The King's Speech is a good movie

Rating: 7/10 (17 June 2017)

The King's Speech is a good movie, but that's it, it does not exceed the limit of a video, it has its merits, but when you think about the possibilities and even the possibilities of the cinema, "the Kings" does not exceed anything .
It is all done on a very shallow scale, a video made to satisfy and respond to the orders of those who asked or even to follow the course of the 2000s, which generated a line of biblio- cinematographic achievements on the reigns, especially the English royalty. Even the performances follow the same rhythm, Colin Firth is fine, but we know of his ability, honestly here, it was not the time to receive his Oscar as best actor.
Geoffrey Rush goes further, which is the great relief of the film, his good character, can follow a rhythm of his own, but nothing more than something great, and we know that Rush is an excellent actor.
Perhaps this strangeness of being only good is justified by the direction of Tom Hooper, who is more accustomed to television accomplishments, which we can check in "King ...", not only because it is a closed script in internal locations, with a lighting Very clear and at the same time very artificial, but mainly for punctuating plans and against plans, a simple work almost lazy that the TV uses to simplify to the maximum and make clear what is talked about and with whom one talks, not opening spaces for Reflections and possibilities.
Apart from this the scenarios, especially where we have the presence of the character "Lionel Logue", is a clear reference of old age and decomposition that conversely give beauty to the film, however, Hopper (specifically close to the characters seated), abuses in wanting to present Such scenarios with cutouts that even work, but that used too much, tiring and only show that they are there like figurative form of a little explored world.