Escape to the Movies: The Kings Speech

[Mr.Squishy]

There's a staggering and terrifying amount of sheep here just taking Bob's word at face value and agreeing in their typical dullard fashion with a "yeah bro, the academy is TOTALLY stupid" without any damn idea what the reality is.

The academy isn't some group of ten old guys sitting in darkened rooms like Bob, in a hilariously hypocritical conspiracy theorist way, wants people to see, but rather a group of two thousand or more people who vote over a rigorous process on the films that begins in November and continues well into February, in fact, the last ballots for votes went out just at the beginning of this week. So during that time all the members vote on the hundreds of films eligible for the awards.

Bob also conveniently ignores the fact that the academy members were the ones who also wanted to expand the number of best film candidates to ten for the sole reason of expanding the amount of great films to be eligible. This has allowed for animations and sci-fi films to be nominated within just two years for the award. THERE IS NO BIG CONSPIRACY.

For people who want Scott Pilgrim to be a winner in something, you've got the MTV movie awards for that - an awards show voted by YOU, which works in the exact same way that the academy awards, only to reflect on the views of the generation that is in the age group of the majority of posters here. Guess what they've thought is the best film two years running now? Twilight.

But hey, I guess it's always easier just to get behind Bob, blindfolded and goose stepping to a tune of complete ignorance and bark against a fantastic film that has not only been selected as the People's Choice (you know, selected by the viewing audience) Award Winner at film festivals, been a box office hit for a limited release indie film and has generally been on every Top Ten list of the past year. But yeah, let's just call if Oscar Bait (despite it taking ten years to get made, something that rarely happens to sure fire Oscar bait material) and all be happy and blissfully unaware of anything good in cinema unless it's got cartoon violence and sci-fi.

Mate, there's also the group that just doesn't care about the goddamn oscars and came to enjoy an entertaining review done in a style that breaks up the monotony of his series a bit, kind of like when yahtzee did the wolfenstein review entirely in limericks. And I'm pretty sure a lot of people here can enjoy a well-made movie without cartoon violence or sci-fi (even though I personally find nothing wrong with cartoon violence or sci-fi).

 

[sarahvait]

I don't get it. Why can't a movie that is "oscar bait" not be a good movie? I don't find The King's Speech that cliched, but the reason things become cliches and tropes in the first place is because they work. *blah blah stating the obvious. I didn't even find the movie that oscar baity as, say, Slumdog Millionare or Avatar. But my bias for liking the movie is slightly slanted from Bob's reason for disliking it.

I'm a voice actor, so I found The King's Speech really fascinating from my point of view. And I was really glad the movie pointed out something that I don't think a lot of people realize: Microphones can be fricking terrifying.

I have a good two years training behind me now, so I can handle pressure behind a mic pretty well by now. But for someone just starting out, the mic can be surprisingly scary. I've heard stories of actors trained in stage work and live action go behind the mic for the first time and being completely intimidated by a piece of recording equipment.

Besides that, I also enjoyed the little bromance between Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush's characters. I could be critical and say while I really liked the film and thought it was solid and well-acted, nothing really blew me away. Oscar-wise, I think Black Swan beats it. But still a good movie IMO.

 

[Mr_Jellyfish]

It may be Oscar bait but it's also a good film! Funny review but you ran with it a little too long. I'm just hoping Inglorious Bastards doesn't win a thing at the Oscars. You want to talk about contrived filmmaking? Take a step back and look at the work of Tarantino, the biggest sell out in Cinema. Seriously, it bugs me that no one else seems to notice how Tarantino has been making money out of selling audiences the same old film again and again and again. Pulp Fiction was good, Kill Bill, Death Proof and Inglorious Bastards, all boring, contrived, pointless and bland. You can't have a go at King's Speech and let that old hack get way with his films!

 

[Pips]

Whilst I do think it's true that certain kinds of films are more likely to win Oscars than others, I feel that Bob was being grossly unfair on this film.
I went to the midnight show of The King's Speech with a friend. We were the only people in the theatre and we sat and laughed our asses off. It is a serious film, no doubt, but there are parts of it which are just comedy gold. The performances from the whole cast are outstanding.
Over-hyped or not, I think The King's Speech is one of the best films I have seen recently.
I am unashamedly a geek, but I still think it was better than Tron: Legacy. Sometimes it seems that Bob has too much of a geek chip on his shoulder to look beyond genre boundaries.

 

[Gunnyboy]

For all the people who seem confused, and are bashing Bob, he even said he liked the movie in the video. He just didn't think much of it.

 

[fullbleed]

Seeing a film just because it's nominated or it's won an award is pretty stupid.

But so is avoiding watching a film just because it's won an award.

Just because something is popular at the cinema, and believe me is it popular, and just because it has artistic sensibilities doesn't make it bad. The idea that if something recieves an Oscar nod it must shit is just as ignorant as thinking it must be the best film ever. And you know what, what does it matter? It's just a statue. The world's best film wont be any better if they get to hold gold man with a sword covering his nads.

And you know it's worse that people are deciding not to see films just because they're nominated than seeing it because of it. You're litterally just acting out of spite and pettiness in that case.

Grow the fuck up, do you not think that there's a shred of chance that the film is recieving so many accolades is because it is that good? Over whelming opinion on this film is that it is that good, and remember... Bob liked fucking GI Joe.

 

[DeAztec62]

How on Earth are you a film critic, just because a film is actually true and about someone who was real, and therefore more important then you, you immediately look down your nose at it. The reason movies based on real life get more awards than fantasy, supernatural, sci-fi,etc is because normal people can relate to them. Normal people can't relate to Star Wars or the Exorcist because take them out of their original context and they're absolute nonsense, there is no such thing as demons, orcs or Jedi and there never will. People will always have problems and heartbreak because of real things like a disability, not because your dumb ass, illegal husband is turning to the dark side. World War II wasn't included for no reason, people revered the King in 30's/40's Britain and at the beginning of the war things weren't looking good for the UK, moral on the home front was a really important factor. However being an ignorant nerd you wouldn't understand any of that.

 

[Perryman93]

You sir, are an idiot.
The film was not made to 'catch an oscar' as you so comically put it. But made to commemorate and raise awareness of people who have speech impediments, as well as a historical truth about the man who was king of England and Ruler of the British empire, even though he struggled with such an affliction on his public speaking ability. The idea of 'Hitler and the evil nazis' is barely mentioned during the film so your comments there are ridiculous, unfounded, Americanisms.
I can agree with the section of the 'rich man overreacting' but the film is told as it happened, and yes 'based on a true story' much of which was taken from writings and accounts found recently by the great grandson of the speech therapist. the films accuracy has also been agreed by the queen herself.

 

[TheMusrich888]

Bob sounds a little miffed.

A little.

Agreed. And when will it be before we get people that are younger than the "WWII generation" to decide on what movies get Oscars? Not that I hate that genenration or anything.

 

[OManoghue]

Best episode ever. The withered old codgers in Hollywood will all be dead soon. Don't worry, just like the US Supreme Court. Soon time will take them home.

 

[KindlySpastic]

Bah, The Escapist comment system ate my post.

People who liked the movie and were offended by this video seem to be projecting all over the place. If you had waited for a bit before flying off the handle you would have noticed that he ended the video with saying that it was a good movie despite how formulaic it was.

Snip

This is hilarious. So you mean that that whole escapism thing doesn't work for "normal people"? This seems like an odd proposition to me, because I could swear that a lot of movies that aren't based on true stories are still very popular.

 

[DayDark]

How on Earth are you a film critic, just because a film is actually true and about someone who was real, and therefore more important then you, you immediately look down your nose at it. The reason movies based on real life get more awards than fantasy, supernatural, sci-fi,etc is because normal people can relate to them. Normal people can't relate to Star Wars or the Exorcist because take them out of their original context and they're absolute nonsense, there is no such thing as demons, orcs or Jedi and there never will. People will always have problems and heartbreak because of real things like a disability, not because your dumb ass, illegal husband is turning to the dark side. World War II wasn't included for no reason, people revered the King in 30's/40's Britain and at the beginning of the war things weren't looking good for the UK, moral on the home front was a really important factor. However being an ignorant nerd you wouldn't understand any of that.

How the fuck does true stories mean I can relate more? it's about a king! I can't freaking relate to a king! I don't even have a speech problem! I sure as hell can relate a lot more to the conflicts faced by Luke Skywalker. Normal people aren't void of imagination.

 

[Slakah]

Bah, The Escapist comment system ate my post.

People who liked the movie and were offended by this video seem to be projecting all over the place. If you had waited for a bit before flying off the handle you would have noticed that he ended the video with saying that it was a good movie despite how formulaic it was.

Nah the reason we're having a go is because it's damn obvious that Mr Bob has a geek chip on his shoulder, and if you need any proof then the paraphrase "1982 best year for film ever" should enlighten you.

 

[Ensis235]

Sure, the Academy does look favorably upon some genres and settings more than others, but your accusations are poorly founded against The King's Speech. Need I remind you that simply because a film has things the Academy likes does not mean that it's trying its best to walk away with the Oscar for Best Picture. Now where to begin...
Your complaint is that a character overcoming something is total Oscar bait... really?
That's the role of the protagonist. The protagonist has a struggle that they must overcome. Let's stick with Scott Pilgrim, a favorite of yours. On one level, he must physically overcome 7 evil exes, but on a psychological level he must learn to respect himself and find someone he's truly happy with (which were nicely displayed in tandem when Scott receives the power of self respect in the form of a sword in the film's climax). So yeah, that sounds like someone overcoming something to me. Any film that's aware of the Dramatic Structure will be, at its core, about someone overcoming (or failing to overcome)something!
As for your comment on WWII being too prevalent in Oscar winning films, I ask you to consider that historical films in general are popular. Gladiator, Braveheart, All Quiet on the Western Front, and Chicago all won Best Picture and come from a staggering array of time periods. This wasn't some sinister attempt to use WWII's setting to nab an Oscar simply because WWII is popular; the King's Speech is just a nice human drama in WWII.
Using your formula, we could come up with a wonderful film but shares too many similarities to other winners which means that it must be part of a conspiracy to nab an Oscar. Sure, there are things that the Academy does find favorable and will tend to vote towards these movies, but that doesn't mean that directors have found a way to "break the system," and create guaranteed Best Picture winners. If they did, studios would make cookie-cutter Oscar winners by the dozen.
And one last thing: The Social Network won't win because old people are scared of that newfangled Facebook machine? Really? The Social Network was hardly even about Facebook, but about its creators and the unique lives they lead. One need only know that Facebook is a global phenomenon to appreciate The Social Network.

 

[StarkillerisDead]

Normally MovieBob's opinions about stuff are pretty much the opposite to mine. The rest of the time, they're really dissimilar to mine.
Except this one, this was an excellent examination of Oscar bait, all credit to you Bob.
Not that this movie is necessarily any better or worse than say Inception, but the point is Inception has no chance at all against it in any Oscar categories.

 

[Johanthemonster666]

No offense meant Bob,

But you're not really one to talk. What makes a film great to you usually involves tights,superheros/heroines, robots, aliens, half-naked/ naked women, and any other sci-fi or comic book nerd ham you can cram into one of these films.

I don't care if this fuels his fandom for me to point out the obvious, but Movie Bob isn't a film critic. So I have no idea why they gave him two shows on here, he's always on his soap box on both.

"The King's Speech" was a good film and deserves to be in the top 8 lineup of Oscar nominees at least. Do I think it was the greatest film ever? No, but it certainly out does an overrated film like "Social Network". Oscars really don't matter to me ultimately, since good films usually come out of the Indie or foreign scene as far as my artsy-fartsy tastes go anyway. So a bunch of underachieving Hollywood big shots give each other gold statues... not really that impressive in my book considering how the academy votes on them.