Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 19, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

On Climate, Business as Usual

The Divide

Truthdig Bazaar
Dateline Havana

Dateline Havana

By Reese Erlich

more items

Arts and Culture

Critics Call ‘King’s Speech’ Historically Incorrect

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jan 27, 2011

Royal backlash: Some critics think “The King’s Speech” paints too rosy an image of King George VI, played by Colin Firth, pictured with Helena Bonham Carter in this still from the film.

With “The King’s Speech” sitting comfortably atop this year’s heap of Oscar-nominated films, it’s not surprising that there might be some grumbles from critical corners about the movie’s actual merits. But in this case, a couple prominent voices are crying foul about the extent to which the historical drama claims cinematic license, particularly with regard to the character and allegiances of stammering King George VI.  —KA

The Wrap:

It’s as predictable as the Oscars themselves. A new front-runner often means some fresh round of attacks, and the charge of historical distortion is a perennial one.

In this case, intellectual gadfly Christopher Hitchens and the New York Review of Books’ Martin Filler are charging that the monarch in question was no better than a Nazi appeaser and, in Filler’s words, “a nitwit.” They paint a portrait of the wartime king that is far different from the shy family man essayed by Oscar nominee (and favorite) Colin Firth.

“‘The King’s Speech’ …perpetrates a gross falsification of history,” Hitchens wrote on Slate on Monday, saying the king was not worthy of hagiography. Fillers says the king had an uncontrollable temper and even struck his wife.

Read more

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Inherit The Wind, January 29, 2011 at 1:46 am Link to this comment

Isn’t funny that Oliver Stone’s “JFK” never got the flack it deserved for being pure fantasy dressed up as “fact”.

OTOH, “Inglorious Basterds” never claimed to be anything but a work of fiction as, clearly, the ending never happened in reality—we just wish it had.

Report this
Queenie's avatar

By Queenie, January 28, 2011 at 1:24 pm Link to this comment

Hitchens wouldn’t know a gross falsification if he fell over one in a drunken stupor. He absolutely KNEW there were WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (0h my God!) in Iraq. His support for the war on Iraq was disgusting.

Report this

sign up to get updates

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.