[ previous note: because in this text go into many details about the plot of this movie, and how that had forced me to go adding the words SPOILER almost every line, I recommend the reader has not yet seen the film, and want to wait to see him not read it].
had not seen until recently this British production directed by Tom Hooper London, who only knew the TV miniseries Elizabeth I (idem, 2005), but it is also recognized by another miniseries, the prestigious John Adams (idem, 2008), and an earlier film for the cinema, Damned United (The Damned United, 2009), which also has, as they say, "good press." Regarding The king's speech (The King's Speech, 2010) had read and heard these days, some comments are not very positive, many of whom, once seen the film, I think in general the usual prejudice against the British cinema, with rare ease branded as "cold," right "or, of course, 'academic', which is the traditional charge that is throwing the same for decades (and, frankly, at this point I doubt that it is valid as derogatory rating, given that, dictionary in hand, one of the meanings of the aforementioned academic a work of art or an author who observes strictly the classic rules.) In postmodern times, King's speech stands as a kind of insult to bigots who claim to love the modern (or, rather, a certain conception of modernity) but in return flaunt an attitude that, at first glance, it reveals the opposite of modernity (and all that entails positive the latter, ie, progressive, open-mindedness and vision for the future), since they seem unable to accept that art in general and film in particular can support, and indeed welcome, all styles and schools, characteristics and shades, and that within it there is room for everything and everyone. A little respect for those who do not think, and in this case does not understand the film, as does one, please. And considering that, having seen Speech king, and if it is true that it seems to me not a masterpiece, it is also true that reveals little of the beholder with a minimum of attention as a good movie, filled with enough interesting elements that make it valuable and considered itself outside the certainly highly publicized interpretative work of actor Colin Firth in the role. 
The king's speech draws until recently a little-known fact of life: problems of diction who became King George VI of England (1895-1952), second son of King George V who succeeded to the British throne following the abdication of his elder brother Edward VIII, given the latter's refusal to give up to marry the twice-divorced American Wallis Simpson, something strictly prohibited by the protocol of the royal household. Even before being crowned king as George VI, when he still held the title of Duke of York, Albert Frederick Arthur George was put into the hands of Lionel Logue, a specialist speech not entitled, Australian nationality, to correct the stuttering that drew from its infancy and that, upon reaching adulthood, and to the obligation of having to give speeches in public, became a serious obstacle to the credibility of your image (must be added that King George VI was a person of high cultural level, because of the physical defect, drew an unfair bad reputation that cost enormously stupid to dispel public opinion, which was then so little tolerance for the imperfections of their agents, and so lax with their own, such as now.) So far, more or less, so-called facts. The reality, in this case the film itself, is that the problems of George VI speaks of are not just a story used to present the professional relationship first, and then growing friendship between two men separated by social class difference : nothing else, is what lies at the bottom of the link established between the two protagonists of the story The Duke of York and later King of England whose family name in intimacy with the diminutive of his first name, Bertie (Colin Firth) and Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a speech pathologist to patients receiving in a humble London consultation receptionist lacking with just furniture. This diminutive I just mentioned, Bertie, has a specific weight at the beginning of the relationship between the protagonists: while in their consultation, Lionel Logue still requires the Duke of York, in order to relax the atmosphere between them, both tuteen, and goes so far as to announce that, in the same way that His Highness can call " Lionel," he called " Bertie "the interesting thing about this requirement lies in the fact that for Logue, your question is its own territory," my castle, my rules "he says, it contains, implicitly, a lesson in respect and mutual trust: that Logue failing to treat the speech, the prince and future British monarch has to "lower" social level of the first to talk one on one and on equal terms. 
In this sense, one of the most successful aspects of The king's speech lies in the humanity of his dramatic approach, and its ability to, thus make an intimate approach to his characters, something often difficult to achieve when it comes, as in this case, the figures "historic", as a general rule and exceptions (this film Tom Hooper is one of them), in films featuring such characters tend to express them out loud the thoughts or "famous quotes" for which they have passed to posterity, which is often not destroy human credibility, or if preferred, dramatic verisimilitude: it must be remembered ever for a movie, any movie is always a representation, it is realistic tone. Funny, in the case of The king's speech , much of its intricacies just turn around one of those "historical figures", George VI, and the words said aloud, in public speeches, at first because of his terrible physical defect and then most optimal possible (the final radio address), since, thus cleverly reverses the traditional conception of so-called "historical films" (which should be enough by itself to close the mouths of those who accuse the film of conventional and academic): what matters here is not what George VI said publicly and, above all, how he said (do not is that the role of art in general and cinema in particular, to express "things" so artistically relevant?). What is interesting, therefore, is the process that led to George VI to have a minimum acceptable speech, and the film was excellent and finely drawn through the description of the relationship between Lionel and Bertie, beautifully outlined in the beautiful script David Seidler and extremely steady on the work of the performers (all superb, but special mention Colin Firth in the role of his life, and above all, needless to say, Geoffrey Rush). Draws attention, also positively, that this description will hold, as we have pointed out, on how to get HH Logue "stoop" to your height to earn your trust and for the character of royalty respects you in a drawing process with large doses of irony and passes through the "liberation" of the king taking the form of people talking in the street see about that scene, as fun as, deep, bitter, in which Bertie unleash their frustrations on the query Lionel swearing out loud and, most importantly, doing it without stuttering. 
The film draws a sharp parallel between the two characters, so they end up being more like than it may seem at first glance. The king is aware that merely serves a building in the state structure, ie, that "queen" but no decisions of government and that his actions are predetermined by "their subjects" of the Parliament, ie George VI has "the title of king, but in practice that title does not mean much, or nothing, depending on how you look, for its part, Lionel Logue is a specialist speech self taught, and therefore has no academic qualifications, lack it is thrown in my face at one point in the story, but Logue is defended by such accusations saying that he has never presented himself as "doctor" (on-board announces consultation is silent on this), hence from the outset, refusing to let anyone be directed to him as "doctor." In other words, both characters live appearances, which provides a title, the king, under which a human being "queen" but not "rules" and an academic degree, the doctor, under which any human being who possesses qualities are attributed therapeutic Logue has a self-taught but official purposes you are denied for lack of a role so certified. Lionel and Bertie also recognize each other as people who have suffered in the flesh weight of the humiliation of their fellow men, in the case of Logue, if not contempt, at least it the indifference of the medical community "entitled" by the very fact that no academic training; and, above all, in the case of Bertie, by having always felt embarrassed in the presence of "their elders": first her father, King George V (Michael Gambon), who does not understand their problems attributed to stuttering and mere cowardice, claiming "curárselos" based on trying to give it courage, l 
fter his older brother David, Duke of Windsor and fleeting King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce), more extroverted , womanizing that he, and since they were children is making fun of his stuttering, even to adulthood, still taunting calling failing "Bbb-bertie ." Lionel and Bertie also have in common, in front of others, they have to "papers" that do not feel like, to the detriment of those who really would like to do: Logue is a lover of Shakespeare amateur actor who would have liked interpretation in a professional capacity, for his part, George VI was forced to make a paper that originally did not belong, that of King. The assumption of these "roles" unwanted brings them also an unfair bad reputation as liars and conspirators. As soon as it is discovered that no formal training, Logue is accused of swindling, and forced the appointment of Bertie and King plans the shadow of a possible plot of the latter to seize the throne of David. The two match, also they have managed to endure those indignities because they have been lucky enough to marry women sympathetic to its limits: Myrtle (Jennifer Ehle), Logue's wife, and Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter), wife of George VI and mother of the present Queen Elizabeth II of England, have a vital support role to their husbands, even though this aspect is worked in the film only in terms Elizabeth: Maybe I could have drawn a little more juice from the scene in which a stunned Myrtle, who knows nothing about the king himself consulting regularly visits her husband, accidentally encountered them and, stunned, just sharing a tea with the Queen. 
is true, as has been said these days (hence, again, accusations of academic), the director Tom Hooper download much of the film's effectiveness in the work of its great performers, but that does not mean that much less work staging is vulgar or dull. It must be noted on the credit of his work, however, almost obsessive sense of planning, so that the same, far from being cold and expressionless, it reflects very well the psychological traits of players using the technique of putting them in relation to the scenarios that comprise their everyday environment. Call attention, in this sense, almost claustrophobic frames that express the burden of Bertie when, at the beginning and end of story, should be pronounced speeches, with the hardship it brings him, is a resource rather thick, some but effective, which provides a contrast, again ironically, among the long shots and medium shots of the crowd attending the Duke of York at the stadium in his first speech, or that King listens to the radio in the second parliament, and collected close to the anguish of the character, effectively differentiating the public image and private torment of the protagonist. Receive similar treatment sets, so that, in certain cases (perhaps many), Hooper draws on wide-angle near what was once called "fish eye" to show the inside of the sumptuous palaces and residences where they live Bertie and his family to the point of them appear also overwhelming. This contrasts with the extent of consultation of Lionel, which, not coincidentally, has some semblance of stage and "stage" where this character carries out its particular "Performance." But the claustrophobia is present even if, at any given time, Bertie and Lionel go out for a walk: the fog that surprised them while roaming the park, together with the enclosed planning takes his strained conversation, making this peaceful walk the two friends in a new testing of the seemingly insurmountable issue of class difference. 
Open fire colleagues Film Looks, which number 106 (January 2011) and published its dossier on film last year under the title of Summary 2010. The summary can be accessed at the following link: 
: 
immediately explain that, since had to send my vote before December 31, 2010, and as at that time had not yet seen Biufitul (idem, 2010) (8), which is why I included that in my list of best releases of last year . Have been, could have been removed from the list of best I'm Not There, because ultimately this is a film of 2007 and return to the Alejandro González Iñárritu. I was also very nearly added, of course, Toy Story 3 (idem, 2010, Lee Unkrich), and if in the end I did was because I saw a movie that would be amply declared and / or recognized as it has been. 
also for those dates, the journal Frames asked for my vote as best of 2010. However, when the truth I was unable to properly complete the Top 5 section of English films, because, even though I struggled, only able to vote as two domestic titles last year, both commented Also in this blog: Julia's eyes (2010), Guillem Morales (9), and Great Vázquez (2010), Oscar Aibar (10). Since five English titles vote was essential to make valid the vote, I chose not to participate and delegate my vote on behalf of News pictures, in partner Tonio L. Alarcón. Tonio referred to this in his blog from scratch: 
Later, the friends of the portal Judex, specializing in fantasy films, I asked for a vote of the 10 best films of this genre of the decade 2001-2010. After many ponderings, I decided to concentrate in the more "pure" and "gender" (in my point of view, of course), horror and science fiction in the strict sense (assuming, of course, that can be "strict" within the boundaries of a genre, by definition, unlimited), and this was the result (in chronological order): 
(idem, 2001), Victor Salva. 
The bottom of the ballot to Judex are here: 
More recently, friends of Film Archive asked me in this case my vote for the 20 best films of the decade 2001-2010, these being the choice (in chronological order), many of them matching I chose the last year for my aforementioned blog entry in this April 23, 2010 (
AI Artificial Intelligence (AI Artificial Intelligence, 2001) of Steven Spielberg. 
clarified that here I have not included an extraordinary film in my opinion, and yes I mentioned in my post of April 23, 2010 among the best of the past decade, Rois et reine (2004), Arnaud Desplechin, for the simple reason that the Film Archive vote was limited to English films released in cinemas. 
Film Archive The dossier is available at the following link: 
1895-1909 period: 
Period 1910-1919: 
Period 1920-1929: 
Period 1930-1939: King Kong 
Period 1940-1949: 
Period 1950-1959: 
Period 1960-1969: 
Period 1970-1979: 
Period 1980-1989: 
Period 1990-1999: 
Period 2000-2009: 
I have also written a couple of articles on the occasion of recent editions on DVD and Blu-ray of two classics of Walt Disney, Fantasy (Fantasy, 1940) ... 
... and Bambi (idem, 1942), which are complemented with issues in the same formats household, their sequels, Fantasia 2000 (Fantasia 2000, 1999) and Bambi 2 (Bambi II, 2006 .) 
Finally, published in this issue three critical two of them corresponding to respective film Oscar finalists and now in the lineup: the interesting 127 hours (127 Hours, 2010), which against all odds, I found the work more irregular solvent Danny Boyle, and the estimable The Fighter (idem, 2010), David O. Russell, the third review, smaller, is also a modest degree, but not so contemptible: The trap of evil (Devil, 2010), by John Erick Dowdle . 
"" Death Line " [released in the U.S. as Raw Meat ] offers, with a rawness in my opinion far superior to the overpriced and very mediocre" The Hills Have Eyes "(The Hills Have Eyes, 1977, Wes Craven), a sinister vision and deformed, monstrous, household, also framed against a backdrop of squalor, cannibalism precedes putrefaction and also the famous "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, 1974, Tobe Hooper), whose effectiveness lies in the sharp contrast between the partner states cannibalistic monsters that live under the London underground, and the world of humans, say, "normal", of which film offers a little worn repertoire. " 
" probably" Dead of Night " [also known as DeathDream ] the most powerful metaphor for the disintegration of the traditional concept of middle America as a result of the Vietnam War offered by American films of the seventies, with even higher (Though it is, of course, less "prestigious") that the contribution of Elia Kazan claustrophobic about it, "Visitors" (The Visitors, 1972), which keeps some contact points . " 
" can be" Miracle Mile "also the process of" awakening to the reality "of two dreamers who feel uncomfortable at the time that they have to live and fall in love in the worst possible time: the perfect love of Harry and Julie ends up being the last gasp of an idealistic world over killing himself. " 
Worst Picture: Yoga Woman Putty to Hollywood DiDi, Bigas Luna. 
Worst director: Yoga Miller's Crossing to Fernando León de Aranoa by Amador. 
Worst actor: Yoga To die the ugly to Mario Casas by 3 meters above the sky . 
Worst Actress (ex aequo): Yoga The Tit and the trumpet to Elsa Pataky by DiDi Hollywood 
Bang Carolina, for trumpet Sad Ballad . [Note bene: we must stress the great sense the humor of the latter, who has accepted with great sportsmanship this "distinction" and be the godmother of these "contrapremios" next year]. Film 
Worst Picture: Yoga Julia Cravings to Eat, Pray Love , Ryan Murphy. 
Worst director: Yoga back to Germany, Pepe to Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck by The Tourist . 
Worst Actor (ex aequo): Yoga 3D (unfocused, disoriented and misplaced) Liam Neeson to for Team A ; 
Gerard Butler, for A model citizen; 
and Ralph Fiennes for Fury for titans . 
Worst actress: Yoga Certified copies to Jennifer Aniston, Love Happens by , Exposed and A small change. 
Yoga With De la Iglesia We have come to Sinde Law. 
Where is My-Narro the producer of Uncle Boonmee remember their past lives, O Estranho Angelica case, The mosquito , Aita , Horn and Blow Familystrip , among others. 
Sausage Kaplan Yoga: The Gaudí had a price. 
Yoga Moco deluxe trailer the Torrente 4: Lethal Crisis . 
