the king's speech ending

Home > The King’s Speech Ending Explained

The King’s Speech Ending Explained

UPDATED: February 1, 2024

“The King’s Speech,” a historical drama released in 2010, directed by Tom Hooper and written by David Seidler, captivates audiences with its portrayal of King George VI’s journey to overcome his stammer with the help of Australian speech therapist Lionel Logue. The film, which stars Colin Firth as King George VI and Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue, concludes on a note of triumph and personal achievement, reflecting the king’s significant progress and the deep friendship formed between the king and his therapist.

Overcoming the Stammer

At its core, the film’s climax is centered around King George VI’s (Bertie) pivotal wartime speech to the British Empire, declaring war on Nazi Germany in 1939. This moment is not just about the delivery of a speech but symbolizes Bertie’s overcoming of his stammer, the culmination of his journey towards self-confidence, and the affirmation of his capability as a monarch. The successful broadcast is a testament to the tireless work and unconventional methods of Lionel Logue, whose close relationship with the king is crucial to this achievement. The scene captures the essence of Bertie’s transformation and his ability to fulfill his royal duties despite personal challenges.

Historical Accuracy and Dramatization

While “The King’s Speech” is grounded in historical events, certain creative liberties have been taken for dramatic effect. The film suggests that Logue’s treatment and the overcoming of Bertie’s stammer closely precede the abdication crisis and his coronation. However, in reality, Logue began treating Bertie in the 1920s, indicating a longer timeline of improvement before these events. Despite these dramatizations, the depiction of the king’s struggle with his speech impediment and the significance of his public speaking duties in an era increasingly influenced by mass media remains historically accurate.

The Portrayal of Characters

The performances of Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush are central to the film’s success, bringing depth and authenticity to their real-life counterparts. Firth’s portrayal of King George VI captures the monarch’s initial insecurity and subsequent growth into a leader capable of uniting his country. Rush’s depiction of Lionel Logue as a charismatic and innovative therapist highlights the importance of their relationship. The film, while focusing on these two figures, also touches upon the broader context of the British monarchy and its challenges during a tumultuous period.

“The King’s Speech” ends on a high note, not just for the successful delivery of the speech but for what it represents: the overcoming of personal obstacles, the importance of support and friendship, and the affirmation of a king’s role as a leader during wartime. This ending is a powerful reminder of the human aspect behind historical figures and the personal challenges they face. The film’s blend of historical accuracy with dramatization serves to enhance the narrative, making it a compelling story of triumph over adversity.

By examining the blend of personal triumph, historical context, and the deep bond between King George VI and Lionel Logue, “The King’s Speech” offers a nuanced exploration of leadership, friendship, and the power of voice, both literally and metaphorically.

The Boy and the Heron Ending Explained

Dark Harbor Movie (2019) Ending Explained

The Night Crew (2015) Movie Ending Explained

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane Ending Explained

Asteroid City Ending Explained

The Best Years of Our Lives Ending Explained

Latest articles, o.j. simpson saga – a tale of triumph, tragedy, and controversy, jeremy allan white filmography, jeremy allen white – all you need to know, da’vine joy randolph – all you need to know.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Ad Blocker Enabled!

Movie Reviews

Tv/streaming, collections, great movies, chaz's journal, contributors, the rain in sp…sp...sp....

Now streaming on:

"The King's Speech" tells the story of a man compelled to speak to the world with a stammer. It must be painful enough for one who stammers to speak to another person. To face a radio microphone and know the British Empire is listening must be terrifying. At the time of the speech mentioned in this title, a quarter of the Earth's population was in the Empire, and of course much of North America, Europe, Africa and Asia would be listening — and with particular attention, Germany.

The king was George VI. The year was 1939. Britain was entering into war with Germany. His listeners required firmness, clarity and resolve, not stammers punctuated with tortured silences. This was a man who never wanted to be king. After the death of his father, the throne was to pass to his brother Edward. But Edward renounced the throne "in order to marry the woman I love," and the duty fell to Prince Albert, who had struggled with his speech from an early age.

In "The King's Speech," director Tom Hooper opens on Albert ( Colin Firth ), attempting to open the British Empire Exhibition in 1925. Before a crowded arena and a radio audience, he seizes up in agony in efforts to make the words come out right. His father, George V ( Michael Gambon ), has always considered "Bertie" superior to Edward ( Guy Pearce ), but mourns the introduction of radio and newsreels, which require a monarch to be seen and heard on public occasions.

At that 1925 speech, we see Bertie's wife, Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter), her face filled with sympathy. As it becomes clear that Edward's obsession with Wallis Simpson (Eve Best) is incurable, she realizes her Bertie may face more public humiliation. He sees various speech therapists, one of whom tries the old marbles-in-the-mouth routine first recommended by Demosthenes. Nothing works, and then she seeks out a failed Australian actor named Lionel Logue ( Geoffrey Rush ), who has set up a speech therapy practice.

Logue doesn't realize at first who is consulting him. And one of the subjects of the film is Logue's attitude toward royalty, which I suspect is not untypical of Australians; he suggests to Albert that they get on a first-name basis. Albert has been raised within the bell jar of the monarchy and objects to such treatment, not because he has an elevated opinion of himself but because, well, it just isn't done. But Logue realizes that if he is to become the king's therapist, he must first become his friend.

If the British monarchy is good for nothing else, it's superb at producing the subjects of films. "The King's Speech," rich in period detail and meticulous class distinctions, largely sidesteps the story that loomed over this whole period, Edward's startling decision to give up the crown to marry a woman who was already divorced three times. Indeed, the Duke and Duchess of Windsor (as they became) would occupy an inexplicable volume of attention for years, considering they had no significance after the Duke's abdication. The unsavory thing is that Wallis Simpson considered herself worthy of such a sacrifice from the man she allegedly loved. This film finds a more interesting story about better people; Americans, who aren't always expert on British royalty, may not necessarily realize that Albert and wife Elizabeth were the parents of Queen Elizabeth II. God knows what Edward might have fathered.

Director Tom Hooper makes an interesting decision with his sets and visuals. The movie is largely shot in interiors, and most of those spaces are long and narrow. That's unusual in historical dramas, which emphasize sweep and majesty and so on. Here we have long corridors, a deep and narrow master control room for the BBC, rooms that seem peculiarly oblong. I suspect he may be evoking the narrow, constricting walls of Albert's throat as he struggles to get words out.

The film largely involves the actors Colin Firth, formal and decent, and Geoffrey Rush, large and expansive, in psychological struggle. Helena Bonham Carter, who can be merciless (as in the "Harry Potter" films), is here filled with mercy, tact and love for her husband; this is the woman who became the much-loved Queen Mother of our lifetimes, dying in 2002 at 101. As the men have a struggle of wills, she tries to smooth things (and raise her girls Elizabeth and Margaret). And in the wider sphere, Hitler takes power, war comes closer, Mrs. Simpson wreaks havoc, and the dreaded day approaches when Bertie, as George VI, will have to speak to the world and declare war.

Hooper's handling of that fraught scene is masterful. Firth internalizes his tension and keeps the required stiff upper lip, but his staff and household are terrified on his behalf as he marches toward a microphone as if it is a guillotine. It is the one scene in the film that must work, and it does, and its emotional impact is surprisingly strong. At the end, what we have here is a superior historical drama and a powerful personal one. And two opposites who remain friends for the rest of their lives.

Note: The R rating refers to Logue's use of vulgarity. It is utterly inexplicable. This is an excellent film for teenagers.

Roger Ebert

Roger Ebert was the film critic of the Chicago Sun-Times from 1967 until his death in 2013. In 1975, he won the Pulitzer Prize for distinguished criticism.

Now playing

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

Christy lemire.

The Animal Kingdom

Monica castillo.

Brian Tallerico

Carol Doda Topless at the Condor

Marya e. gates.

Little Wing

Film credits.

The King's Speech (2010)

Rated R for language

118 minutes

Directed by

David Seidler

Latest blog posts

Sonic the Hedgehog Franchise Moves to Streaming with Entertaining Knuckles

San Francisco Silent Film Festival Highlights Unearthed Treasures of Film History

Ebertfest Film Festival Over the Years

The 2024 Chicago Palestine Film Festival Highlights

Log in or sign up for Rotten Tomatoes

Trouble logging in?

By continuing, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes.

Email not verified

Let's keep in touch.

Sign up for the Rotten Tomatoes newsletter to get weekly updates on:

Upcoming Movies and TV shows
Trivia & Rotten Tomatoes Podcast
Media News + More

By clicking "Sign Me Up," you are agreeing to receive occasional emails and communications from Fandango Media (Fandango, Vudu, and Rotten Tomatoes) and consenting to Fandango's Privacy Policy and Terms and Policies . Please allow 10 business days for your account to reflect your preferences.

OK, got it!

Movies / TV

No results found.

What's the Tomatometer®?
Login/signup

Movies in theaters

Opening this week
Top box office
Coming soon to theaters
Certified fresh movies

Movies at home

Fandango at Home
Netflix streaming
Prime Video
Most popular streaming movies
What to Watch New

Certified fresh picks

Challengers Link to Challengers
Abigail Link to Abigail
Arcadian Link to Arcadian

New TV Tonight

The Jinx: Season 2
Knuckles: Season 1
THEM: The Scare: Season 2
Velma: Season 2
The Big Door Prize: Season 2
Secrets of the Octopus: Season 1
Dead Boy Detectives: Season 1
Thank You, Goodnight: The Bon Jovi Story: Season 1
We're Here: Season 4

The King's Speech

Where to watch.

Watch The King's Speech with a subscription on Max, rent on Fandango at Home, Prime Video, Apple TV, or buy on Fandango at Home, Prime Video, Apple TV.

What to Know

Colin Firth gives a masterful performance in The King's Speech , a predictable but stylishly produced and rousing period drama.

Audience Reviews

Cast & crew.

Colin Firth

King George VI

Geoffrey Rush

Lionel Logue

Helena Bonham Carter

Queen Elizabeth

King Edward VIII

Timothy Spall

Winston Churchill

Best Movies to Stream at Home

Movie news & guides, this movie is featured in the following articles., critics reviews.

Share full article

Supported by

Movie Review | 'The King’s Speech'

The King’s English, Albeit With Twisted Tongue

By Manohla Dargis

Nov. 25, 2010

British films that make it to American screens these days often fall into two distinct niches: life is miserable and life is sweet (to borrow a title from the director Mike Leigh, who oscillates between the two). Given its quality headliners and high commercial profile (ding-dong, is that Oscar calling?), it’s no surprise that “The King’s Speech,” a buddy story about aggressively charming opposites — Colin Firth as the stutterer who would be king and Geoffrey Rush as the speech therapist — comes with heaping spoonfuls of sugar.

The story largely unfolds during the Great Depression, building to the compulsory rousing end in 1939 when Britain declared war on Nazi Germany, world calamities that don’t have a patch on the urgent matter of the speech impediment of Albert Frederick Arthur George (Mr. Firth). As a child, Albert, or Bertie as his family called him, the shy, sickly second son of King George V (Michael Gambon, memorably severe and regal), had a stutter debilitating enough that as an adult he felt compelled to conquer it. In this he was aided by his wife, Elizabeth (a fine Helena Bonham Carter), a steely Scottish rose and the mother of their daughters, Elizabeth, the future queen (Freya Wilson), and Margaret (Ramona Marquez).

Albert meets his new speech therapist, Lionel Logue (Mr. Rush), reluctantly and only after an assortment of public and private humiliations. (In one botched effort, a doctor instructs Albert to talk with a mouthful of marbles, a gagging endeavor that might have altered the imminent monarchical succession.) As eccentric and expansive as Albert is reserved, Logue enters the movie with a flourish, insisting that they meet in his shabby-chic office and that he be permitted to call his royal client, then the Duke of York, by the informal Bertie. It’s an ideal odd coupling, or at least that’s what the director Tom Hooper would have us believe as he jumps from one zippy voice lesson to the next, pausing every so often to wring a few tears.

To that generally diverting end, Albert barks and brays and raps out a calculatingly cute string of expletives, including the four-letter kind that presumably earned this cross-demographically friendly film its R. With their volume turned up, the appealing, impeccably professional Mr. Firth and Mr. Rush rise to the Acting occasion by twinkling and growling as their characters warily circle each other before settling into the therapeutic swing of things and unknowingly preparing for the big speech that partly gives the film its title. Before you know it, Elizabeth (Ms. Bonham Carter), the future dumpling known as the Queen Mother, is sitting on Bertie’s chest during an exercise while he lies on Logue’s floor, an image that is as much about the reassuring ordinariness of the royals as it is about Albert’s twisting tongue.

It isn’t exactly “Pygmalion,” not least because Mr. Hooper has no intention of satirizing the caste system that is one of this movie’s biggest draws. Unlike “The Queen,” a barbed look at the royal family after the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, “The King’s Speech” takes a relatively benign view of the monarchy, framing Albert as a somewhat poor little rich boy condemned to live in a fishbowl, an idea that Mr. Hooper unwisely literalizes by overusing a fisheye lens. The royals’ problems are largely personal, embodied by King George playing the stern 19th-century patriarch to Logue’s touchy-feely Freudian father. And while Albert initially bristles at Logue’s presumptions, theirs is finally a democracy of equals, an angle that makes their inequities go down in a most uneventful way.

Each character has his moments, instances when Bertie the closed book tentatively opens and Logue’s arrogance gets away from him, but both are too decent, too banal and the film too ingratiating to resonate deeply. Albert’s impediment certainly pales in comparison with the drama surrounding his older, popular brother, David, later King Edward VIII (a fantastic Guy Pearce), and his married American divorcée, Mrs. Wallis Simpson (Eve Best). After King George V dies, David assumes the crown and continues to carry on with Mrs. Simpson, a liaison that, because of its suggestively perverse power dynamics — at a party, she orders the new king (yoo-hooing “David”) to fetch her booze — hints at a more interesting movie than the one before you.

That film does have its attractions, notably in its two solid leads and standout support from Mr. Pearce. Mercurially sliding between levels of imperiousness and desperation, he creates a thorny tangle of complications in only a few abbreviated scenes, and when his new king viciously taunts Bertie, you see the entirety of their cruel childhood flashing between them. By the time he abdicates in 1936, publicly pledging himself to Mrs. Simpson (“the woman I love”), turning the throne over to King George VI, Edward has a hold on your affections. Those would surely lessen if the film tagged after him when he and Mrs. Simpson subsequently took their post-abdication tour around Germany, where they had tea with Hitler and the Duke returned the Führer’s Nazi salute. Like many entertainments of this pop-historical type, “The King’s Speech” wears history lightly no matter how heavy the crown.

The King’s Speech

Opens on Friday in New York and Los Angeles.

Directed by Tom Hooper; written by David Seidler; director of photography, Danny Cohen; edited by Tariq Anwar; music by Alexandre Desplat; production design by Eve Stewart; costumes by Jenny Beavan; produced by Iain Canning, Emile Sherman and Gareth Unwin; released by the Weinstein Company. Running time: 1 hour 58 minutes.

WITH: Colin Firth (King George VI), Geoffrey Rush (Lionel Logue), Helena Bonham Carter (Queen Elizabeth), Guy Pearce (King Edward VIII), Jennifer Ehle (Myrtle Logue), Eve Best (Wallis Simpson), Freya Wilson (Princess Elizabeth), Ramona Marquez (Princess Margaret), Claire Bloom (Queen Mary), Derek Jacobi (Archbishop Cosmo Lang), Michael Gambon (King George V), Timothy Spall (Winston Churchill) and Anthony Andrews (Stanley Baldwin).

“The King’s Speech” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). Coarse language.

an image, when javascript is unavailable

The Definitive Voice of Entertainment News

Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter

site categories

The king’s speech — film review.

Colin Firth, following up on his Oscar-nominated role in "A Single Man," now can claim a place among Britain's finest film actors with his performance as the man who became King George VI.

By Kirk Honeycutt

Kirk Honeycutt

Share this article on Facebook
Share this article on Twitter
Share this article on Flipboard
Share this article on Email
Show additional share options
Share this article on Linkedin
Share this article on Pinit
Share this article on Reddit
Share this article on Tumblr
Share this article on Whatsapp
Share this article on Print
Share this article on Comment

It perhaps started with The Queen , continued with Young Victoria and now achieves the most intimate glimpse inside the royal camp to date with The King’s Speech .

Each of these films features a mesmerizing central performance. Although Speech requires shared billing, with no disrespect to Geoffrey Rush ‘s spot-on work here, Colin Firth , following up on his Oscar-nominated role in A Single Man , now can claim a place among Britain’s finest film actors with his performance as the man who became King George VI.

The Bottom Line A riveting, intimate account at how a British king triumphed over a speech impediment with the help of an unorthodox speech coach.

The film is a sure winner in the British Isles and many former colonies. How its most rebellious and historically challenged colony will react when the Weinstein Co. releases the film domestically Nov. 24 is hard to gauge. Perhaps only decent box office can be anticipated.

THR Newsletters

More from The Hollywood Reporter

Nantucket film festival reveals 2024 lineup, sets honors for roger ross williams, kerry ehrin and meredith scardino (exclusive), critics’ conversation: ‘civil war’ and civic anxiety, shameik moore, paris jackson board ‘one spoon of chocolate’ drama (exclusive), cate blanchett, colin farrell and millie bobby brown in cannes immersive lineup, karlovy vary festival piles on angsty adaptations with franz kafka retrospective, jerry seinfeld says “disorientation replaced the movie business” and talks directorial film debut.

The King’s Speech Review

07 Jan 2011

118 minutes

King’s Speech , The

Some films turn out to be unexpectedly good. Not that you’ve written them off, only they ply their craft on the hush-hush. Before we even took our seats, Inception had trailed a blaze of its cleverness the size of a Parisian arrondissement. We were ready to be dazzled. If you had even heard of it, Tom Hooper’s The King’s Speech looked no more than well-spoken Merchant Ivoriness optimistically promoted from Sunday teatime: decent cast, nice costumes, posh carpets. That was until the film finished a sneak-peak at a festival in deepest America, and the standing ovations began. Tweeters, bloggers and internet spokespeople of various levels of elocution announced it the Oscar favourite, and this also-ran arrives in our cinemas in a fanfare of trumpets.

But for all its pageantry, it isn’t a film of grandiose pretensions. Much better than that, it is an honest-to-goodness crowdpleaser. Rocky with dysfunctional royalty. Good Will Hunting set amongst the staid pageantry and fussy social mores of the late ’30s. The Odd Couple roaming Buckingham Palace. A film that will play and play. A prequel to The Queen.

Where lies its success? Let’s start with the script, by playwright David Seidler, a model for transforming history into an approachable blend of drama and wit. For a film about being horrendously tongue-tied, Seidler’s words are exquisitely measured, his insight as deep as it is softly spoken. Both an Aussie and a long-suffering stammerer, he first adapted the story as a play, written with the permission of both the late Queen Mother (George’s wife) and Logue’s widow. Stretching into the legroom of film, he loses none of the theatrical richness of allowing decent actors to joust and jostle and feed off each other.

As their two worlds clash, this outspoken “colonial” and this unspoken aristocrat, Seidler mines great humour from the situation. Logue’s outlandish treatments are designed to rock George, whom he insists on calling Bertie (the impertinence!), out of his discomfort zone. He has to lie on the floor, his dainty wife perched upon his chest, strengthening his diaphragm. He has to swing his arms like a chimpanzee, warble like a turkey. And in a sure-to-be classic scene, Logue cracks the dam of his patient’s cornered voice by getting him swearing. “Say the ‘F’ word,” commands Rush, his eyes twinkling at Logue’s front. “Fornication!” howls Firth, like a man bursting. Such naughtiness — escalating to a magnificent chorus of “shits” and “fucks” — landed the film an R rating in America. The silly-billies: the moment couldn’t be more tender or uplifting.

What Hooper sensed of Seidler’s play is that this is not about fixing a voice, but fixing a mind bullied by his father (a waxen-voiced Michael Gambon as George V) and brother since boyhood, a soul imprisoned by the burden of forthcoming kingliness. Between his handsome London backdrops, elevating any potential staginess with sleek forward motion and microscopic historical accuracy (from mist-occluded parks, to the Tardis-sprawl of the BBC’s broadcasting paraphernalia with the death-noose of their microphones), Hooper plays on the idea of childhood. We meet Logue’s scruffy brood and the twee Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret; while in another scene loaded with codified meaning, George begins to open up as he gently completes a model plane. The tragedy is that he never had a childhood. Friendship is a voyage into the unknown for Bertie. Logue is gluing him together.

Hooper, whose own mother recommended the play, knew straightaway here was his cornerstone — the unlikeliest of friendships. To get all zeitgeist on its royal behind, it’s a bromance. One that required two performers to go to opposite places. Colin Firth has found a rich vein of form: A Single Man provided emotional entrapment in repressed grief, but here were greater perils still, treading the perilous high-wire of physical affliction. In terror of mockery or Rainman, he looked to Derek Jacobi’s definitive stammering in I Claudius (Jacobi winkingly cast here as a conniving Archbishop Of Canterbury) and got to grips with an actor’s greatest fear — being unable to find his words. It’s a bristling irony: acting is a craft exemplified in the crystal-clear diction of Shakespeare, but here is a gripping performance where the actor is virtually incapable of speaking at all. Not in a straight line. It is an anti-acting role, yet Firth doesn’t ever stop communicating: pain, sadness, yearning; intelligence and humour demanding escape; and the fierce self-possession of a man born to privilege. When Logue, pushing and pushing, oversteps the mark, Bertie rounds on him, furious, his voice suddenly eloquent in the spate of his fury. The idea of class is never far away; what marks out one’s place in the social network of yesteryear more than how one speaks?

Logue, a psychotherapist before his time (a royal in therapy — the very thought!), finds Rush in equally fine fettle. He locates Logue’s own shortcomings, a failed actor who turns his office into a stage, striding and pontificating, a show-off with a big heart. A modernist trying to break through social prejudice. A colonial nobody desperate to be an English somebody. Stripped walls line Logue’s drafty chambers: the deprivations of pre-War Britain are here, yet warmed by family. The cushioned train of anterooms of Buckingham Palace appear antiseptic in comparison. Life crushed by velvet. Grimacing Whitehall serving as a cold reminder of war to come.

Any behind-the-drapes depictions of British royalty carry the base pleasures of a good snoop. But these were changing times. Helena Bonham Carter makes for a vibrant Queen Elizabeth (the Queen Mum-to-be), both devoted wife and teasing wit whirling around the word “contraverseeal” like a figure skater, another modernist in a dusty enclave who takes the risk of contacting Logue. If anything, older brother Edward VIII was the true trailblazer, breaking through the bars of royal absolutes to marry American divorcee Mrs. Simpson, and unthinkably vacate the throne for his timorous brother. In that decision, precedents were shattered and the modern world spilled into the royal household. Guy Pearce (an Aussie in English robes) has enormous fun as the arrogant older sibling, plumbing his voice to the borders of camp, but a flash harry flinty enough to shed a nation for a wife. As George will angrily point out, what use does a king serve anymore?

If we start small, a lonely prince trying to express himself, we end big. History knocks the door down. Edward abdicates just as that unquenchable ranter Hitler gets warmed up, and Timothy Spall drops by as a slippery Churchill (a jar to the film’s subtleties) to sneer about oncoming “Nazzzeees”. A sense of terrible urgency engulfs the therapy, but what an ending it offers. George VI must use his faltering voice to soothe a frightened nation in a radio broadcast, all but conducted by Logue, transformed into match-winning glory. You’ll be lost for words.

Movies | 28 09 2023

Movies | 09 11 2020

Movies | 15 05 2017

Movies | 24 04 2016

Movies | 02 02 2016

Movies | 03 12 2014

Movies | 17 01 2012

Movies | 05 10 2011

Symbols and Tropes

Hero's journey, point of view, what's up with the title, what's up with the ending, shock rating, tired of ads, logging out…, logging out....

You've been inactive for a while, logging you out in a few seconds...

W hy's T his F unny?

Cast & crew
User reviews

The King's Speech

The story of King George VI , his unexpected ascension to the throne of the British Empire in 1936, and the speech therapist who helped the unsure monarch overcome his stammer.
Britain's Prince Albert must ascend the throne as King George VI , but he has a speech impediment. Knowing that the country needs her husband to be able to communicate effectively, Elizabeth hires Lionel Logue, an Australian actor and speech therapist, to help him overcome his stammer. An extraordinary friendship develops between the two men, as Logue uses unconventional means to teach the monarch how to speak with confidence. — Jwelch5742
Tasked with serving as the voice of freedom and leading a nation into conflict with Adolf Hitler 's Nazis, the future King of the United Kingdom, King George VI , must first address a chronic, debilitating condition. As Prince Albert of York struggles to overcome his stammering problem to no avail, his wife, the worried Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother , seeks help from unconventional London speech therapist Lional Logue . But to deal with the terrible speech impediment, Prince Albert must persevere through fear and humiliation to take on the burden of the monarchy. And with courage, determination, and unexpected friendship, the nation will eventually have a leader. — Nick Riganas
The true story of the journey of King George VI to the throne and his reign as he develops a friendship with a therapist who helps him overcome his speech impairment to help him in life and all of his duties in the British Monarch while he is king. — RECB3
Biopic about Britain's King George VI (father of present day Queen Elizabeth II) and his lifelong struggle to overcome his speech impediment. Suffering from a stammer from the age of four or five, the young Prince Albert dreaded any public speaking engagement. History records that his speech at the closing of the 1925 Commonwealth exhibition in London was difficult for both him and everyone listening that day. He tried many different therapies over many years, but it was only when he met Lionel Logue, a speech therapist, that he truly began to make progress. Logue did not have a medical degree, but had worked as an elocution coach in the theater and had worked with shell-shocked soldiers after World War I. Through a variety of techniques and much hard work, Albert learns to speak in such a way so as to make his impediment a minor problem and deliver a flawless speech heard around the world by radio when the U.K. declared war on Nazi Germany in 1939. The King and Logue remained life-long friends. — garykmcd
Prince Albert, Duke of York (later King George VI), "Bertie" (Colin Firth), the 2nd son of King George V, speaking at the close of the 1925 British Empire Exhibition at Wembley Stadium, with his wife Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) by his side. His stammering speech unsettles the thousands of listeners in the audience. The prince tries several unsuccessful treatments and gives up, until the Duchess persuades him to see Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), an Australian speech therapist in London. In their first session, Logue requests that they address each other by their Christian names, a breach of royal etiquette. Logue is unorthodox in his approach & Albert is not convinced it will be of any help. Logue makes a recording of Bertie with full music in background (so Bertie can't hear himself) & gives it to Bertie. In 1934, King George V (Michael Gambon) declares Bertie's older brother unfit for the throne & demands Bertie to improve his speech. He plays Logue's recording & finds himself speaking perfectly. He returns to Logue & he gently probes the psychological roots of the stammer. The Prince reveals some of the pressures of his childhood: his strict father; the repression of his natural left-handedness; a painful treatment with metal splints for his knock-knees; a nanny who favored his elder brother-David, the Prince of Wales--deliberately pinching Bertie at the daily presentations to their parents so he would cry and his parents would not want to see him, and--unbelievably--not feeding him adequately ("It took my parents three years to notice," says Bertie); and the early death in 1919 of his little brother Prince John. Logue & Bertie become friends. On 20 January 1936 George V dies, and David, the Prince of Wales (Guy Pearce) accedes to the throne as King Edward VIII, & wants to marry Wallis Simpson (Eve Best), an American divorcee, which would provoke a constitutional crisis. Bertie confronts David, who only accuses Bertie of having designs of his own & makes fun of his speech impediment. Even Logue suggests that Bertie can be King, & this causes a rift in their friendship as Bertie is not thinking in that way. When King Edward VIII does in fact abdicate to marry, Bertie becomes King George VI. Feeling overwhelmed by his accession, the new King realizes that he needs Logue's help and he and the Queen visit the Logues' residence to apologize. When the King insists that Logue be seated in the king's box during his coronation in Westminster Abbey, Dr Cosmo Gordon Lang, the Archbishop of Canterbury (Derek Jacobi), questions Logue's qualifications. This prompts another confrontation between the King and Logue, who explains he had begun by treating shell-shocked soldiers in the last war. When the King still isn't convinced about his own strengths, Logue sits in St. Edward's Chair and dismisses the Stone of Scone as a trifle, the King remonstrates with Logue for his disrespect. The King then realizes that he is as capable as those before him. Upon the September 1939 declaration of war with Germany, George VI summons Logue to Buckingham Palace to prepare for his radio speech to the country. As the King and Logue move through the palace to a tiny studio, Winston Churchill (Timothy Spall) reveals to the King that he, too, had once had a speech impediment but had found a way to use it to his advantage. The King delivers his speech as if to Logue, who coaches him through every moment. As Logue watches, the King steps onto the balcony of the palace with his family, where thousands of Londoners, gathered to hear the speech over loudspeakers, cheer and applaud him. A final title card explains that, during the many speeches King George VI gave during World War II, Logue was always present. It is also explained that Logue and the King remained friends, and that, "King George VI made Lionel Logue a Commander of the Royal Victorian Order in 1944. This high honor from a grateful King made Lionel part of the only order of chivalry that specifically rewards acts of personal service to the Monarch."

Contribute to this page

IMDb Answers: Help fill gaps in our data
Learn more about contributing

More from this title

More to explore.

The King's Speech – review

W H Auden wrote his poem "September 1, 1939" while sitting in a New York bar: "Uncertain and afraid/ As the clever hopes expire/ Of a low dishonest decade." The King's Speech takes a rather different view of Britain and the 1930s, though it's not entirely inconsistent with Auden's judgment and isn't in any sense what is sneeringly called heritage cinema. It is the work of a highly talented group of artists who might be regarded as British realists – Tom Hooper directed the soccer epic The Damned United ; Eve Stewart was production designer on Mike Leigh's Topsy-Turvy and Vera Drake ; Jenny Beavan was responsible for the costumes worn in Gosford Park and The Remains of the Day ; the cinematographer Danny Cohen lit Shane Meadows's This is England and Dead Man's Shoes ; Tariq Anwar's editing credits range from The Madness of King George to American Beauty ; and the screenplay is by the British writer David Seidler, who co-wrote Coppola's Tucker: The Man and His Dream .

The film is the private story of a famous public man, King George VI (known in his family circle as Bertie), the woman who loved him and became his queen, and the innovative Australian speech therapist Lionel Logue, who helped him control and come to terms with the stammer that had tortured him since childhood.

The social and political background, acutely observed and carefully woven into the film's fabric, is the Depression at home, the rise of fascism abroad, and the arrival of the mass media as a major force in our lives. Central to the dramatic action are four crucial incidents: the death in 1936 of George V, the first monarch to address his subjects via the radio; the accession to the throne of his eldest son as Edward VIII and his almost immediate abdication in order to marry American double divorcee Wallis Simpson; the crowning of his successor, George VI; and finally, in 1939, the outbreak of a war for which the king and queen became figureheads of immeasurable national significance alongside their prime minister, Winston Churchill.

Although the film involves a man overcoming a serious disability, it is neither triumphalist nor sentimental. Its themes are courage (where it comes from, how it is used), responsibility, and the necessity to place duty above personal pleasure or contentment – the subjects, in fact, of such enduringly popular movies as Casablanca and High Noon . In this sense, The King's Speech is an altogether more significant and ambitious work than Stephen Frears's admirable The Queen of 2006 and far transcends any political arguments about royalty and republicanism.

The film begins with a brief prologue in which both Bertie as Duke of York (Colin Firth) and his contemporary audience endure agonies of embarrassment as he attempts to deliver a speech at Wembley Stadium during the 1924 Empire exhibition. The rest takes place between 1934 when his wife (Helena Bonham Carter) arranges for him to see Logue the unorthodox therapist (Geoffrey Rush), and shortly after the beginning of the war when he makes a crucial live broadcast to the world from Buckingham Palace, with Logue almost conducting the speech from the other side of the microphone.

Helena Bonham Carter is a warm, charming, puckish presence as Elizabeth, very much aware of her royal status when first approaching Logue using a pseudonym. Michael Gambon is entirely convincing as George V, a peremptory man irritated by the increasing demands of democracy; having been neglected by his own father, he's incapable of expressing love for his sons. Guy Pearce is equally good as the selfish, wilful future King Edward, the movie's one truly despicable character, whose mocking of his brother's stammer places him beyond the pale. Derek Jacobi does a neat turn as Cosmo Lang, the Archbishop of Canterbury, pillar of the establishment, at once dictatorial and obsequious.

The movie, however, ultimately turns upon the skilfully written and impeccably played scenes between Firth's Bertie, initially almost choking on his stammer but trained to insist on court protocol, and Rush's Logue, the informal, blunt-speaking Australian, whose manners are as relaxed as his consulting room in Harley Street is modest. The interplay between them resembles a version of Pygmalion or My Fair Lady in which Eliza is a princess and Henry Higgins a lower-middle-class teacher from Sydney, and they're just as funny, moving and class-conscious as in Shaw's play. There are also, one might think, benign echoes of Prince Hal and Falstaff from Henry IV .

Across a great social gulf they become friends, the king gaining in confidence and humanity, deeply affected by the first commoner he's befriended. But to the end there remains the need to preserve a certain distance.

The film is not without its odd faults, the truly annoying one being the representation of Winston Churchill (Timothy Spall) as a supporter of George during the abdication. In fact, his intrigues in Edward VIII's cause nearly ruined his career. In his biography of Churchill, Roy Jenkins remarks that "had Churchill succeeded in keeping Edward VIII on the throne he might well have found it necessary in 1940 to depose and/or lock up his sovereign as the dangerously potential head of a Vichy-style state".

But overall the film is a major achievement, with Firth presenting us with a great profile in courage, a portrait of that recurrent figure, the stammerer as hero. He finds as many different aspects of stammering as the number of ways of photographing sand explored by Freddie Young in Lawrence of Arabia or John Seale in The English Patient . And as they did, he deserves an Oscar.

The King's Speech
The Observer
Colin Firth
Helena Bonham Carter
Period and historical films
Jenny Beavan

More on this story

The King's Speech flies the flag for a stiff upper lip that no longer exists

The King's Speech: an emotionally stirring Oscar magnet

The King's Speech rules Toronto film festival

Could Colin Firth's King's Speech become one of Oscar acceptance?

The King's Speech – review

Colin Firth has left his posh acting peers in the dust. Give him the Oscar for The King's Speech now

The King's Speech: How George VI's simple domesticity made him the king his country needed in time of war

The King's Speech: How clever sets create a compelling picture of 1930s London

Comments (…), most viewed.

Screen Rant

The king's speech review.

‘The King’s Speech’ is a competent Oscar-baiting historical drama, but does the film stammer too much for the mainstream moviegoer? Read our review to find out.

Screen Rant's Ben Kendrick Reviews The King's Speech

Since it’s debut at the Telluride Film Festival back in September, The King’s Speech has been steadily racking up award nominations as well as several wins, including: The Producers Guild of America Award for Best Theatrical Motion Picture and The Golden Globe for Best Actor (Colin Firth).

There’s no doubt that The King’s Speech - a historical drama about King George VI’s pre-World War II rise to power - is the type of film award shows love to celebrate. However, despite being a competent and beautiful film, is director Tom Hooper’s movie too stuffy to provide mainstream moviegoers with a satisfying trip to the box office?

Fortunately, the answer is no. Despite critical acclaim, some Academy Award-nominated historical dramas never get a wide release – in large part due to their limited appeal to the greater movie-going population. The King’s Speech , however, is an intelligent film with beautiful direction by Hooper, that manages to offer a charm and sense of humor that even audiences at the megaplex will enjoy (not just the local independent theater).

If you’re still unfamiliar with the story of King George VI, or subsequently The King’s Speech , here’s the official synopsis:

After the death of his father King George V (Michael Gambon) and the scandalous abdication of King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce), Bertie (Colin Firth) who has suffered from a debilitating speech impediment all his life, is suddenly crowned King George VI of England. With his country on the brink of war and in desperate need of a leader, his wife, Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter), the future Queen Mother, arranges for her husband to see an eccentric speech therapist, Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush). After a rough start, the two delve into an unorthodox course of treatment and eventually form an unbreakable bond. With the support of Logue, his family, his government and Winston Churchill (Timothy Spall), the King will overcome his stammer and deliver a radio-address that inspires his people and unites them in battle. Based on the true story of King George VI, THE KING'S SPEECH follows the Royal Monarch's quest to find his voice.

As mentioned in the summary, the entire movie revolves around the importance of voice. With the recent invention of the wireless radio, as well as the growing threat of Nazi Germany, King George VI is forced into a unique moment in history – where a King’s radio booth is suddenly more important than his throne.

Despite being the type of role typically labeled as "Oscar-bait," Colin Firth’s performance as the stammering Prince Albert (George VI) is an honest portrayal that never oversteps the boundary between interpretation and caricature. While Firth’s stammering is certainly painful to listen to, it’s clear this is Hooper’s desired effect – and the director balances Albert’s stammers, as well as his succeeding frustration and anger, with a charming performance by Geoffrey Rush as the Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue.

Like many dramas that revolve around a “burgeoning friendship” dynamic, many of the best moments in The King’s Speech are centered around the dynamic between the two would-be friends as Logue attempts to draw the stubborn Prince Albert down from his high horse, in order to truly address the root of the problem (Albert’s fear of being King). In the process, the audience is treated to a number of great moments: some humorous, some painful, and others that are genuinely inspiring.

That said, at times a few of these moments can follow the three act historical drama a bit too closely – resulting in several predictable character arcs. Without giving anything away, the end of the first and second acts are each punctuated with some misunderstanding or regression that tears at Lionel and Albert’s friendship. Surely the pair had their ups and downs in real life, and the framework doesn’t ruin the film or even take much away from the viewer’s enjoyment, but, because of where they’re placed, these moments end up coming across as the contrived movements of the plot, instead of the organic transition of the characters.

It’s a fine line, and certainly won’t bother most moviegoers, but in these moments it was easy to see the screenplay for The King’s Speech shining through a bit too clearly on the silver screen.

However, despite the over-obvious movie structure that, on occasion, gets forced onto the historical events depicted in the film, The King’s Speech is a terrific film with great performances by the cast, as well as an inspiring, not to mention charming, story about a man who not only finds his voice, but finds his place as one of the most important leaders in history.

If you’re still trying to make up your mind, check out the trailer for The King’s Speech below:

Also, if you’re interested in hearing the King’s speech, you can listen to King George VI’s actual September 3rd 1939 address to his people from Buckingham Palace – HERE .

The King’s Speech is currently playing in wide release.

Become a Critical Movie Critic
Movie Review Archives

Movie Review: The King’s Speech (2010)

Mariusz Zubrowski
Movie Reviews
2 responses
--> December 27, 2010

One of the requirements to holding any kind of public office is a sharp tongue. That being said, a king with a speech impediment is simply coated with irony; it sounds like a great political satire. However, director Tom Hopper ( The Damned United ), alongside screenwriter David Seidler ( Malice in Wonderland (the 1985 T.V. movie, not the Snoop Dogg album, just to be clear) and Tucker: The Man and His Dream ) have taken a more historical (and thus realistic) route, tapping into the criminally underappreciated story of King George VI. The King’s Speech chronicles the hijinks and hoopla surrounding the king of Britain, Albert Frederick Arthur ‘Bertie’ George (or as he’d refer to himself, Ge-Ge-Ge-orge), a real-life “stutterbug” who inherited the throne from his brother, Edward VIII, when he relinquished the crown in order to marry an American socialite. In the film, Colin Firth plays the famous ruler with Geoffrey Rush rounding out the cast as Lionel Louge, George’s personal speech therapist who becomes the center of a much unexpected friendship. Although The King’s Speech does tackle the controversies surrounding the royal family, as well as the uprising of Hitler’s campaign, it remains more of a personal story — a tale of companionship and acceptance that though rather predictable, is also very well-done.

From the film’s very first scene, the humiliation is present in Firth’s character — made explicitly clear by the actor’s mannerisms. For George, a crowd of supporters and a microphone are far scarier than any political figurehead. Sometimes his condition, a life-changing impediment that almost completely shrouds his intellect, is presented humorously — poking fun at Hitler’s talent in public speaking — whereas in others, it is handled carefully — never bordering on being derogatory. But regardless of what context Seidler sculpts the character in, Firth gives a heavy-handed role that is sure to land him an Oscar nomination at the upcoming Academy Awards (making this year’s ceremony a real clash of the titans, with Firth, Jeff Bridges, and Ryan Gosling expected to garner nods).

However, a majority of the film’s likability is because of Firth’s chemistry with Rush, George’s unorthodox counterpart. Although they do not consider themselves equals in the first few moments of their relationship, the bond between them gradually blossoms. It eventually becomes a beautiful partnership — one that can overcome any obstacle, and it is this that stops George from becoming a one-note, heartless king, allowing him to become shockingly human. Adding to the effect is the versatile Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth, whose role in George’s characterization is key — without Elizabeth, who George treats with the utmost of respect, his relationship with Lionel, which begins tumultuously, would have been tainted. Audience members, who watch as George throws tantrums and verbally abuse Louge, would have associated George as nothing more than a dignified brute, but because of Carter’s character, who is employed with immaculate precision, George’s motives are clear — he’s just insecure.

It’s just a shame that Seidler is forced to separate the characters in order to move the plot along. When apart, The King’s Speech is at its weakest — being left wide open to uneeded superfluities which caused me to lose focus and interest (you may think otherwise, if you’re into the entire political scheme of things).

Fortunately, the majority of the film isn’t about politics, instead succeeding because of its very touching human component. And thanks to the chemistry between the film’s leading actors, The King’s Speech goes past being just a good film to being a gr-gr-gr-gr-eat film.

Eventually I'll put something nifty here. Until then, know that I'm watching you. Closely.

Movie Review: Justice League (2017) Movie Review: My Scientology Movie (2015) Movie Review: The Magnificent Seven (2016) Movie Review: Creed (2015) Movie Review: The Green Inferno (2013) Movie Review: Sicario (2015) Movie Review: Terminator Genisys (2015)

'Movie Review: The King’s Speech (2010)' have 2 comments

January 25, 2011 @ 10:34 am Fowler

12 Oscar nominations! It is a good movie, but that good?

January 25, 2011 @ 6:45 pm Mariusz Zubrowski

The Academy loves these buddy-buddy tales of triumphant. But some of the nominations are pushing it.

| Log in

Notice: All forms on this website are temporarily down for maintenance. You will not be able to complete a form to request information or a resource. We apologize for any inconvenience and will reactivate the forms as soon as possible.

DVD & Streaming

The King’s Speech

Content caution.

In Theaters

November 26, 2010
Colin Firth as Prince Albert/King George VI); Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue; Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth; Guy Pearce as Prince David/King Edward VIII); Michael Gambon as King George V; Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill; Jennifer Ehle as Myrtle Logue; Derek Jacobi as Archbishop of Canterbury; Anthony Andrews as Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin; Eve Best as Wallis Simpson

Home Release Date

April 19, 2011

Distributor

The Weinstein Company

Movie Review

Living life without being able to speak easily and fluently is more than just a mere trial. Relaying even the simplest thought is grueling—as well as frustrating and sometimes embarrassing. Well-meaning but patronizing family members offer all manner of useless advice regarding elocution. Speech therapists fill your mouth with marbles and then command you to speak clearly. Telling your children a simple bedtime story is a verbal obstacle course. The thought of standing in front of a microphone summons sheer terror.

And if you are a king, called upon to bolster and unite a fearful nation in the face of war, well, then, the stakes are more than just ease of communication. They are life and death.

His Royal Highness King George VI found himself in this exact position. A stammerer since childhood, no one—least of whom himself—had confidence in his ability to lead the British Empire after his elder brother, David (later King Edward VIII) scandalously abdicated the throne in order to marry American divorcée Wallis Simpson.

But before King George VI becomes king, he is “merely” Prince Albert, father of Elizabeth II (the current queen of England) and husband to Elizabeth, the beloved and now deceased queen mother. In 1925, after Albert’s devastatingly awkward public address to the British Empire Exhibition—if stuttering a few syllables can be considered an address—his wife seeks help from an unlikely source: Lionel Logue.

An eccentric, unemployed Australian actor informally trained in elocution, Lionel is unwaveringly confident in his unorthodox treatments for stuttering. He boldly tells Elizabeth that he will treat Albert only on his turf and by his rules. And by demanding total equality with Albert—whom he even calls Bertie, as the prince’s family members do—Lionel introduces the stuffy royal to the common man’s common life.

The two gradually become friends. Their decades-long relationship produces not only a more confident monarch and better speeches for the British Empire, but a deep camaraderie that helps Albert begin to understand himself and the people he’s leading. And Lionel not only helps the repressed future king find his personal voice, he helps him to speak like a monarch who has a right to be heard.

Positive Elements

Lionel and Albert dearly love their respective wives and children, and Elizabeth is steadfast in her commitment to and love for Albert. She is his comforter, champion and friend who never reveals her own subtle doubts that he will overcome his stammer.

Albert is far more politically and morally discerning than David, and takes the royal family’s duties seriously. He scolds David for his poor leadership on more than one occasion. Hardworking Albert is also tireless in performing the speech exercises Lionel suggests. He continually works to better his speech and prepare for possible kingship even when his personal life is in turmoil. And though he may not always understand the people he will govern, he is determined to lead them well.

Lionel encourages Albert to dig deeply into his lonely childhood memories, thus exposing abuses the prince suffered at the hands of indifferent nannies and frosty, Victorian-era parents. Lionel also offers the future king genuine, unaffected friendship—for perhaps the first time in the royal’s life. He compassionately sees Albert as an emotionally broken but valiant man with tremendous potential for greatness. Lionel, in fact, cares for all his “patients” with the same kindness and dedication.

As a result of his harsh childhood and stammering, Albert has lived in fear most of his life. Lionel tells him there’s hope—that he doesn’t have to be afraid of the things that haunted him when he was young—and that he’s a friend who will always listen.

Spiritual Elements

Mostly stock, cultural expressions: Albert’s father, King George V, says “God bless you” during a Christmas speech. Posters are emblazoned with “God save the king.” God is mentioned during a coronation. Albert publicly announces that Great Britain must commit its wartime cause to God.

As head of the Anglican Church, the king of England is not allowed to marry a divorcée—but David does so anyway, raising the eyebrows and ire of many countrymen.

Sexual Content

David and the twice-divorced Wallis scandalize the world with their love affair. (None of their intimacy is shown, and the phrases “expert ministrations” and “certain skills” stand in for frank descriptions of why David is attracted to her.) Albert tells Lionel of a girl whom he and David pursued in their youth, and dialogue subtly implies that both had sex with her on separate occasions.

Wallis wears a dress with a plunging back. Crude language is used for male genitalia and women’s breasts. Couples kiss.

Violent Content

Prone to fits of temper, Albert yells—especially at Lionel—several times. The threat of war (conveyed via newsreels of Hitler’s zeppelins and marching troops) hangs in the air.

Crude or Profane Language

Close to 20 each of f- and s-words. Christ’s name is abused twice, and God’s is misused at least once. The British crudity “bloody” is used more than a dozen times. Another British profanity, “b-gger,” is used about 10. There’s a handful each of the words “d‑‑n,” “b‑‑tard,” “a‑‑” and “h‑‑‑.” Crude slang is used for sexual anatomy (“t-ts,” “pr–k,” “balls” and “willie”).

Drug and Alcohol Content

People smoke cigarettes and cigars. Of note is that while doctors say the smoke is good for vocal cords, Lionel insists it’s toxic. Alcohol is served at a cocktail party as well as at Lionel’s home. Albert asks for liquor, and Lionel offers him a second drink, presumably to loosen up the ultra-formal royal.

Other Negative Elements

Edward VIII (David) and Wallis are sympathetic toward Hitler, whom they admire. And so, deeply concerned British politicians don’t know which way the monarch will lean politically. Their negative perception of him is strengthened by the fact that before and during his brief reign, David is irresponsible in his duties.

Frightened by the prospect of being crowned king and resentful of Lionel’s informality, Albert pulls rank, harshly and arrogantly calling Logue the disappointing “nobody” son of a brewer. Albert’s younger brother Johnny, who died as a youth, was born “different,” and was hidden away from public view as a result. Albert’s nanny is said to have withheld affection and food from him when he was young—and his parents didn’t notice for three years.

How often have we awkwardly looked away from other people’s disabilities, unable to face their agonizing struggle to accomplish what average folks do with ease?

In The King’s Speech , an entire empire looks away from Albert and his excruciating stutter. Yet he speaks to an audience that is just as fearful as he. When the certainty of a dark and vicious war—and its uncertain outcome—overshadows Great Britain, the nation longs for a leader who will competently guide and encourage citizens to victory. And because they’re not certain Albert is up to the task, we feel their agony just as deeply as we feel his when, at times, he labors to utter even a single word.

People are ashamed for him. Embarrassed because of him. And yet they simultaneously have their fingers crossed for him because he is their only hope.

Today we have the comfort of the historical record. We know how the story ends. The actual King George VI did indeed have a stutter (though its severity is debatable), and overcame enough of his oral issues to address his people with only periodic hesitations. But he never fully overcame his impediment, just as the onscreen king doesn’t. Instead, he faced it, tackling his limitations with Lionel’s help and encouragement. Perhaps the fact that Albert is never completely cured is the most inspiring reminder that courage rarely comes in the absence of fear or weakness. Courage is action in the face of these things, and the elder King George says Albert has more bravery than all of his brothers combined. Lionel agrees and helps Albert to see it too. So much so that the once ineffective King George VI becomes a national symbol of pride and wartime resistance during World War II.

This touching, masterfully acted and subtly comedic film could easily have been PG-rated, making its stirring message readily available for teens and families hungry for an inspiring life lesson devoted to clawing one’s way past shortcomings and limitations. Instead, director Tom Hooper opted for a profanity-laden R rating. Several times Albert angrily blurts out long streams of curse words during speech therapy, since the only times he doesn’t stutter are when he sings and when he swears.

Regarding the foul language and its resulting rating, star Colin Firth told The National Post , “This isn’t a non-issue. I get that people don’t want their small children hearing these strong words—I don’t like them. … I don’t want my kids thinking it’s a good way to use language—language is more beautiful than that. It should be more thought about than that. It has more power than that. That’s lazy and ugly—but that’s not the case in this movie. [The foul language usage is] not vicious, it’s not sexual, and it’s not lazy—it’s anything but. These are tools, these forbidden words have become momentary tools to get a guy to break out of extreme repression. Then he immediately gets rather sheepish and apologizes. There couldn’t be a more harmless context. It doesn’t teach your kids to sprinkle your language with these words or direct them against people. I would hate to deny kids in that age bracket, or discourage them from seeing a film which has so much to say to people that age.”

Firth continues, “As far as the rest of public opinion is concerned, certainly in our industry, I’d be kicking in a door. Because everyone seems to be in harmony on the subject.”

While many will see his point, not everyone is in harmony. Context , when it comes to obscenity, is not the end of the discussion for most families. Surely it’s fair to ask why a movie of this caliber must be first edited (by way of an airline, a TV network or a ClearPlay machine) before the very kids Firth wants to see influenced can reasonably encounter it.

A postscript: The Weinstein Company initially sued the MPAA for assigning The King’s Speech an R rating, arguing that, in fact, context was the end of the discussion. “While we respect the MPAA,” said owner Harvey Weinstein, “I think we can all agree that we are living with an outdated ratings system that gives torture porn, horror and ultraviolent films the same rating as films with so-called inappropriate language.”

After the film won Best Picture, among other Oscars, at the 2011 Academy Awards, Weinstein decided to make a few changes to the film’s language, at least enough to secure a PG-13 rating for a a new version. A statement from the studio declared that the new “family-friendly version” was created for “those to whom it speaks most directly—young people who are troubled by stuttering, bullying and similar trials.” The decision was met with instant derision from the film’s star. “I don’t support it,” said Colin Firth, who won a Best Actor award for his role as the king. “I think the film has its integrity as it stands. I’m not someone who’s casual about that kind of language. I take my children to [soccer] games. I hate hearing that kind of language in their ears, but I won’t deny them the experience of a live game. … I still haven’t met the person who’d object to it.”

Be that as it may, the changes, for many moviegoing families, will go unnoticed because the expletives in question haven’t been muted or bleeped, they’ve merely been replaced with other expletives. Specifically, the long series of f-words that the king blurts out is now a long series of s-words. And one full f-word remains intact at the outset of the outburst.

PluggedIn Staff

Reviews from previous PluggedIn Staff members

Steven Isaac

Latest reviews.

Spy x Family Code: White

Villains Inc.

Rebel Moon – Part Two: The Scargiver

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare

Weekly reviews straight to your inbox.

Discovering good movies, one bad movie at a time

The King’s Speech (2010)

Talking it out, connect with us.

Support The Show

The King's Speech

56 pages • 1 hour read

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapters 1-3

Chapters 4-6

Chapters 7-9

Chapters 10-12

Chapters 13-16

Key Figures

Symbols & Motifs

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Discussion Questions

Summary and Study Guide

The King’s Speech is a 2010 non-fiction book about King George VI and how he was treated for a speech impediment by the Australian Lionel Logue . Their unlikely friendship is credited for saving the British monarchy during a difficult time in world history. The King’s Speech was co-authored by Mark Logue (grandson of Lionel Logue) and Peter Conradi (an accomplished author of historical nonfiction) as an accompaniment to the Oscar-winning 2010 film of the same name.

Plot Summary

Get access to this full Study Guide and much more!

7,500+ In-Depth Study Guides
4,900+ Quick-Read Plot Summaries
Downloadable PDFs

The book begins in May 1937. King George VI wakes up on the morning of his coronation, already nervous. The British monarchy is facing “one of the greatest crises” (16) in its history following the abdication of Edward VIII. Also in London, an Australian speech therapist named Lionel Logue wakes up and begins to travel to the coronation with his wife Myrtle. The King is expected to deliver a speech, and the stammer he has suffered from since childhood has made this a difficult prospect. The streets are packed as the crowds gather to watch the ceremony. The coronation goes well. That evening, Logue travels to Buckingham Palace to help the King prepare for a radio broadcast. The next day, the King’s speech is hailed as a success.

Logue was born in Adelaide in 1880. He develops an interest in elocution and begins to perform speeches onstage for rapt audiences. He meets and marries a woman named Myrtle, and the two have a son together. They travel the world in 1908, leaving their son Laurie at home. They plan to move to Britain but do not do so until 1924. Logue becomes famous in Australia for his skills as a speech therapist.

The SuperSummary difference

8x more resources than SparkNotes and CliffsNotes combined
Study Guides you won ' t find anywhere else
100+ new titles every month

By the time the Logue family moves to Great Britain, they have three sons. The country is still recovering from World War I and an economic recession. Logue sets up a speech therapy practice. He develops a number of key techniques to treat speech impediments.

The future King George VI is born in December 1895. His grandmother is Queen Victoria. With his brother, he is raised mostly by nurses and governesses, leading to a distant relationship with his parents. Whereas his brother is charming and fun, he has developed a terrible stammer. Bertie (as he is known) attends naval college and does not excel. His father is eventually proclaimed King. Bertie struggles to give speeches and frequently falls ill. In adulthood, Bertie slowly becomes his father’s favorite while his brother argues with the King and has developed a reputation for socializing. Bertie meets Elizabeth, and they marry, which pleases Bertie’s father, though his stammer remains an issue. Public speaking makes him incredibly nervous. One speech ends in humiliation for Bertie. Logue hears him speak and believes he can help. Bertie has sought medical advice, but it has always failed him. At Elizabeth’s request, Bertie agrees to meet with Logue.

Logue and Bertie meet at Logue’s office. Logue declares that he can cure the stammer but demands that his patient apply a tremendous amount of effort. They meet often, and two well-delivered speeches are seen as evidence of improvement. A royal trip to Australia goes very well, and Bertie is commended for his speech. The lessons continue.

Logue takes Myrtle to the Palace, where they are presented at court. Bertie’s improvement is noted in the press, though Logue declines to answer questions on the matter. The story is eventually published, and Logue is credited for his work, becoming famous. Bertie continues to toil and the beginnings of a real friendship between him and Logue emerge.

The narrative moves into the 1930s. Bertie is becoming more involved in the monarchy while his daughters are becoming world famous. He visits Logue less frequently but remains in touch. The Great Depression affects both men’s families. King George V dies in 1936, precipitating change for both men.

Edward takes the throne as a popular King, but his romantic relationship with twice-divorced American Wallis Simpson is scandalous. When he announces that he wants to marry Wallis, he is told it is not possible. Edward abdicates the throne. Bertie takes the throne as his brother leaves the country. Bertie becomes King George VI. His speech impediment is now an even bigger issue, even if his treatment has been going well.

Logue helps the new King prepare for his coronation. There will be a speech to the crowd and a radio broadcast for the Empire. Rehearsals do not go well, though the Queen is a calming influence. A back-up recording is made from practice speeches in the event that something should go wrong.

Both speeches are a triumph. Logue continues to help the King prepare his speeches. The monarch’s new workload is notably draining. The King delivers a Christmas day speech in the mold of his father, which Logue helps prepare. They spend Christmas day together, and the King gives Logue a present as a means of thanking him. Myrtle returns to Australia, where she is treated like a celebrity. Everyone wants to know about her husband’s work with the King.

As Europe moves closer to the Second World War, the King travels to Europe. He delivers speeches and meets with President Roosevelt. Logue grows closer to the royal family, and when the King returns from America, they chat informally about the trip while preparing for a speech.

The Second World War begins. The Logues’ Bavarian cook returns to Germany. Air raid sirens encourage everyone to move to shelters. The King and Logue prepare a special radio broadcast to reassure people. Rationing is introduced. The Christmas speech becomes a yearly tradition.

The war continues. The King’s hair is beginning to grey as he and Logue prepare a speech for Empire Day. Logue listens to the speech, marveling at the progress the King has made. The King is proud. The Nazis are winning in the war. Logue’s eldest son is conscripted. London is bombed. Logue assists with another Christmas speech. As he listens, he stops following along because he realizes that there is no need.

By 1943, the war has turned in the Allies’ favor. The King visits North Africa. All three Logue boys are now serving in the military. Logue’s business suffers due to the war and the King donates £500 as a means of thanking Logue. They prepare a speech for the eve of D-Day, which is a great success. The war continues, as does the bombing of London. The King delivers the Christmas speech without Logue, and it is a great success.

The Allies win the war. The entire country celebrates. Later, while Logue is undergoing surgery, Myrtle suffers a heart attack. Logue is devastated. Logue continues to work, though he sells the large (and now empty) family house. He is lonely and develops an interest in psychics. The King’s daughter marries, and the King’s health worsens.

The King delivers his final Christmas speech in 1951 and dies in his sleep a short time later. He and Logue corresponded up until his death. Logue recovers from his own illness to write to the Queen, mourning the loss of her husband. Princess Elizabeth is crowned Queen Elizabeth II. Logue dies in 1953 as a result of kidney failure. He does not survive to see Elizabeth’s coronation, though he is invited.

Don't Miss Out!

Access Study Guide Now

Featured Collections

British Literature

View Collection

Inspiring Biographies

Rev. King spoke at the Illinois State Armory in 1965, his visit will be commemorated

The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. may never have made it to Springfield except for a unique set of events.

King delivered his only Springfield speech to some 4,000 delegates − and apparently a few curious State of Illinois employees − at an AFL-CIO convention at th e Illinois State Armo ry on Oct. 7, 1965.

A bronze plaque will commemorate the visit sometime after a three-year, $122 million renovation on the downtown Armory is completed by mid-2025.

Doss retiring as Lanphier High School principal on Feb. 27

Several events in Springfield pay tribute to King, whose birthday is marked Monday.

King's Springfield speech spoke to the intersection of the labor movement and the fight for civil rights, said State Sen. Doris Turner, D-Springfield, who helped champion the memorialization of the speech.

By the time of his appearance, King was a nationally recognized civil rights leader.

But King almost didn't make it to Springfield.

Longtime AFL-CIO president Reuben Soderstrom , who first met King in Florida in 1961, invited him to speak at Illinois’ 1963 convention, said longtime labor journalist and Soderstrom biographer Chris Stevens of Peoria. Instead, King sent friend and mentor Ralph Abernathy.

King was scheduled to speak at the gathering in Peoria in 1964, but he was tending to his ill father, the Rev. Martin Luther King Sr. , and President Lyndon B. Johnson stepped in, Stevens said.

The state convention rotated between cities and Springfield was hosting when King accepted in 1965, Stevens said.

King flew from Atlanta to Chicago and then on to Springfield. Early in the speech, King noted the choppiness of the flight. "I am always happy to get on the ground. I don't want to leave you with the impression that I don't have faith in God in the air. It is simply that I have had more experience with (God) on the ground."

King also acknowledged he was in the city of Abraham Lincoln, "the man whose sacred memory will remain a part of our thoughts as long as there is any memory in this great nation."

Bishop Jacson L. Moody studied King's theology at Morehouse School of Religion but wasn't familiar with the Springfield speech until he moved to town.

Moody, the pastor of the Redemption Center church in Springfield, recreated the speech at the Springfield and Central Illinois African American History Museum in 2018.

Moody said one particular line still resonates with him: King's call for a guaranteed annual wage.

"That's not something people are really thinking about," Moody said. "We don't mind talking about minimum wage as far as hourly, but he called for a guaranteed annual wage. That was unheard of. With that, he was arguing it was a basic human and moral right. That's major."

While King had "no fear of speaking truth to power," Moody said, others, including some clergy members, weren't as intent on hearing his message.

"As beloved as King is now, and history has been kind, in the moment there were people who didn't care for what they determined was his radical thought process," Moody said. "King was on the right side of history and speaking out on those things and sharing that there was a line that correlated the civil rights movement into wage rights and labor rights but also end of the struggle for underpaid workers. It was one straight line for him. There was nothing that was mutually exclusive."

King, Moody said, also incorporated parts of the "I Have a Dream" speech into the Springfield speech and at the end used the familiar "free at last" refrain, "a calling card for King."

Stevens, who has researched King's speech and appearance in Springfield, said he tried to track down an audio recording of the speech to no avail.

While the speech was only open to credentialed delegates, an account by the Illinois State Register (an afternoon paper and a forerunner to The State Journal-Register) said several state workers on their lunch hour took in the speech.

Stevens was told that King may have been targeted here.

Robert G. "Bob" Gibson , the Illinois AFL-CIO community services director at the time, had to hustle King out of the Armory after the speech, said Stevens, because a bomb threat was phoned into the Armory.

Stevens said Gibson, who went on to serve as the state labor union's president, recounted the story in an interview shortly before he died in 2021.

Stevens said Gibson recalled driving King around to various Abraham Lincoln sites in Springfield when the bomb threat was made known.

King didn't return to the Armory, Stevens noted and took a flight out of Springfield the same day.

While the newspaper didn't mention the bomb threat, it did report that King had plans to return home after the speech.

Another newspaper story also mentioned that King addressed a news conference before he left.

Turner and Robert Peters, D-Chicago, helped pass a Senate Joint Resolution officially acknowledging the commemoration of King's speech first advanced in 2020 by Turner's predecessor, State Sen. Andy Manar, D-Bunker Hill. Manar, who worked with Illinois AFL-CIO president Tim Drea in drafting the resolution, is now the state's deputy governor.

The seven-story Armory, which dates from 1937, will be used for state offices once renovations are complete.

Turner, speaking earlier this week, said the resolution caught her interest shortly after she was appointed to fill Manar's 48th District seat in February 2021.

"It was very important for me to see it through just because of the importance of the subject matter," Turner said.

Another monument in Springfield to King, a statue across from the Illinois Capitol Building that was vandalized on Sept. 11, 2022, may make it back to Freedom Corner by the spring.

Max Walczyk, a spokesman for the Illinois Secretary of State, said in an email Thursday that a Chicago-based restoration company is nearly finished with making repairs the statue.

Turner said there wasn't an exact line item for the plaque but that "funds will be found."

The commemoration was important, Turner said, on a personal note.

"I believe the labor movement really worked hand-in-hand to build the middle class and in a lot of ways I am a direct product of that partnership because my father (Thomas Porter, who worked at Allis-Chalmers , later Fiat-Allis) was a very proud UAW member," Turner said. "I know first-hand what that union membership meant to my family, meant to my mother even after my father died. So I think it's really important to commemorate that.

"If you look at all of the big moments that Dr. King had, you will see labor with him."

Contact Steven Spearie at 217-622-1788; [email protected]; or X, twitter.com/@StevenSpearie.

‘I am prepared to die’: Mandela’s speech which shook apartheid

Sixty years ago during the Rivonia Trial in South Africa, Nelson Mandela delivered one of the most famous speeches of the 20th century. He expected to be sentenced to death but instead lived to see his dream ‘of a democratic and free society’ realised.

“Accused number one” had been speaking from the dock for almost three hours by the time he uttered the words that would ultimately change South Africa. The racially segregated Pretoria courtroom listened in silence as Nelson Mandela’s account of his lifelong struggle against white minority rule reached its conclusion. Judge Quintus de Wet managed not to look at Mandela for the majority of his address. But before accused number one delivered his final lines, defence lawyer Joel Joffe remembered, “Mandela paused for a long time and looked squarely at the judge” before saying:

“During my lifetime, I have dedicated my life to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against Black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal for which I hope to live for and to see realised. But, my Lord, if it needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.”

Keep reading

South africa seeks to stop auction of historic nelson mandela artefacts, a way of saying ‘we shall overcome’: playing football on robben island, history illustrated: mandela – south africa’s first black preside, king charles to host sa’s ramaphosa in first state visit of reign.

After he spoke that last sentence, novelist and activist Nadine Gordimer, who was in the courtroom on April 20, 1964, said, “The strangest and most moving sound I have ever heard from human throats came from the Black side of the court audience. It was short, sharp and terrible: something between a sigh and a groan.”

This was because there was a very good chance that Mandela and his co-accused would be sentenced to death for their opposition to the apartheid government. His lawyers had actually tried to talk him out of including the “I am prepared to die” line because they thought it might be seen as a provocation. But as Mandela later wrote in his autobiography, “I felt we were likely to hang no matter what we said, so we might as well say what we truly believed.”

‘The trial that changed South Africa’

The Rivonia Trial – in which Mandela, Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki and seven other anti-apartheid activists were charged with sabotage – was the third and final time Mandela would stand accused in an apartheid court. From 1956 to 1961, he had been involved in the Treason Trial, a long-running embarrassment for the apartheid government, which would ultimately see all 156 of the accused acquitted because the state failed to prove they had committed treason.

And in 1962, he had been charged with leaving the country illegally and leading Black workers in a strike. He knew he was guilty on both counts, so he decided to put the apartheid government on trial. On the first day of the case, Mandela, known for his natty Western dress, arrived in traditional Xhosa attire to the shock of all present. He led his own defence and did not call any witnesses. Instead, he gave what has been remembered as the “Black man in a white court” speech, during which he asserted that “posterity will pronounce that I was innocent and that the criminals that should have been brought before this court are the members of the Verwoerd government,” a reference to Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd.

The Rivonia Trial, which kicked off in October 1963, was named after the Johannesburg suburb where Liliesleaf Farm was located. From 1961 to 1963, the Liliesleaf museum website notes, the farm served “as the secret headquarters and nerve centre” of the African National Congress (ANC), the South African Communist Party (SACP) and Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK, the military wing of the ANC). On July 11, 1963, acting on a tip-off, the police raided Liliesleaf, seizing many incriminating documents and arresting the core leadership of the underground liberation movement. Mandela, who was serving a five-year sentence on Robben Island from his conviction in the 1962 trial, was flown to Pretoria to take his place as accused number one.

Instead of charging the men with high treason, State Prosecutor Percy Yutar opted for the easier-to-prove crime of sabotage – the definition of which was so broad that it included misdemeanours such as trespassing – and which had recently been made a capital offence by the government. Thanks to the evidence seized from Liliesleaf, which included several documents handwritten by Mandela and the testimony of Bruno Mtolo (referred to as Mr X throughout the trial), a regional commander of MK who had turned state witness, Yutar was virtually assured of convictions for the main accused.

In his autobiography, Mandela explains their defence strategy: “Right from the start we had made it clear that we intended to use the trial not as a test of the law but as a platform for our beliefs. We would not deny, for example, that we had been responsible for acts of sabotage. We would not deny that a group of us had turned away from non-violence. We were not concerned with getting off or lessening our punishment, but with making the trial strengthen the cause for which we were struggling – at whatever cost to ourselves. We would not defend ourselves in a legal sense so much as in a moral sense.”

The accused and their lawyers decided that Mandela would open the defence case not as a witness – who would be subject to cross-examination – but with a statement from the dock. This format would allow him to speak uninterrupted, but it carried less legal weight.

Mandela writes that he spent “about a fortnight drafting [his] address, working mainly in my cell in the evenings”. He first read it to his co-accused, who approved the text with a few tweaks, before passing it to lead defence lawyer Bram Fischer. Fischer was concerned that the final paragraph might be taken the wrong way by the judge, so he got another member of the defence team, Hal Hanson, to read it. Hanson was unequivocal: “If Mandela reads this in court, they will take him straight to the back of the courthouse and string him up.”

“Nelson remained adamant” that the line should stay, wrote George Bizos, another member of the defence team. Bizos eventually persuaded Mandela to tweak his wording: “I proposed that Nelson say he hoped to live for and achieve his ideals but if needs be was prepared to die.”

On the evening of April 19, Bizos got Mandela’s permission to take a copy of his statement to Gordimer. The respected British journalist Anthony Sampson, who knew Mandela well, happened to be staying with her and he retired to Gordimer’s study with the text. “What seemed like hours” later, Bizos wrote, Sampson “eventually returned, obviously moved by what he had read”. Sampson made no major changes to the text, but he did advise moving some of the paragraphs because he felt journalists were likely to read the beginning and the end properly and skim over the rest.

Gordimer does not seem to have suggested changes to the address, but she did see several drafts. She, too, was happy with the final version.

INTERACTIVE Nelson Mandela Rivonia Trial I am Prepared to Die-1713266537

The statement from the dock

Yutar, who had been hoodwinked by the defence team’s constant requests for court transcripts into spending weeks preparing to cross-examine Mandela, was visibly shocked when Fischer announced that Mandela would instead be making a statement from the dock. He even tried to get the judge to explain to Mandela that he was committing a legal error. But the usually stone-faced judge laughed as he dismissed the request. Mandela, himself a lawyer, was represented by some of the country’s finest legal minds. He knew exactly what he was doing.

“My Lord, I am the first accused,” Mandela said. “I admit immediately that I was one of the persons who helped to form Umkhonto we Sizwe and that I played a prominent role in its affairs until I was arrested in August 1962.” Thanks to the recent recovery of the original recordings of Mandela’s statement, we now know that he spoke for 176 minutes , not the four and a half hours regularly cited.

As Martha Evans, author of Speeches That Shaped South Africa, explained, Mandela “candidly confessed some of the crimes levelled against him before giving a cogent and detailed account of the conditions and events that had led to the establishment of MK and the adoption of the armed struggle”.

He spoke at length of the ANC’s tradition of nonviolence and explained why he had planned sabotage: “I did not plan it in a spirit of recklessness nor because I have any love for violence. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation that had arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation and oppression of my people by the whites.”

The final section of the address focused on inequality in South Africa and humanised Black South Africans in ways that Mandela argued the country’s white population rarely acknowledged:

“Whites tend to regard Africans as a separate breed. They do not look upon them as people with families of their own. They do not realise that we have emotions, that we fall in love like white people do, that we want to be with our wives and children like white people want to be with theirs, that we want to earn money, enough money to support our families properly.”

And: “Above all, my Lord, we want equal political rights because without them our disabilities will be permanent. I know this sounds revolutionary to the whites in this country because the majority of voters will be Africans. This makes the white man fear democracy. But this fear cannot be allowed to stand in the way of the only solution which will guarantee racial harmony and freedom for all.”

Interestingly, Gordimer noted that the speech “read much better than it was spoken. Mandela’s delivery was very disappointing indeed, hesitant, parsonical (if there is such a word), boring. Only at the end did the man come through.”

Hanging by a thread

After Mandela’s address, several of the accused subjected themselves to cross-examination. Gordimer was particularly impressed by Walter Sisulu: “Sisulu was splendid. What a paradox – he is almost uneducated while [Mandela] has a law degree! He was lucid and to the point – and never missed a point in his replies to Yutar.”

The defence team enjoyed a number of minor victories with Judge de Wet fairly regularly telling the court that Yutar had failed to prove one point or another. After final arguments were heard in mid-May, court was adjourned for three weeks for the judge to consider his verdict.

For the main accused, that verdict was always going to be guilty. Avoiding the noose became the defence team’s number one priority. In the courtroom, this entailed asking Alan Paton, a world famous novelist who was leader of the vehemently anti-apartheid Liberal Party, to give evidence in mitigation of sentence.

But the real action happened outside the court, Sampson wrote in his authorised biography of Mandela: “The accused had been buoyed up by the growing support from abroad, not only from many African countries but also, more to Mandela’s surprise, from Britain. … On May 7, 1964, the British Prime Minister, Alec Douglas-Home, offered to send a private message to Verwoerd about the trial. But Sir Hugh Stephenson [Britain’s ambassador to South Africa] recommended that ‘no more pressure should be exerted’ and, contrary to some published reports, there is no evidence the message was sent. When the South African Ambassador called on the Foreign Office that month, he was told that the government was now under less pressure to take a stronger line against South Africa, though death sentences would bring the matter to a head again.”

A week before the verdicts, Bizos visited British Consul-General Leslie Minford at his Pretoria home. “As I was leaving, Leslie put his arm around my shoulders and said, ‘George, there won’t be a death sentence.’ I did not ask him how he knew. For one thing, he had downed a number of whiskies. Certainly, I felt I could not rely on the information nor could I tell the team or our anxious clients.”

Upping the stakes further was the decision by Mandela, Sisulu and Mbeki to not appeal their sentence – even if it were death. As he listened to sentencing arguments, Mandela clutched a handwritten note that concluded with the words: “If I must die, let me declare for all to know that I will meet my fate as a man.”

Paton and Hanson spoke in mitigation of sentence on the morning of June 12, 1964. Bizos noted, “Judge de Wet not only took no note of what was being said but he appeared not to be listening.” He had already made his mind up, and when the formalities were over, he announced: “I have decided not to impose the supreme penalty, which in a case like this would usually be the penalty for such a crime. But consistent with my duty, that is the only leniency which I can show. The sentence in the case of all the accused will be one of life imprisonment.”

Professor Thula Simpson, the leading historian of MK, told Al Jazeera, “There is no evidence that De Wet was leaned on by the state. I don’t believe there’s any evidence for this being a political rather than a judicial judgement.”

Professor Roger Southall, author of dozens of books on Southern African politics, agreed. “At the time, there was a lot of speculation about whether there was pressure on the SA government to ensure that capital punishment was not imposed,” he told Al Jazeera. “But there is also no proof that the SA government intervened. That remains an unanswered question. We have to presume that the judge knew the international and local climate.”

Business as usual?

“Rivonia got a lot of global publicity,” Southall said. “But once the trial ended, it seemed like Mandela had been forgotten.” Mandela and other senior ANC figures were either locked up on Robben Island or were living in relative obscurity in exile. “Capital came pouring into South Africa at a rate that’s never been equalled since,” Southall continued. “The apartheid government seemed totally in control. The resistance was dead. It was a thoroughly grim period for the ANC.”

This only started to change in 1973, Southall said, “with the Durban strikes and the revival of the trade union movement”, which had been battered into submission. The rebirth of the Black trade union movement signalled the beginning of a new phase of opposition politics. Things ratcheted up several notches on June 16, 1976, when apartheid policemen opened fire on a peaceful protest of schoolchildren in the Black township of Soweto, killing 15 people. In the eight months that followed, violence spread across South Africa, killing about 700 people.

The resuscitation of Black opposition to apartheid under a new band of leaders coincided with the decline of the economy. After the Soweto uprising, foreign investors fled South Africa in their droves, laying bare the fundamental flaws of the apartheid government’s dependence on cheap labour and mining and its point-blank refusal to meaningfully educate people of colour. The apartheid government spent about 12 times more per child on white schoolchildren than it did on Black ones.

By the 1980s, even the apartheid government could see something had to change, and in 1983, Prime Minister PW Botha announced plans to include multiracial and Indian South Africans, but not Black South Africans, in a new “tricameral” parliament. His plan backfired spectacularly, uniting the opposition like never before under the newly formed United Democratic Front (UDF). One of the UDF’s key demands was the unconditional release of all political prisoners, especially Mandela. Soon after its launch in August 1983, the UDF numbered almost 1,000 different organisations from all segments of South African society. Botha didn’t know what had hit him.

When, in 1984, Oliver Tambo, the ANC’s exiled leader, asked his supporters to “make South Africa ungovernable”, the townships rose up. Things got so bad in 1985 that Botha declared a state of emergency – but this was also the year in which tentative secret talks with Mandela began.

An icon re-emerges

“In the late 1970s, you started getting occasional demands that Mandela be released,” Southall said. By the mid-1980s, “Free Nelson Mandela” became a constant and global refrain with the “I am prepared to die” statement being quoted at rallies and emblazoned on T-shirts. “On one level, the ANC ‘invented’ this version of Mandela,” Southall said. “Until 1976, the apartheid government had done a very good job of erasing him from public memory.”

What might have happened if Mandela had been sentenced to death at Rivonia? One does not need to look far for a possible answer. The other poster boy of the global anti-apartheid movement in the 1980s was Steve Biko (subject of the Peter Gabriel hit song), the young leader of the Black Consciousness movement, who had been tortured to death by apartheid police in 1977. “You can also have myths develop when you execute people,” Simpson said. “If they had executed Mandela, he would have been a different icon in a different struggle.”

A dream realised

On February 11, 1990, Mandela was released from prison. From the balcony of Cape Town City Hall, he addressed his supporters for the first time since Rivonia. He opened his speech by saying: “I stand here before you not as a prophet but as a humble servant of you, the people. Your tireless and heroic sacrifices have made it possible for me to be here today. I, therefore, place the remaining years of my life in your hands.”

He ended by quoting the final lines of his 1964 statement from the dock, explaining that “they are true today as they were then.” Over the course of the next decade, as Mandela first navigated the treacherous path to democracy and then served as the country’s first democratically elected president, he lived out his vision of a “democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities”.

When the ANC’s Chris Hani was assassinated by an apartheid supporter in 1993, Mandela assumed the moral leadership of the country by urging his incensed supporters not to derail the peace process. After becoming president, he engaged in numerous public shows of reconciliation: He went for tea with the widow of slain apartheid Prime Minister Verwoerd, and he donned the Springbok rugby jersey (for many, a symbol of white supremacy) when he presented the almost entirely white South African team with the World Cup trophy in 1995.

When Mandela died in 2013, US President Barack Obama spoke at his memorial, famously – and predictably – quoting the final paragraph of the statement from the dock at Rivonia. By that stage, there were already some in South Africa who felt that Mandela was a “sellout” because he had been too forgiving of whites during the transition.

Now, more than a decade later as inequality continues to plague the country and South Africa stands on the cusp of its most competitive general election in 30 years of democracy, it is common to hear young Black South Africans accuse Mandela of selling out . Southall does not take such claims too seriously: “People who say he’s a sellout are either too young or too forgetful to appreciate how close we came to civil war. Mandela played a huge role in pulling off the peaceful transition.”

“Now, after 30 years of democracy, there is still a tension between white domination and Black domination,” Simpson said. “South Africa is not what Mandela dreamed of. He might be turning in his grave, but we can’t forget that many of the policies that have gone wrong were introduced by him. He might have turned things around, but he might have not.”

“You can’t blame Mandela for where we are now,” Southall said. “There are individual things he got wrong. But he also got a lot of things right.”

Mandela’s is one of the 12 remarkable lives covered in Nick Dall’s recent book, Legends: People Who Changed South Africa for the Better, co-written with Matthew Blackman.

IMAGES

The King's Speech Final Scene
The Kings Speech final speech #best scene# entry into war
The King's Speech (2010)
Prime Video: The King's Speech
The King's Speech (2010)
The King's Speech (2010)

VIDEO

The King's Speech Exercise
The King's Speech Speech Scene
The King's Speech End Credits (Fox Version)
The King's Speech Full Movie Facts And Review
The King's Speech Full Movie Review
The King's Speech

COMMENTS

The King's Speech Ending Explained
Table of Contents. "The King's Speech," a historical drama released in 2010, directed by Tom Hooper and written by David Seidler, captivates audiences with its portrayal of King George VI's journey to overcome his stammer with the help of Australian speech therapist Lionel Logue. The film, which stars Colin Firth as King George VI and ...
"The King's Speech" (2010)
Movie Speech from The King's Speech- King George VI BBC Address to the Nation. : M ovie S peech. "The King's Speech" (2010) King George VI BBC Radio Address to the Nation Announcing WWII Outbreak. In this grave hour, perhaps the most fateful in our history, I send to every household of my peoples, both at home and overseas, this message, spoken ...
The King's Speech
The King's Speech is a 2010 historical drama film directed by Tom Hooper and written by David Seidler. Colin Firth plays the future King George VI who, to cope with a stammer, sees Lionel Logue, an Australian speech and language therapist played by Geoffrey Rush.The men become friends as they work together, and after his brother abdicates the throne, the new king relies on Logue to help him ...
The King's Speech Ending Scene Speech
Colin's Firth's brilliant performance, the final epic and ending speech.
The King's Speech movie review (2010)
"The King's Speech" tells the story of a man compelled to speak to the world with a stammer. It must be painful enough for one who stammers to speak to another person. To face a radio microphone and know the British Empire is listening must be terrifying. At the time of the speech mentioned in this title, a quarter of the Earth's population was in the Empire, and of course much of North ...
The King's Speech (2010)
The King's Speech: Directed by Tom Hooper. With Colin Firth, Helena Bonham Carter, Derek Jacobi, Robert Portal. The story of King George VI, his unexpected ascension to the throne of the British Empire in 1936, and the speech therapist who helped the unsure monarch overcome his stammer.
The King's Speech
Rated: 5/5 • Apr 1, 2023. England's Prince Albert (Colin Firth) must ascend the throne as King George VI, but he has a speech impediment. Knowing that the country needs her husband to be able to ...
'The King's Speech' With Colin Firth
Directed by Tom Hooper. Biography, Drama, History. PG-13. 1h 58m. By Manohla Dargis. Nov. 25, 2010. British films that make it to American screens these days often fall into two distinct niches ...
The King's Speech
The King's Speech — Film Review. Colin Firth, following up on his Oscar-nominated role in "A Single Man," now can claim a place among Britain's finest film actors with his performance as the ...
The King's Speech Review
Original Title: King's Speech , The. Some films turn out to be unexpectedly good. Not that you've written them off, only they ply their craft on the hush-hush. Before we even took our seats ...
The King's Speech: Analysis
Get all the details on The King's Speech: Analysis. Description, analysis, and more, so you can understand the ins and outs of The King's Speech. More on The King's Speech ... What's Up With the Ending? King George VI made Lionel Logue a Commander of the Royal Victorian Order in 1944. This high honour from a grateful King made Lionel part of ...
The King's Speech Final Scene
About Press Copyright Contact us Creators Advertise Developers Terms Privacy Policy & Safety How YouTube works Test new features NFL Sunday Ticket Press Copyright ...
The King's Speech (2010)
Logue & Bertie become friends. On 20 January 1936 George V dies, and David, the Prince of Wales (Guy Pearce) accedes to the throne as King Edward VIII, & wants to marry Wallis Simpson (Eve Best), an American divorcee, which would provoke a constitutional crisis. Bertie confronts David, who only accuses Bertie of having designs of his own ...
The King's Speech
The King's Speech - review. W H Auden wrote his poem "September 1, 1939" while sitting in a New York bar: "Uncertain and afraid/ As the clever hopes expire/ Of a low dishonest decade." The King ...
The Kings Speech
the last speech from the great movie the kings speech
The King's Speech Review
The King's Speech, however, is an intelligent film with beautiful direction by Hooper, that manages to offer a charm and sense of humor that even audiences at the megaplex will enjoy (not just the local independent theater). If you're still unfamiliar with the story of King George VI, or subsequently The King's Speech, here's the ...
Movie Review: The King's Speech (2010)
Fortunately, the majority of the film isn't about politics, instead succeeding because of its very touching human component. And thanks to the chemistry between the film's leading actors, The King's Speech goes past being just a good film to being a gr-gr-gr-gr-eat film. Critical Movie Critic Rating: 4. Movie Review: Yogi Bear (2010)
The King's Speech
A postscript: The Weinstein Company initially sued the MPAA for assigning The King's Speech an R rating, arguing that, in fact, context was the end of the discussion. "While we respect the MPAA," said owner Harvey Weinstein, "I think we can all agree that we are living with an outdated ratings system that gives torture porn, horror and ...
The King's Speech (2010)
The King's Speech is altogether less substantial than it seems like it ought to be, but not any more substantial than it thinks it is, and though this is not necessarily a merit in a film with a cameo by Adolf Hitler, it's hard to argue with a good light-hearted lark every now and then. Somewhat based on history, with the embellishments that ...
The King's Speech Summary and Study Guide
The King's Speech is a 2010 non-fiction book about King George VI and how he was treated for a speech impediment by the Australian Lionel Logue.Their unlikely friendship is credited for saving the British monarchy during a difficult time in world history. The King's Speech was co-authored by Mark Logue (grandson of Lionel Logue) and Peter Conradi (an accomplished author of historical ...
The King's Speech (10/12) Movie CLIP
The King's Speech movie clips: http://j.mp/1x2C3KRBUY THE MOVIE: http://amzn.to/zoi2r4Don't miss the HOTTEST NEW TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/1u2y6prCLIP DESCRIPT...
Watch The King's Speech
During a tense period in history, King George VI struggles to communicate to the public and seeks help from speech therapist Lionel Logue. Watch trailers & learn more.
King's 1965 speech in Springfield will be memorialized with ...
King delivered his only Springfield speech to some 4,000 delegates − and apparently a few curious State of Illinois employees − at an AFL-CIO convention at th e Illinois State Armo ry on Oct ...
'I am prepared to die': Mandela's speech which shook apartheid
By the mid-1980s, "Free Nelson Mandela" became a constant and global refrain with the "I am prepared to die" statement being quoted at rallies and emblazoned on T-shirts. "On one level ...
Chaos in Dubai as UAE records heaviest rainfall in 75 years
Chaos ensued in the United Arab Emirates after the country witnessed the heaviest rainfall in 75 years, with some areas recording more than 250 mm of precipitation in fewer than 24 hours, the ...
The King's Speech
The King's SpeechThis is a 2010 British historical drama film. Actor Colin Firth played the future King George VI who suffers from stammer. And in order to c...
Parliamentary researcher charged with spying for China
A parliamentary researcher has been charged with carrying out espionage work on behalf of China. The Metropolitan Police announced Christopher Cash had been charged alongside another man ...