the humour is cheap, everything is cheap, this movie is plain cheesy and its "humour" is on par with any Benny Hill show. No, really, heeeewwwww!!! David Ward is a honest writer sometimes, but as a director... NO!

If you have a brain, avoid this movie. If Benny Hill makes you burst out laughing, then go rent it. Personally, I do have a brain, so it was quite a disgusting experience.

Ralph is a obese, slovenly, egocentric, loud, opinionated, inflexible middle-aged man still chasing fame as a small-time lounge singer who by some freak accident becomes the King of England.

In other words, he is meant to be the stereotypical American.

This time it's the royal house of England that his character invades. His casual approach makes him some friends but mostly ruffles feathers among the snobby Europeans.

He "falls in love" with a commoner and you can probably guess what happens with that. There are no surprises here. You might not be able to guess the exact resolution, though, because it's so nonsensical and rushed that it's unpredictable.

The romance is poorly developed. The fish-out-of-water scenes come out bland and dull. Perhaps that's because Ralph behaves inconsistently. He tries to take his responsibilities seriously but throws a fit over random issues and suddenly becomes very egotistical.

Or it could just be a problem with the actor himself. I don't know what it is about John Goodman, but he's not fit for this sort of role. Maybe it's that his voice is too gruff and his manner of speaking is too calm or that he doesn't have the ability to be physical enough on camera here...

Or it might be the writing.

He almost never behaves outrageously enough to earn humour points on that ground and it's not realistic enough to be ironically interesting. I think the film's premise called for farce but instead most of the time it shied away from extreme humour and instead is more of a comedy-drama that ends up too restrained because it takes itself too seriously.

The end result is that it's very predictable and not very interesting.

Honourable Mentions: Caddyshack (1980). Rodney Dangerfield plays a similar character. If I recall correctly, he was an ostentatious noveau riche millionaire causing a ruckus at a prim country club. Anyway, his behaviour is outrageous and indecorous (but still realistic enough) and offends a lot of stuffy people. Hilarious. They should have made a movie about that guy. Oh wait, they did.

This seems to get a panning from film reviewers here, but it actually is a good comedy. The story line is mildly stupid and a replay of the old fish-out-of-water formula, but the British were able to add a fantastic flavour to the film and the comedy is kept in check and doesn't become too outlandishly stupid.

Thumbs up in my view, but it's a little bit date these days. Superb supporting cast and a friendly film: nothing crude and from recollection, no bad language.

Goes to show that it can still be done if you really apply your mind to it!

I have to say that John Goodman's performance among a sea of royal British costars like the great Peter O'Toole, Leslie Phillips OBE, Rudolph Walker OBE, John Hurt CBE, Judy Parfitt, Ann Beach, and Richard Griffiths. John Goodman plays Ralph Jones who turns out to be the British royal family's closest living relative after a photo picture that turns into a disaster killing everybody. While the country mourns, they need a new monarch. They found him, Ralph Jones, an American lounge lizard who plays the piano and watches television at the same time. Of course, he's nothing that they expected and he's an American too living in sin city or Las Vegas, Nevada. They bring him the news and bring him back to Buckingham Palace. He seeks to escape the bodyguards and security to see his lady love, Miranda, played well by Camille Corduri. Miranda is a commoner who wants to design dresses but works as a stripper and gets canned because she can't do it. Anyway, the love story appears genuine. She helps him with his British history. But the scene at McDonalds is quite memorable. The girl who takes the King's order was a regular on East Enders. Of course, the crowd gets mobbed. Without John Goodman in the role, I don't think King Ralph would be that enjoyable to watch but that's why I find it irresistible. He wins them over with his charm. I appreciate it now 15 years later. Everybody even the Royals could use a good laugh.