king's speech real

Recent changes
Random page
View source
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Printable version
Permanent link
Page information
Create account

How historically accurate is the movie The King's Speech

In 2010, The King’s Speech won the Oscar for Best Picture and grossed over $414 million worldwide. It was an unlikely box office champion because it was based on a true story about King George VI of Britain (1895-1952) and an Australian speech therapist Lionel Logue (1880-1953). It shows how Logue helped the king overcome a crippling stammer and how this helped him lead his country during World War II. The movie was directed by Tom Hooper and written by David Seidler.

Critics have widely praised the editing, cinematography, directing, and acting. The movie was able to express the main characters' inner life by the clever use of lighting and other cinematic techniques. Colin Firth won an Oscar for his portrayal of George IV/ The King’s Speech was produced by a British company, and it was shot mainly in London. Among the supporting cast was Helen Bonham-Carter, who played Queen Elizabeth, the wife of the king. The movie was nominated for 12 academy awards, and it won four awards, including one for Best Picture.

Before the movie began filming, the writer, Seidler, found Logue's journal and incorporated elements from the journal into the movie. However, despite this, the historical accuracy of the movie has been questioned and even widely criticized.

When does the King's Speech take place?

The King's Speech takes place mainly in the 1930s at a critical juncture for Britain and its Empire. The nation and its various dependencies had still not recovered from the ravages of World War or the Great Depression. Internationally, Hitler was in power in Germany, and many feared, correctly, that there would be another World War. [1] The rather bleak mood of the time is captured very well by the director. At this critical point in its history, the British Royal Family faced its crisis.

After George V's death, he was succeeded by his eldest son, who became Edward VII in 1936. Edward VII's reign was both brief and controversial. Edward wanted to marry a divorced American, Wallis Simpson. Marrying a divorced was unacceptable to many in Britain at this time as the King was also head of the Church of England. Divorce was socially unacceptable, and the Anglican Bishops and others denounced the idea of the monarch marrying a divorced woman.

When Edward VII decided to marry Wallis Simpson, he was forced to abdicate his crown soon after his Coronation. This meant that his younger brother George or Bertie, as he was known, became king. [2] The depiction of these events in the movie has been fictionalized but is reasonably accurate.

However, there were some inaccuracies in the movie that troubled viewers. One of the scenes that caused the most controversy was when Sir Winston Churchill, the future leader of war-time Britain, supported the accession of George V. This scene misrepresented Churchill's view of Edward's abdication entirely. Churchill supported Edward VII (1894-1972) and believed that he should remain as king despite his marriage to Wallis Simpson. He was friendly with the abdicated king and remained a supporter. [3]

Unlike in the movie, Churchill did have grave doubts about the ability of George VI to carry out his Royal duties. He was not alone in the belief, and many others shared that view in the highest circles of the British government. Over time, he did come to accept the younger brother of Edward VII and came to respect him as an able monarch and leader . [4]

The King and his Stutter

The movie's central theme is the difficulties faced by George VI because of his stutter and how Logue was able to help him overcome his speech defect. This depiction is historically accurate, and the future George VI had a serious speech impediment. In the movie, Firth's character is shown as having a terrible stammer and that when he became nervous or anxious, he was almost unable to communicate. His stammer made public speaking almost impossible for the monarch.

The movie shows that his speech impediment was a result of his insecurity and shyness. [5] This was very much the case, and George VI did have a terrible stutter from childhood. The King’s Speech accurately shows the real problems caused by the future George VI and the entire Royal Family. In one scene at the opening of an exhibition celebrating the British Empire, George struggles with a speech and becomes visibly upset. The movie shows many senior officials and members of the Royal Family becoming gravely concerned about this. In the 1930a, when the movie is set, for the first-time, Royalty members were expected to speak in public and be effective communicators because of the growing importance of the mass media. [6]

The inability of George VI to publicly speak clearly was a real problem, and it was feared that it could damage the Royal Family and even undermine confidence in the government of the British Empire. The movie does somewhat exaggerate the importance of the king’s stutter, but it was a significant issue for the Royal Family.

When did Lionel Logue begin treating George VI?

Perhaps the biggest inaccuracy in the movie is that Logue was, in reality, able to help the King to overcome his stammer before the abdication crisis and his coronation rather than after these events. He first began to treat the second son of George V in the 1920s and continued to do so for many years. The movie shows that the treatment took place in the 1930s, and this was no doubt done for dramatic effect, but this is not strictly correct.

Cooper’s movie relates how George had been seeking help all his life for his stammer, and he tried every technique and treatment available for the time, which is true. The 2010 motion picture does really capture the sense of desperation and anxiety that the future George VI had over his speech impediment. He is shown as going in desperation to the Australian Logue, and this is also correct. The therapist is shown as using innovative techniques to help George overcome his stammer, which is right. The Australian was an early pioneer in speech and language therapy, and he was an innovator. [7] The film shows Rush trying to instill more confidence in the Royal. He adopts several strategies, but none are shown to work.

How did Logue treat George VI's speech impediment?

Eventually, he provokes the king, and in his anger, he can speak stutter-free. In reality, the speech and language therapist gave the monarch a series of daily vocal exercises, such as tongue twisters, that were designed to help him to relax. This helped the future king to relax, and this was key to the improvements in his speech. The motion picture does show that the treatment was not a total success, and the king continued to have a very slight stammer. This was indeed the case. However, the improvement in the speech of George VI was remarkable, which is accurately shown in the 2010 movie. It shows George having grave doubts about Logue and his treatment when he hears that he is not formally qualified as a therapist.

In real life, this did not cause a crisis in the relationship between the British sovereign and the Australian therapist. It is correct that Logue was not formally qualified because there was no education system for language therapy when he was young. Instead, he was self-taught and had traveled the world, studying the ideas of respected speech therapists. The movie leaves the viewers in no doubt that the king and the Royal Family owed the Australian a great debt, and this was the case, and when George VI died, his widow, the Queen, wrote to the therapist to thank him for all he had done for her husband. [8]

What was the relationship between King George VI and Lionel Logue?

The movie shows that the two men began to become real friends over time, despite their differences. This was the case, and it appears that both men liked each other and even enjoyed each other’s company. The relationship between the British king and the Australian is very realistically shown, and they remained friends until the early death of George VI. The movie shows that Logue was present when George made important Radio broadcasts to the British Public. This was the case, but Logue continued to coach the king to speak in public for many years.

In the movie, Logue is shown when George VI pronounced that Britain was at war with Germany in September 1939 during a radio address to the nation. This is not correct, but the Australian did provide the king with notes on things where he should pause and breathe, and these were a real help in the most important speech the monarch ever made. Logue continued to coach the king for many years until about 1944.

The therapist is shown as being very much at ease in the King's presence and treating him like any other client. This was not the case. Despite their genuine friendship, Logue would have been expected to have been somewhat formal and respect the Royal Person of the King at all times. In real life, Logue was not as easy-going and familiar with George VI as portrayed in the historical drama. [9]

Was George VI accurately portrayed in the King's Speech?

Colin Firth’s performance was widely praised. The British actor won the Academy Award for Best Actor. While Firth's performance was widely acclaimed, there were some concerns about how accurately he portrayed the monarch. In the main, Firth did manage to capture George VI and his character in the feature film. The British actor did correctly show that the monarch was a timid and insecure man who felt that he was not equal to his Royal duties, and this was something that greatly distressed him. [10]

His stammer may have been a result of his sense of inadequacy, but this cannot be known, for certain. Firth does show that the monarch did grow in stature after he was crowned as King. It leaves the viewer in no doubt that by the end of the movie, Firth, who has largely overcome his stammer, could lead his country in its hour of greatest danger. [11]

This was the case, and the monarch became widely respected for his leadership and his calm dignity. However, the script tended to be overly sympathetic to George and avoided his character's rather unpleasant aspects. He was alleged to have both fits of anger and alleged acts of domestic violence. Those allegations have not been confirmed.

Helena Bonham Carter's performance was praised, and she does capture the personality of Queen Elizabeth (1900-2002). She was a very supportive wife and dedicated to her husband. She did not want him to become king because she feared what it would do to him. Her family, as shown in the feature film. [12] Geoffrey Rush played the character of the speech and language therapist Logue, and he presented him as a larger-than-life figure who was charismatic, and this was indeed the case. It is generally agreed that Rush really captured the personality of the acclaimed speech and language therapist.

How realistic is the King's Speech?

Overall, the movie is historically accurate. It shows the modern viewer the importance of the King's treatment for his speech impediment. This movie also captures the real sense of anxiety in Britain in the 1930s, and it broadly captures the historical context of the Coronation of George VI. The relationship between Logue and the monarch is also largely accurate. However, this is a movie, and the need to entertain means some inaccuracies, especially concerning details such as the king's treatment. However, when compared to other historical dramas, the movie is very realistic.

The True Story Behind "The King's Speech"

"The King's Speech" is a 2010 dramatic biographical film, recounting the friendship between King George VI of England and his Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue. The film also covers Edward VIII's 1936 abdication, and George VI's subsequent coronation and shouldering of responsibility during World War II. George VI ultimately must conquer his stammer to assist and guide Britain during the war.

As a film, "The King's Speech" takes a few liberties with the historical timeline and in regards to simplifying certain characters. One element historians took particular umbrage with was the depiction of Winston Churchill . However, overall it is fairly faithful to the historical record. For one thing, George VI really did have a speech impediment since the age of eight, and Lionel Logue did work with him for several years. They did stay friends until they both died. Certain scenes, such as George VI's coronation, were praised for their accurate recapturing of the feel of the 1930s.

The main concept the film changed was simply adding drama to certain scenes, such as the speech announcing war with Germany towards the end. It also condensed the historical timeline significantly, shortening events. This was mostly done for the sake of keeping the narrative moving. Overall, however, " The King's Speech " is a fairly accurate, heartwarming rendering of George VI and Lionel Logue's friendship.

Prince Albert had a stutter as a child

Prince Albert, later George VI, developed a stutter when he was eight that he carried through to his early adult life. His parents were not terribly affectionate with him, and he was susceptible to tears and tantrums – traits he also carried through his adult years, writes Biography . Given that many of his public duties required speeches, Albert needed to – and worked tirelessly – to fix his stammer with multiple doctors and therapists, writes Stuttering Help . He wasn't successful with any speech therapies until he worked with elocutionist and informal speech therapist Lionel Logue, beginning in the 1920s.

When Logue saw the then-Duke of York give a speech, he said to his son, "He's too old for me to manage a complete cure. But I could very nearly do it. I'm sure of that." (via Stuttering Help ). He was right, and his positive attitude helped the duke recover from previous failures that had made him believe the problem caused him to be mentally deficient instead of simply physically injured. Despite how long they worked together, the duke's speech issues had more to do with how held his jaw and pronounced words; the result was that his stammer was mainly cleared up in a matter of months as opposed to years.

Lionel Logue was a self-taught speech therapist

Lionel Logue was an Australian speech therapist who, not being formally trained, used methods he had discovered and created on his own. He worked as an elocutionist first, but fell into helping Australian World War I veterans with speech defects, writes The ASHA Leader . No one else was doing what he was with the veterans, and speech therapy and audiology programs didn't even get off the ground until the 1940s (via UNC Health Sciences Library ). Logue was even a founder of the College of Speech Therapists.

Just before World War I, Logue worked a variety of jobs as a teacher of elocution and drama, theater manager, and reciter of Shakespeare and Dickens (via Speech Language Therapy's Caroline Bowen, a speech language pathologist ). Logue worked with patients on their speech, but also on confidence and the self-belief that they could accomplish what they set out to do. He was empathetic with his patients, and learned from each case he worked on. Logue originally tried out as an actor, and as a result, his manner was somewhere between a teacher and an artist. He was serious about his life's work and resolved to avoid cheapening it by writing a book about his efforts with the king.

Logue began working with Prince Albert in 1926

Elizabeth, the Duchess of York, first encouraged her husband to work with Lionel Logue, though the meeting as depicted in the film between Elizabeth and Logue likely didn't happen (via Logue and Conradi's "The King's Speech" ). Logue thus began working with the Duke of York in October 1926, soon after he opened his London practice on Harley Street. Logue first diagnosed the Duke with, according to CNN , acute nervous tension and the habit of closing the throat, which caused him to clip words out.

Logue met with him daily for the next two or three months (in advance of a visit to Australia), and his stammer was gone (for the most part) within that time frame; it didn't take years of treatment (via Speech Language Therapy ). Unlike in the film, in reality, the Duke and Logue weren't necessarily aiming for complete fluency. However, they did continue to work together for the next two decades, mainly on the royal's speeches.

Logue worked with Albert for over 15 years

Though the film condenses the timeline to make it seem as though everything takes place over just a few years, Logue and Albert worked together for decades (via CNN ). "The King's Speech" begins in 1925 with the close of the British Empire Exhibition, which would be historically accurate, but time simply speeds by until the film depicts the abdication of Edward VIII in 1936 and later the outbreak of war in 1939 in just a few hours; it doesn't really feel as though a decade and a half have passed.

Regardless, Logue and the duke worked together on speeches even after the duke had mostly mastered his stammer. Lionel Logue's methods were unorthodox and primarily self-taught. He never specifically said what course of treatment he worked on with the duke, saying, according to The ASHA Leader : "...on the matter of Speech Defects, when so much depends on the temperament and individuality, a case can always be produced that can prove you are wrong. That is why I won't write a book." Much of the ideas for the therapy sessions depicted in the film come from Logue's diaries (though plenty of the dialogue was invented), which were inherited by his grandson Mark. They were used in the film, though the director only saw them late in the film's production.

Any sort of therapy is inherently individual, not to mention personal (via Psychiatric Times ). It's no wonder that Logue decided to avoid writing about his work.

Wallis Simpson was a more complex person than the film indicates

King Edward VIII was crowned in January 1936 and abdicated in December of the same year in order to marry Wallis Simpson , who had been twice divorced (via History ). His younger brother was proclaimed king the next day. The film is sympathetic to George VI and Elizabeth, and Wallis Simpson is cast as a vaguely Nazi-supporting villain; there is little depth to her character. However, her life and motivations were shrouded in rumors from the British upper classes and the media.

The upper classes, who learned about the Edward-Wallis romance before the British media, in particular saw her as an uncouth American divorcee, and had a hard time figuring out why Edward wanted to be with her. When the media did find out, in December 1936, she was both ruined and revered by them, according to History Extra . However, after moving overseas more-or-less permanently she faded from the spotlight. Her unfortunate reputation from the nobles stuck with her.

Ultimately, George VI didn't allow his brother and sister-in-law, who had moved to France, to be productive for the royal family; they asked multiple times for jobs and were denied (via History Extra ). Awful rumors followed Wallis Simpson even past her death in the 1980s, including one that stated she would do anything to become queen of England. Though it's clear both on and off screen that she and Elizabeth disliked each other, Wallis was more than a king-stealing villain.

Churchill was actually opposed to Edward VIII's abdication

One major element of the film that historians had trouble with is Churchill's abrupt support of George VI, writes Daily History . In real life, he encouraged Edward VIII not to abdicate in 1936, and remained a supporter of the royal, believing something could be worked out without having to resort to abdication. George VI and Elizabeth didn't fully support Churchill later in life due to his actions during the abdication. However, Churchill was later knighted by Elizabeth II (via Biography ).

This element is likely written as such for the film due to the writers having a hard time writing someone as beloved as Churchill with actual flaws. The writers of "Saving Mr. Banks" had a similar issue with Walt Disney and his flaws. As a result, it is one of the only concrete historical aspects that left historians scratching their heads in confusion. Everything else that is changed in the film is mainly done for the sake of adaptation, drama, and the good of the narrative. This change seems to be for the sake of preserving Churchill's reputation. Considering the film's lead-up of events to World War II, and Churchill's role in Britain's survival, it isn't that surprising.

King George VI's coronation was less fraught than the film depicts

Logue worked with George VI on his coronation speech in 1937. Five days afterward, the king wrote a heartfelt thank you letter for the assistance (via Tatler ), attributing the success to Logue's "expert supervision and unfailing patience." Just as in the film, Logue and his wife are seated in the royal box, so high up that Myrtle Logue needed to use opera glasses in order to see, writes CNN .

However, by this time, the king had mostly mastered his speech impediment, and the dramatic scene in the film with Logue and St. Edward's chair is likely fictional. It was written for the sake of the narrative of George VI realizing he does have a voice. Reality isn't necessarily so cinematic, and after weeks of working on the speech with Logue, George VI delivered it flawlessly. Regardless, according to Daily History , the film accurately conveys the atmosphere of the 1930s and the coronation of a new king. In reality, the king and Logue likely didn't have the same miscommunication as they do in the film, and it is doubly heartwarming that Logue and his wife were seated with the royal family, just because of the services Logue had rendered the new king.

Logue was more deferential to his royal patient

Geoffrey Rush's portrayal is much more animated than Logue likely was in reality. Logue certainly addressed Prince Albert respectfully, and the scenes of swearing in Logue's office are likely invented. Logue also never referred to the prince by a nickname, much less one used exclusively by the family. They were friends in real life, but their relationship was more realistically distant.

According to CNN , the letters Logue wrote to the king are addressed to "Your Royal Highness". On the other hand, the king signed his letters with his first name, indicating a measure of friendship between the two men. Logue also apparently allowed George VI to set treatment goals due to his position. Though they did end up being friends, Logue never forgot who exactly his patient was, and treated him accordingly (via Daily History ). Historical films always add heart-to-heart speeches between people which probably never actually happened but work for the sake of drama and the narrative. "The King's Speech" is no exception.

The speech announcing war with Germany was less dramatic

Lionel Logue further assisted George VI during the 1939 speech when he announced Britain was at war with Germany. However, Logue wasn't actually in the room with him, as the film depicts, and only wrote notes on places for the king to pause to collect himself when speaking or on which words to stress, according to CNN . Keep in mind that by this point in time, 13 years after meeting Logue, the king had essentially mastered his stammer. George VI also stood to give the speech, though photographs show him in full military uniform and sitting down.

Lionel Logue's diaries also answered a previously unknown question about the speech that was added to the film. George VI stammered on some of the W's in the speech, and according to a comment he made to Logue, it was so the people would recognize him, writes CNN .

The film turns the event into a climactic event, as a culmination of the years of work the king and Logue have put into his affliction – and which the audience has just watched on screen for the past two hours. Also, though it is unlikely the information was revealed at this exact time in real life, the character of Winston Churchill tells the king just before this speech that he, too, was a stammerer as a child, writes The Lancet . This element is true, though it is positioned for the sake of cinematic drama.

George and Logue's friendship didn't fracture over credentials

In the film, coronation preparations pause when the archbishop of Canterbury, Cosmo Lang, mentions that Logue doesn't have any formal training. Not having known this beforehand, George VI becomes outraged and only calms after Logue provokes him into speaking without stammering, causing him to realize that he actually can speak accurately. This entire element is invented for the film, presumably for the sake of drama (and humor).

By this point, the two men had known each other for over a decade and were friends. Though their relationship was primarily professional, in scouting out Logue's help, the king must have understood his credentials and it didn't bother him; after all, he worked with Logue, voluntarily, for decades (via Daily History ). Logue's formality likely kept their friendship professional enough that they probably had few personal disagreements.

Logue and the king wrote letters back and forth for years; the earlier letters were signed "Albert" and the later letters "George" by the king, according to CNN , indicating a measure of friendship that was likely meted out to few people. When Logue asked the king in 1948 if he would serve as patron of the College of Speech Therapists, George VI immediately agreed and it became known as the Royal College of Speech Therapy, writes The ASHA Leader .

The film has an obvious pro-George VI bias

Due to being written from a historical perspective, "The King's Speech" supports George VI, Logue, Elizabeth, and even Winston Churchill as characters and historical figures much more than it does George V, Edward VIII, or Wallis Simpson. The film has an agenda and a narrative it set out to tell: the story of how George VI overcame his stammer and led a nation successfully through a war.

According to The Gazette , the film's textual inclusion of Logue's appointment as a Member of the Royal Victorian Order is accurate. The king appreciated his services enough to reward him with a title for them, and this element certainly adds to the theme of friendship the film is so fond of.

In another interesting example of bias, however, the film omits Edward VIII's Nazi sympathies entirely, though Simpson is written to seem like an outsider to the royals. This was likely done for the sake of Edward's surviving family, though it was a slightly odd omission considering the context of the film. Edward isn't cast as a villain, however, he doesn't quite seem to realize what he's forcing his brother to step into. Though he immediately supports George, Edward doesn't seem to comprehend the royal family's – and the film's – endless demand of duty.

International edition
Australia edition
Europe edition

Colin Firth and Helena Bonham Carter in The King's Speech

How historically accurate is The King's Speech?

M y view is that a film is a film, and you have to move the drama on. People can say, for example, that Churchill didn't play nearly as big a role as he does in the film – he wasn't actually there at such and such a point, he never uttered those words, and so on. But the average viewer knows who Churchill is; he doesn't know who Lord Halifax and Lord Hoare are. I don't mind these things at all.

Of course, when the king made his famous speech after Chamberlain had declared war on Germany, none of those high-ranking officials who appear with him in the film were present. But they need to speak to the king, there's a point that needs to be made.

It's the essence of the story that counts, and the essence of the story here is very sound indeed.

The little things are very important, though. I like to think that if there are very few things that jar in this film, it's because of the subtle work of people like me. It's like presenting the flowers to the soprano at the end of the recital: if it's done well, no one notices it happen. I curtseyed to Claire Bloom, for example, and kissed her hand, to show her what Queen Mary might have done before the new king – her son – on the death of George V. Now I don't know whether that's actually what happened. But it's a very good way of showing that the old reign has come to an end and the new one begun.

Some things I'm not so keen on. There's a lot of swearing. And the Duchess of Windsor comes across as a bit gauche, which she wasn't. But everyone involved in this film deserves a huge amount of credit.

More on this story

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

Stammering: lost for words

The King's Speech: an emotionally stirring Oscar magnet

The King's Speech rules Toronto film festival

Colin Firth: 'Playing the stammering king had an effect on me, a semi-paralysis'

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

There are no short cuts for the monarchy.

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

Share this on:

Forgotten archive reveals true story behind 'king's speech'.

The grandson of the Geoffrey Rush character in the movie has the real Lionel Logue's papers
They include letters between King George VI and his grandfather
The two men were really friends for a quarter of a century
Mark Logue's discovery helped "King's Speech" director Tom Hooper

London (CNN) -- There were always three pictures of King George VI on the mantelpiece of the various houses Mark Logue lived in when he was growing up -- including one signed and dated by the king on the day of his coronation -- but as a boy in the 1970s and 1980s, Logue doesn't remember wondering why.

Only years later, after his father died and Logue inherited a box of papers and scrapbooks, did it all begin to make sense.

Logue's grandfather was Lionel Logue, the Australian speech therapist played by Geoffrey Rush in the Oscar nominated movie "The King's Speech."

Mark Logue -- born 12 years after his grandfather died -- had inherited some archive: Christmas cards from the king and queen, a condolence card from George VI to Lionel Logue when his wife died, and a letter of thanks from the queen for a letter Logue wrote when the king himself died several years later.

The papers also include hundreds of letters exchanged by the king and the speech therapist, whom he met more than a decade before he was crowned.

"The content of the letters between them is incredibly friendly as you'd expect between two friends," Mark Logue says. "But there is a kind of etiquette that Lionel still abides by," addressing George VI as "your Royal Highness."

George VI addressed his friend as "Dear Logue," and signed the early letters "Albert" -- his name before he was crowned king. The later letters are signed "George."

Also among his grandfather's papers is what Mark Logue believes is the actual copy of the speech George VI read at the outbreak of war with Germany 1939 -- the climactic scene of the movie.

"In this grave hour, perhaps the most fateful in our history..." the speech begins.

The copy in Logue's archive contains handwritten pencil notes, indicating what words to stress and where to pause.

"The King's Speech" condenses the friendship of the monarch and commoner into about a year, but the real George and Logue knew each other for a quarter of a century.

"The first thing that I came across that startled me was his appointment card," Mark Logue says.

In tiny handwriting, Logue assessed his new patient, Albert, Duke of York in 1926.

The duke "has acute nervous tension which has been brought on by the defect. He is of nervous disposition... Contracts teeth and mouth and mechanically closes throat... an extraordinary habit of clipping small words - an, in , on - and saying the first syllable of one word and the last syllable of another," Logue wrote.

The Duke saw Logue almost every day for next two or three months, in advance of a royal visit to Australia, Logue's records show.

The friendship lasted for the rest of their lives, although it seems they were never photographed together.

At the Coronation in 1937, Logue is seated in the royal box, with his wife, Myrtle. They are so high up, she's using opera glasses.

Myrtle died suddenly of a heart attack after World War II, prompting the king to write: "Dear Logue, I must send you one line to tell you how terribly sorry I was to hear of your bereavement. And I send you all my deepest sympathy in your great grief ...I do so feel for you as I know you had a perfect companionship with her. I am yours sincerely. George."

Mark Logue gets choked up reading the letter generations later.

"It's something about thinking about him hurting after Myrtle's death... makes it kind of real," he says.

The archive inspired him to write a book with the author Peter Conradi.

"King's Speech" director Tom Hooper starting looking at Logue's material about seven weeks before starting filming, Logue says -- and was able to add some details to the movie as a result.

Hooper hadn't known, for example, that the king took off his jacket and stood to deliver the 1939 speech, since photos of the event show him seated and in full military uniform.

And, from Logue's diary, a joke was added.

"I went to Windsor on Sunday for the broadcast... only one mistake... W in weapons," Logue wrote. "After the broadcast I shook hands with the King and congratulated him. And asked him why he stopped on the W. He replied with a grin. I did it on purpose. I exclaimed -- on purpose ? And he said yes -- if I don't make a mistake they won't know it's me."

The movie did make some changes, of course: The real Lionel Logue was more deferential than Geoffrey Rush's character, and rather shorter than his movie counterpart.

And another thing the movie does not tell audiences is that the king and the therapist remained close until the end of their lives. George VI died in 1952. The following year, his friend Lionel Logue died too.

Most Popular

Fine art from an iphone the best instagram photos from 2014, after ivf shock, mom gives birth to two sets of identical twins, inside north korea: water park, sacred birth site and some minders, 10 top destinations to visit in 2015, what really scares terrorists.

Skip to main content
Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Movie Interviews

Tom hooper: on directing 'the king's speech'.

In The King's Speech , Colin Firth plays King George VI, who was adored by his subjects for refusing to leave London during World War II bombing raids. He also suffered from a terrible stammer and hated speaking in public. Laurie Sparham via The Weinstein Co. hide caption

This interview was originally broadcast on November 18, 2010. The King's Speech was recently nominated for 12 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Director.

In 1925, Albert, Duke of York, began seeing a speech therapist to correct his pronounced speech impediment. Eleven years later, he reluctantly ascended to the British throne as King George VI, after his older brother Edward VIII abdicated to marry the American Wallis Simpson.

As the king, George VI was expected to frequently address his nation, both in person and on the radio. During these public speaking engagements, he continued to rely heavily on his speech therapist, Australian Lionel Logue, to make sure he didn't stammer.

King George VI's relationship with Logue is at the heart of director Tom Hooper's historical drama, The King's Speech . The film stars Colin Firth as King George VI and Geoffrey Rush as Logue, who developed his somewhat unorthodox way of treating speech impediments while treating shell-shocked soldiers in the years following World War I.

The real story behind 'The King's Speech'

Doggedness and serendipity set up a small film's big success.

By Gloria Goodale Staff writer

February 16, 2011 | Los Angeles

This year's top Oscar-nominated film, " The King's Speech ," bursts with narrative resonance – both in the story it tells and in the one behind the film's creation.

The true-life tale of Prince Albert, who overcame a lifelong stammer on his way to becoming King George VI , seems built to appeal both to Americans' love of self-reinvention and also Britons' complex blend of nostalgia and ambivalence where their royals are concerned. The movie brims with the universal appeal of a fairy-tale ending – both in terms of its plot and also in that it is a $12 million film that has garnered 12 Oscar nods.

As a quintessential triumphant underdog yarn, the story is pure Americana, says Steve Thompson , founder of MindFrame Theaters, an independent art-house cinema in Dubuque , Iowa .

"[King George] is a man with problems, just like us, so we relate to him," he says.

But in depicting a royal who puts duty above his personal pain, this version of history is "also pure British Empire," says Wade Major, who teaches the film and social justice program at Mount St. Mary's College in Los Angeles . It reinforces all the best values Britons attribute to themselves while it also humanizes the very notion of royalty – both past and present, he says.

The film is also well timed. It arrives as the British public finds itself face to face with the memory of another, more recent royal figure – Diana, Princess of Wales , whose own painful story hovers over the impending marriage of her first son, Prince William.

This is a wrenching moment for the British, says Mark Logue , grandson of Lionel Logue , the Australian actor and speech therapist – played in the film by Geoffrey Rush – whose unconventional techniques helped the second in line to the British throne (played by Colin Firth ) gain his "voice."

The memory of Diana is everywhere, he says, speaking by phone from London . The film's story is a reminder of her appeal. "She was very human, with weaknesses and vulnerability, and the public had a great appetite for that," he says.

This film has been enthusiastically embraced by the British, points out Professor Major, who says that it underlines a shift in national attitudes. "The British want the royals to adapt; they do not want a replay of what happened with Diana," he adds.

Perhaps if the king's story had been told earlier, Diana's life story might have had a different outcome, notes Mr. Logue. But Queen Elizabeth (played by Helena Bonham Carter ) refused to give screenwriter David Seidler her blessing to make a film about events of those days during her lifetime. And so, says Logue, "now becomes the perfect time, because people here are thinking about royalty in a new way." Everyone finally realizes that the monarchy has to change with the times, something Diana tried to do, but with little support from the British royal family, he says.

This deference to the former queen's desires drapes the making of the film with its own Cinderella story.

The king's travails are intensely personal for Mr. Seidler, who suffered from a childhood stutter himself after a wartime evacuation from England . He was keenly aware that the man who never expected to wear the British crown had labored mightily to overcome the same affliction.

"The king was my hero," he says simply, and a lifelong urge to tell the king's story was born almost as soon as he became aware of their shared challenge. When he acquiesced to the queen's request to delay telling her husband's story until her passing, he did not realize just how much patience that might require – the queen mother, as she was affectionately known after her daughter became queen, died in 2002 at age 101.

Seidler labored to shape the unconventional relationship between Logue and "Bertie," as his intimates called the prince, drafting both a play and a screenplay.

His own fairy-tale ending began shaping up when the mother of acclaimed director Tom Hooper attended the single staged reading of the play. She then persuaded her son that this should be his next project.

But even with a big-name director behind the venture, "there were literally dozens of times that this project nearly collapsed," says Seidler. "It really is a miracle," he says, "that it finally happened."

The serendipitous details underscore just how tenuous the path to the multiple awards and nominations has been. The young assistant of an agent who became involved happened to live in Australia near Rush, and dropped the screenplay through his mail slot while she was home on holiday.

"Nothing happened for some six months," says Seidler, "so I decided it had been a bad move after all." But then Rush signed on to play the crucial role of Logue. The actor's commitment finally helped get the award-winning film made.

And now, after waiting nearly a lifetime to tell this story, Seidler has become, at age 73, the oldest writer signed to UTA, one of Hollywood's top talent agencies.

The film's success, however, has invited new challenges, says Major, who points out that biopics nearly always attract charges of historical inaccuracy . In this case, they range from suggestions that the film whitewashes Nazi sympathies on the part of the king all the way down to gripes about inaccuracies in selecting a kilt's tartan. Award season broadsides can hurt a film's chances, concedes Major. In 1989, for instance, allegations that the front-runner film, " Mississippi Burning ," did not do justice to the real events of the civil rights era "sank the film's chances," he says, adding that " Rain Man " subsequently overtook the historical drama for best film. What is so often overlooked in debates over historical accuracy in drama is the fact that these films are not documentaries. "They are spiritual representations of a time and the deeper lessons of history," Major says.

Deeply personal engagement is nearly always the key to successfully transmitting those lessons, says Mary Dalton , codirector of the Documentary Film project at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem , N.C. "There is a two-fold reason 'personal passion projects' are sometimes particularly memorable. First, the filmmaker's personal connection to a story can imbue it with indelible authenticity," she writes in an e-mail. Second, she notes, that same passion can sustain the commitment necessary to get a picture made in an industry where it can take years and years to take a project from concept to completion.

Yet these offbeat films that challenge official history or industry conventions are the lifeblood of truly creative filmmaking, says Gordon Coonfield , an associate professor of film and media at Villanova University in Philadelphia . But the entertainment industry's growing dependence on blockbusters make it deeply risk-averse, he points out.

"It's a vicious spiral downward," he says. "And it results in a decreased tolerance for creativity, for risk, for something different but potentially beautiful. As a consequence, great films go unmade and unwatched. Still, occasionally films like this one slip through and, hopefully, awaken something that the next sequel-to-a-formula [film] won't be able to put to sleep again."

Subscription expired

Your subscription to The Christian Science Monitor has expired. You can renew your subscription or continue to use the site without a subscription.

Return to the free version of the site

If you have questions about your account, please contact customer service or call us at 1-617-450-2300 .

This message will appear once per week unless you renew or log out.

Session expired

Your session to The Christian Science Monitor has expired. We logged you out.

No subscription

You don’t have a Christian Science Monitor subscription yet.

Perspective: How true is ‘The King’s Speech’?

Show more sharing options
Copy Link URL Copied!

If any best-picture contender was going to face questions about taking liberties with the facts this Oscar season, it seemed likely it would be “The Social Network.” But now that screenwriter Aaron Sorkin and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg have tactfully retreated a bit from their initially contentious stands, the accuracy debate has shifted to “The King’s Speech.”

“The King’s Speech” is being sold as a feel-good tale of how a friendship between a royal and a commoner affected the course of history. But some commentators are complaining, among other things, that the film covers up Winston Churchill’s support for Edward VIII, the playboy king who abdicated to marry an American divorcee, and that the movie fails to acknowledge that the once tongue-tied George VI supported Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of the Nazis. (Writing last month at slate.com, Christopher Hitchens blasted the film as “a gross falsification of history.”)

As a specialist in British history, I agree that screenwriter David Seidler certainly has tweaked the record a bit and telescoped events in “The King’s Speech” — but for the same artistic reasons that have guided writers from Shakespeare to Alan Bennett, who wrote the screenplay for “The Madness of King George” (and the play on which the movie was based). While historians must stick to the facts, dramatists need to tell a good story in good time. It also helps if they can explore the human condition in the process.

Seidler’s script opens with Colin Firth as Prince Albert (the future King George VI, but then the Duke of York and known to his family as “Bertie”) facing the ordeal of making his first radio broadcast. To add to the strain, the duke must deliver the address in a stadium before a large crowd. However, his words come only haltingly, causing embarrassment for all present. Not shown but later referenced in the film is the fact that in the crowd was Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a speech therapist recently transplanted from Australia.

All this took place in 1925, but Seidler brings the speech disaster forward 10 years to the eve of the abdication crisis, which resulted in the duke unexpectedly being transformed into a king when his brother Edward VIII stepped aside. The compression of events, although understandable, requires a slew of historical alterations to explain the back story.

The duke’s stammer derived in part from the verbal abuse he received as a child from his father, King George V (Michael Gambon). To indicate this, Seidler concocts a scene showing the adult Bertie still being hectored by his father, and it is only after this that he agrees to see Logue.

Much of the early part of the film is taken up with Logue’s struggle to win the duke’s trust. The therapist succeeds partly by trickery and partly because of continued prompting by Bertie’s wife, the Duchess of York (Helena Bonham Carter). After achieving a “breakthrough” with his patient and following Edward’s abdication in 1936, Logue helps prepare the new king for the ordeal of the coronation ceremony. That hurdle cleared, the film culminates with the therapist coaching Bertie through another historic moment: his broadcast to the British Empire at the start of World War II with an approving Churchill (Timothy Spall) looking on.

In reality, the duke first sought treatment from Logue in 1926, and, contrary to the film, the two hit it off immediately. Logue wrote in a note later published in the king’s official biography that Bertie left their first meeting brimming with confidence. After just two months of treatment, the duke’s improvement was significant enough for him to begin making successful royal tours with all the public speaking that entailed. George V was so delighted that Bertie rapidly became his favored son and preferred heir.

In interviews, Seidler has been ambiguous about what sources he consulted in writing the script. The various biographies of George VI all tell of the king’s relationship with Logue. This includes the official biography published in 1958. John Wheeler-Bennett, the royal biographer personally selected by the king’s widow, was himself a former patient of Logue’s and so wrote about the episode with great emotion.

It remains unclear, though, to what extent sources not available to scholars or the public played a role in the final shape of the film. Seidler has said that Logue’s son offered 30 years ago to show him his father’s notebooks, provided the king’s widow agreed. But when Seidler wrote Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, he was told that she found it too painful to remember the old anguish and begged that he wait until she had passed away.

Although the Queen Mother died in 2002, filmmakers said they were provided with Logue’s diaries, notes and letters only shortly before filming began. Seidler has not specified how material from Logue’s records was used, but he has said that research guided him to the conclusion that Logue utilized Freud’s “talking cure” approach. Thus, by reading up on the king’s life, Seidler used what he terms “informed imagination” to create the film’s therapy scenes.

Seidler also drew on personal experience: He himself stammered as a child, and it was this that led him to an interest in George VI. From what he has said about his own successful treatment, Seidler indicates that he projected that experience into his fabrication about Logue having to work patiently to gain Bertie’s trust. This liberty with the truth certainly gives the film more dramatic interest.

There are many other instances of artistic license in “The King’s Speech.” For example, Bertie chose his regal cognomen, George, out of respect for his father and not as the film has it because Churchill suggested that Albert sounded “too German.” Another dramatic fantasy occurs when the Archbishop of Canterbury (Derek Jacobi) breathlessly revealed that Logue was not in fact a doctor. In reality, Logue’s credentials were never misrepresented. Bertie always referred to him as “Mr. Logue” or simply “Logue.” Logue’s grandchildren recently came forward to say that their grandfather never used Christian names with the king at all — despite the movie making a strong point that the future king bristled at being called “Bertie” by Logue.

As for Hitchens’ allegations, they are much ado about nothing. Churchill’s support of Edward VIII owed more to his near-medieval reverence for the monarchy than it did to the individual occupying the throne. In supporting the appeasement policies of Chamberlain, George VI acted in harmony with the overwhelming majority of the British population across the political spectrum. As a combat veteran of World War I, the king was as anxious as his subjects to avoid a second conflict by any promising means. George VI was also at one with most Britons in remaining skeptical about Churchill as prime minister until the great man had proved himself.

Hitchens will get a second chance to scrutinize moviedom’s portrayal of Edward VIII and George VI this year, when Madonna’s film “W.E.” — about Wallis Simpson and Edward — hits theaters. He’s probably already stocking up on pencils.

Freeman teaches history at California State Fullerton.

[email protected]

‘Scoop’ depicts Prince Andrew’s infamous interview. These were the women behind it

April 5, 2024

Kate’s remarkable video was a Royal revolution, scepter-spinning in its frankness

March 24, 2024

ENVELOPE STORY DECEMBER 9, 2010. DO NOT USE PRIOR TO PUBLICATION. ******** NEW YORK, NEW YORK--NOV. 08, 2010--David Seidler wrote the screenplay for the new movie "The King's Speech," directed by Tom Hooper. (Carolyn Cole/Los Angeles Times)

David Seidler, ‘The King’s Speech’ screenwriter, dies at 86

March 17, 2024

The biggest entertainment stories

Get our big stories about Hollywood, film, television, music, arts, culture and more right in your inbox as soon as they publish.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

More From the Los Angeles Times

A man in white sings into a microphone while members of his rock band play guitars and drums around him

Aerosmith farewell tour is back on with new L.A. date, months after Steven Tyler injury

April 10, 2024

Travis Kelce, Taylor Swift and Lil Dicky

Travis Kelce pal Lil Dicky calls those who diss Taylor Swift relationship ‘bitter losers’

Tommy Wallach, right, and Terry Pettigrew-Rolapp, left, in an escape room.

Travel & Experiences

This L.A. escape room explores corporate greed — and shows how corruptible you really are

A young Black woman with braided hair in a bright green velvet suit and a black shirt smiling against a BBC backdrop

Entertainment & Arts

Black ‘Romeo & Juliet’ star backed by 800+ actors condemning ‘racist and misogynistic abuse’

The King’s Speech True Historical Story

The King’s Speech is headed for Oscar glory but some have criticized its faulty history. Author Peter Conradi says the relationship between King George VI and his speech therapist was unusually close and important.

Peter Conradi

"The King's Speech," starring Colin Firth as the King - or Bertie as he was known to his intimates - appears destined to be rewarded by the Academy next February. (Laurie Sparham / The Weinstein Company)

The King’s Speech may get some historical details wrong , but it’s spot on when it comes to its central point: the closeness of the friendship between King George VI and his unconventional Australian speech therapist

On February 28, 1952, just over three weeks after King George VI of England died, at age 56, his grieving widow, Elizabeth, took out her fountain pen and some sheets of Buckingham Palace notepaper and began to write to an old friend. “I know perhaps better than anyone just how much you helped the king, not only with his speech, but through that his whole life & outlook on life," she wrote. "I shall always be deeply grateful to you for all you did for him."

The recipient of her letter was Lionel Logue, an Australian in his early 70s, who was also, as it turned out, close to the end of his life. Over the previous quarter of a century, this publican’s son from Adelaide, without a formal qualification to his name, had come to occupy an extraordinary position within the inner circle of King George, father of the present queen, not just as a speech therapist, but also as a friend.

The relationship between the two men is at the heart of the film The King’s Speech , which went on selected release at theaters in the U.S. over Thanksgiving weekend and will be shown elsewhere in the country over the coming weeks. After delighting critics at film festivals from Toronto to London, the film, starring Colin Firth as the king—or Bertie as he was always known to his intimates—and Geoffrey Rush as Logue, appears destined to be rewarded by the Academy in February.

Among the critics’ plaudits, however, there have been some notes of dissent—from, among others, Andrew Roberts, the respected British historian, writing last week here on The Daily Beast . Although gorgeously produced, he says, the film as history “is worthless because of its addiction to long-exploded myths.”

When the king made a speech on the evening of September 3, 1939, the day Britain declared war on Germany, he asked Logue to go through it with him first.

Roberts is right to point out that Tom Hooper, the director, has tinkered with some of the basic facts, such as having Winston Churchill back the abdication of Edward VIII, which put a reluctant Bertie onto the throne in December 1936, whereas Churchill instead spoke out in favor of Edward and his romance with Wallis Simpson. But then this never claimed to be a documentary.

When it comes to the debt owed by King George to Logue, though, Hooper's film is spot on—as became clear to me going through hundreds of diary entries, letters, and other documents that form the basis for the book The King’s Speech: How One Man Saved the British Monarchy , which I have written with Logue’s grandson, Mark, and is being published to coincide with the release of the film.

The two men first met in 1926, when Bertie went to consult Logue in the dingy set of rooms at the cheap end of Harley Street in the heart of Britain’s medical establishment that he had rented after arriving, virtually penniless, with his wife and three sons on the boat from Australia two years earlier.

Bertie was badly in need of help. He had began to stammer at the age of 8—the letter ‘k’ (as in king) proved a particular challenge—and his condition worsened after he was created Duke of York in 1920 and had to take on official engagements. A major speech in front of thousands of people at the British Empire exhibition in Wembley in May 1925—which forms the starting point of the film—proved a particular humiliation. And he soon faced the grueling prospect of a major six-month tour of New Zealand and Australia.

The duke had already seen his fill of “experts,” but no one had been able to cure him. He was persuaded to have one last try by his glamorous young wife, Elizabeth, better remembered today as the queen mother (played in the film by Helena Bonham Carter). "I can cure you," Logue declared after they had spent an hour and a half together. "But it will need a tremendous effort by you. Without that effort, it can't be done."

Bertie certainly put in the required effort—but this was no quick fix. Indeed, despite weekly sessions with Logue, coupled with a rigorous program of exercises, he continued to consult the Australian for the rest of life. In the process the two men became close—even though, judging by the tone of their letters, the real-life Logue was somewhat more deferential toward his pupil than his on-screen depiction.

Their relationship intensified after Bertie became king. His stammer, as Roberts asserts, may not have been as bad in reality as in the movie, but it remained a major preoccupation—otherwise why would he have had several one-to-one sessions with Logue in the run-up to his coronation in May 1937? And why would he have insisted on his therapist joining the royal family for Christmas lunch at Sandringham so he could help prepare a broadcast to the empire that afternoon—and in subsequent Christmases?

Logue’s own diary entries show how much of a strain the king still found public speaking. One rehearsal on May 6, six days before the coronation, went especially badly: According to Logue’s account, the king became almost hysterical, although the queen managed to calm him down, “He is a good fellow,” Logue wrote of the king, “and only wants careful handling.”

• Andrew Roberts: The King Who Couldn’t Speak When the king made a speech on the evening of September 3, 1939, the day Britain declared war on Germany, he asked Logue to go through it with him first. We know that because an annotated copy—showing Bertie where to pause and breathe—was among Logue’s papers.

Just over a year later, when the king was practicing his speech for that year's State Opening of Parliament, he greeted Logue grinning like a schoolboy. "Logue, I've got the jitters," he declared. "I woke up at 1 o'clock after dreaming I was in parliament with my mouth wide open and couldn't say a word." Although both men laughed heartily, it brought home to Logue that even now, after all the years they had spent working together, the king's speech impediment still weighed heavily on him.

And so it went on through the war years, until a few days before Christmas 1944, when the king finally felt confident enough to deliver his message without Logue by his side. The broadcast went well. Logue, listening at home in London, with friends, rang the king immediately afterward to congratulate him. “My job is over, sir,” he declared. “Not at all,” the king replied. “It is the preliminary work that counts, and that is where you are indispensable.”

Plus: Check out more of the latest entertainment, fashion, and culture coverage on Sexy Beast—photos, videos, features, and Tweets .

Peter Conradi is a journalist with The Sunday Times of London. Read more about the book at www-the-kings-speech.com

Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast here .

READ THIS LIST

Advertise with us

History Magazine
History of Britain

The King’s Speech

Perhaps you have seen the Oscar winning film, now you can view the original transcript of the King’s Speech, which was sent to Scotland Yard in 1939, announcing that Britain was going to war…

Ben Johnson

Perhaps you have seen the award winning film – which was nominated for 12 Oscars – now you can view the original transcript of the King’s Speech, which was sent to Scotland Yard in 1939, announcing that Britain was going to war.

The transcript – which was broadcast to the nation on 3 September 1939 – can be viewed free at the Metropolitan Police’ Historical Collection – along with hundreds of other documents, artefacts and images detailing the history of policing since 1829.

The King’s Speech – starring Colin Firth – tells the inspiring story of George VI who overcomes his stammer as he reluctantly takes the throne when his brother, Edward VIII abdicates in 1936 over his plans to marry twice divorced Wallis Simpson.

A series of announcements by the King and Prime Minister were broadcast to the country asking police for their help in getting people to follow air raid precautions and wear gas masks. A war cabinet was also formed and people were asked to stand firm and resolute in the battle ahead.

In his first speech, on 3 September 1939 , King George VI said: “In this grave hour, perhaps the most fateful in our history, for the second time in the lives of most of us we are at war. Over and over again we have tried to find a peaceful way out of the differences between ourselves and those who are now our enemies. But it has been in vain. The task will be hard. There may be dark days ahead and war is no longer confined to the battlefield.”

The new king quickly won the respect of his ministers and his people and his hard work and conscientious manner eventually brought him respect in his war torn country.

Neil Paterson, Manager of the Historical Collection said: “The Met is in such a unique position to have a rich history of documents, photos and images dating back to 1829. We are very proud of our Collection – which is free to see – and people from all over the world regularly come to view it.”

View the transcript below of the King’s speech:

The Historical Collection is based at Empress State Building, Empress Approach, Lillie Road, London, SW6 1TR, London, from 10am – 4pm weekdays.

Published: 25th December 2014.

History in your inbox

Next article.

Historic Allies and Enemies of Great Britain

Since the Act of Union in 1707, the Kingdom of Great Britain has fought in over 120 wars across a total of 170 countries...

King George VI

He took over the British throne following his older brother's abdication in 1936. Because of a crippling stutter, he was terribly shy. With the help of an unorthodox Australian speech therapist, he conquered the stammer and famously addressed millions of people around the world in a live radio broadcast on Sept. 3, 1939, after Britain declared war on Germany. A call to patriotism, it was one of the best speeches he had ever made.

Colin Firth as King George VI

Though he is most likely to win the best actor Oscar, Firth tells THR , "I was full of doubt a lot of the time" while shooting. "Doubt because we couldn't really know all the history, doubt because I wasn't always sure I was getting to the bottom of things, and I really wanted to."

Queen Elizabeth

She was the Queen consort of King George VI from 1936 until her husband's death in 1952, accompanying him husband on diplomatic tours to France and the United States in the run-up to World War II. She also supported him as he conquered his stammer and stood by his side as he delivered his rousing 1939 speech.

Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth

"I wanted to do her justice," the British actress tells THR of playing the Queen (she earned a best actress Oscar nomination). "Not just make her the archetypical woman behind the man in the background … [I wanted to give her] some authority."

Lionel Logue

Though he had no medical degree or professional training, Lionel Logue successfully cured the King of his stammer. Their friendship lead to his knighthood as member of the Royal Victorian Order.

Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue

He scored a best supporting actor Oscar nomination for his role. "As an Australian, I'm as excited to be recognized and honored by the Academy as my character must have been when his London speech therapy business flourished when the future King of England happened to pop by one day," he tells THR .

King Edward VIII

He reigned for less than 11 months before abdicating in 1936 in favor of marrying American divorcee Wallis Simpson .

Guy Pearce as King Edward VIII

He has said growing up in Australia aided him in perfecting the role. "An English actor might have been a bit more fearful about being so raw with this character and possibly irritating that famous royal family that lives down the road. But I'd already been shipped out to Australia. They couldn't ship me any farther," said Pearce.

Wallis Simpson

She divorced twice before marrying former King Edward VIII, six months after he abdicated the throne. Essentially exiled from the royal family, she and her husband remained controversial celebrities for the rest of their lives as the Duchess and Duke of Windsor.

Eve Best as Wallis Simpson

In the original King's Speech script, Best didn't have a single line. Screenwriter David Seidler ended up giving her some dialogue.

Search Please fill out this field.
Manage Your Subscription
Give a Gift Subscription
Newsletters
Sweepstakes

Long-Forgotten Letter Reveals Truth Behind Colin Firth's Real-Life Role in 'The King's Speech'

A previously unknown letter from King George VI to his speech therapist is being auctioned on April 29

A long-forgotten letter from King George VI to his speech therapist has revealed more about the true story behind Colin Firth ’s Oscar-winning role in The King’s Speech .

Written at Windsor Castle on May 17, 1937 — just five days after the English monarch’s coronation — the letter details King George’s immense gratitude towards Lionel Logue for helping him to control his debilitating stammer.

“The Queen and I have just viewed the film of our Coronation, & I could not wait to send you a few lines to thank you again for your hard work in helping me prepare for the great day,” Queen Elizabeth ‘s father says in the letter, which is scheduled to be auctioned on April 29.

“The success was due to your expert supervision and unfailing patience with me over recent months, & I truly don’t know how I could have done it without you,” the letter continued.

Australian Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush in the hit 2010 movie) first helped the King to control his stammer in 1926 when he was the Duke of York.

As detailed in the movie — which also features The Crown star Helena Bonham Carter — Logue’s use of a number of revolutionary methods ultimately helped George to conquer both his stammer and his fear of speaking in public.

Thanks to this and George’s determination, the King was able to expertly read out his 1937 coronation speech on BBC radio, with the entire British Empire tuning in to listen.

“I want you to know how grateful I am, not only for your invaluable help with my speech, but for your devoted friendship & encouragement,” adds George in the letter.

“You know how anxious I was to get my responses right in the Abbey, the poor rehearsal adding greatly to my anxiety,” he added. “My mind was finally set at ease tonight. Not a moment’s hesitation or mistake!”

Yet this doesn’t mean the coronation went off entirely hitch-free either: the King’s letter goes on to reveal just how nervous he was on the eve of the coronation, and how he almost suffered just as many problems with the pen he used to sign his oath.

“The ink got all over my fingers,” says the King. “Fortunately, one can hardly make it out.”

Alongside the letter, King George also sent Logue a silver-gilt cigarette case to thank him for his help. Bearing George’s royal cipher, this is also part of the auction lot, which will take place at Woolley & Wallis in Salisbury, England. The starting price is $5,000.

“We believe this letter is the only example written to Logue by George VI, which has not been retained by the Logue family,” explains Rupert Slingsby from Woolley & Wallis.

Can’t get enough of PEOPLE ‘s Royals coverage? Sign up for our free Royals newsletter to get the latest updates on Kate Middleton , Meghan Markle and more!

“Whilst our vendor realized the historical significance of the items, I don’t think he appreciated quite how valuable they could be to British collectors,” he adds.

“Before The King’s Speech , most people were unaware of the difficulties that George VI encountered with his stammer, but the enduring and endearing friendship between the King and Lionel Logue that emerged from that is especially evident in this new letter.”

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

Peyton Robinson

Accidental Texan

Mary & George

Cristina escobar.

Megamind vs the Doom Syndicate

Brian Tallerico

Film Credits

The King's Speech (2010)

Rated R for language

118 minutes

Directed by

David Seidler

Latest blog posts

A Plea for Someone to Save Megalopolis

The End of the World is Going to be Weird on Prime Video’s Quirky, Clever Adaptation of Fallout

The Zellner Brothers Take a Walk in the Woods with Sasquatch Sunset

The Scene That Clint Eastwood Cut to Make Unforgiven a Classic

Watch CBS News

The story behind "The King's Speech"

June 12, 2011 / 8:47 PM EDT / CBS News

This story was first published Feb. 20, 2011. It was updated on June 12, 2011.

Last winter, "The King's Speech" dominated the Oscars when it took home four out of the 12 Academy Awards it was nominated for - including best picture, best director, best actor and best original screenplay.

The movie is based on the true story of George VI, the father of the present queen of England. George VI was a man who, in the 1930s, desperately did not want to be king. He was afflicted nearly all his life by a crippling stammer which stood to rob Britain of a commanding voice at the very moment that Hitler rose to threaten Europe.

The story struck a nerve with audiences and critics alike, as we reported last February, just before Colin Firth won his first Oscar for his critically-acclaimed portrayal of George VI.

The hidden letters Dig into the treasure trove of historic letters between a stuttering king and his commoner friend, speech therapist Lionel Logue.

When correspondent Scott Pelley asked Firth if he liked being king, Firth said, "I think it's hard to think of anything worse, really. I mean, I wouldn't change places with this man. And I would be very surprised if anybody watching the film would change places with this man."

"It's a perfect storm of catastrophic misfortunes for a man who does not want the limelight, who does not want to be heard publicly, who does not want to expose this humiliating impediment that he's spent his life battling," Firth explained. "He's actually fighting his own private war. He'd rather have been facing machine gun fire than have to face the microphone."

The microphone hung like a noose for the king, who was a stutterer from the age of 8. He was never meant to be king. But in 1936 his older brother gave up the throne to marry Wallace Simpson, a divorced American. Suddenly George VI and his wife Elizabeth reigned over an empire that was home to 25 percent of the world's population.

And like the George of over 1,000 years before, he had a dragon to slay: radio.

Extra: The real King George Extra: Colin Firth, King and Queen Extra: Firth's Oscar-nominated roles Extra: Firth's "bland" looks Pictures: Colin Firth on "60 Minutes"

"When I looked at images of him or I listened to him, you do see that physical struggle," Firth said of the king's public speeches. "His eyes close, and you see him try to gather himself. And it's heartbreaking."

Among those listening was a 7-year-old British boy who, like the king, had a wealth of words but could not get them out.

"I was a profound stutterer. I started stuttering just before my third birthday. I didn't rid myself of it until I was 16. But my parents would encourage me to listen to the king's speeches during the war. And I thought, 'Wow if he can do that, there is hope for me.' So he became my childhood hero," David Seidler, who wrote the movie, told Pelley.

Seidler had grown up with the story, but he didn't want to tell the tale until he had permission from the late king's widow, known as The Queen Mother.

Seidler had sent a letter to her. "And finally, an answer came and it said, 'Dear Mr. Seidler, please, not during my lifetime the memory of these events is still too painful.' If the Queen Mum says wait to an Englishman, an Englishman waits. But, I didn't think I'd have to wait that long," he explained.

Asked why, Seidler said, "Well, she was a very elderly lady. Twenty-five years later, just shy of her 102nd birthday, she finally left this realm."

After the Queen Mother's death in 2002, Seidler went to work. He found the theme of the story in the clash between his royal highness and an Australian commoner who became the king's salvation, an unknown speech therapist named Lionel Logue.

"The words that keep coming up when you hear about Lionel Logue are 'charisma' and 'confidence.' He would never say, 'I can fix your stuttering.' He would say, 'You can get a handle on your stuttering. I know you can succeed,'" Seidler said.

Geoffrey Rush plays Logue, an unorthodox therapist and a royal pain.

They say you can't make this stuff up, and in much of the film that's true. Seidler could not have imagined his work would lead to a discovery that would rewrite history. Researchers for the film tracked down Lionel Logue's grandson Mark, because the movie needed family photos to get the clothing right.

Mark Logue not only had pictures, he also had some diaries.

His grandfather's diaries were up in the attic in boxes that the family had nearly forgotten. When Logue hauled them down for the movie, he discovered more than 100 letters between the therapist and his king.

"'My dear Logue, thank you so much for sending me the books for my birthday, which are most acceptable.' That's so British isn't it. 'Yours very sincerely, Albert,'" Logue read from one of the letters.

"As you read through all these letters between your grandfather and the king, what did it tell you about the relationship between these two men?" Pelley asked.

"It's not the relationship between a doctor and his patient, it's a relationship between friends," Logue said.

We met Logue at the same address where his grandfather treated the king. And among the hundreds of pages of documents were Logue's first observations of George VI.

"Probably the most startling thing was the king's appointment card," Logue told Pelley. "It described in detail the king's stammer, which we hadn't seen anywhere else. And it also described in detail the intensity with the appointments."

The king saw Lionel Logue every day for an hour, including weekends.

"You know, he was so committed. I think he decided 'This is it. I have to overcome this stammer, and this is my chance,'" Mark Logue told Pelley.

In the film, the king throws himself into crazy therapies. But in truth, Logue didn't record his methods. The scenes are based on Seidler's experience and ideas of the actors.

"We threw in stuff that we knew. I mean, somebody had told me that the only way to release that muscle," actor Geoffrey Rush said of one of the speech exercises he did in the movie. "And of course, little did I realize that the particular lens they were using on that shot made me look like a Galapagos tortoise."

While the treatments spring from imagination, the actors read Logue's diaries and letters to bring realism to everything else.

"The line at the end, I found reading the diaries in bed one night, 'cause this is what I used to do every night, when Logue says 'You still stammered on the 'W'," Firth said.

The line was used in the movie.

"It shows that these men had a sense of humor. It showed that there was wit. It showed there was self mockery and it just showed a kind of buoyancy of spirit between them. The fact that he spoke on a desk standing upright in this little hidden room is something we found in the diaries as well," Firth told Pelley.

"In reality he had to stand up to speak, he had to have the window open," Firth said. "And he had to have his jacket off."

"And that wonderful, specific little eccentric observation that came from reality," Firth added.

One of the most remarkable things to come out of the Logue attic was a copy of what maybe the most important speech the king ever made - the speech that gave the movie its name. This was the moment when King George VI had to tell his people that for the second time in a generation they were at war with Germany. The stakes were enormous. The leader of the empire could not stumble over these words.

Mark Logue has the original copy of "the speech," typed out on Buckingham Palace stationary.

"What are all of these marks? All these vertical lines? What do they mean?" Pelley asked, looking over the documents.

"They're deliberate pauses so that the king would be able to sort of attack the next word without hesitation," Logue said. "He's replacing some words, he's crossing them out and suggesting another word that the king would find easier to pronounce."

"Here's a line that he's changed, 'We've tried to find a peaceful way out of the differences between my government.' He's changed that from, 'my government,' to, 'the differences between ourselves and those who would be our enemies,'" Pelley said.

"You know, I'm curious. Have either of you snuck into a theater and watched the film with a regular audience?" Pelley asked Firth and Rush.

"No, the only time I've ever snuck in to watch my own film I got quite nervous about it, because I just thought it be embarrassing to be seen doing that, so I pulled my collar up, and the hat down, over my eyes, and you know, snuck in as if I was going into a porn cinema, or something and went up the stairs, crept in, sidled in, to sit at the back, and I was the only person in the cinema. That's how well the film was doing," Firth remembered.

Now, it's a lot harder for Firth to go unnoticed. Recently he was immortalized with a star on Hollywood's Walk of Fame and brought along his Italian wife Livia.

They've been married 14 years and have two sons. With "The King's Speech," we realized Firth is one of the most familiar actors that we know almost nothing about. So we took him back to his home town Alresford in Hampshire, outside London. He's the son of college professors, but Firth dropped out of high school to go to acting school.

"But you don't have a Hampshire accent," Pelley pointed out.

"No. My accent has changed over the years, as a matter of survival. So until I was about 10, 'I used to talk like that,'" Firth replied, mimicking the local accent. "I remember it might have been on this street, actually, where I think the conversation went something like, 'Oy, you want to fight?' And I said, 'No, I don't.' 'Why not?' 'Well, 'cause you'll win.' 'No, I won't.' 'Well, will I win then?' 'Well, you might not.' And so, you know, we went trying to process the logic. And I thought, 'Have we dealt with it now?"

"Do we still have to fight?" Pelley asked.

"Do we actually have to do the practical now? We've done the theory," Firth replied.

He wanted us to see his first stage. It turned out to be the yard of his elementary school where he told stories from his own imagination.

"And at lunch times on the field up here, the crowd would gather and demand the story. They'd all sit 'round and say, 'No, we want the next bit,'" Firth remembered.

Firth told Pelley he found his calling for acting at the age of 14.

Asked what happened then, he told Pelley, "I used to go to drama classes up the road here on Saturday mornings. And one day I just had this epiphany. It was I can do this. I want to do this."

He has done 42 films in 26 years, most of them the polar opposite of "The King's Speech," like "Mamma Mia!"

"How hard was it to get you to do the scene for the closing credits?" Pelley asked, referring to Firth doing a musical number in an outrageous, Abba-inspired outfit.

"I think that's the reason I did the film," Firth joked.

"You have no shame?" Pelley asked.

"I'm sorry. That's if one thing has come out of '60 Minutes' here, it's we have discovered, we've unveiled the fact that Colin Firth has no shame. I am such a drag queen. It's one of my primary driving forces in life. If you cannot dangle a spandex suit and a little bit of mascara in front of me and not just have me go weak at the knees," Firth joked.

From queen to king, Firth is an actor of amazing range who had his best shot at his first Oscar.

Like George VI himself, this movie wasn't meant to be king. "The King's Speech" was made for under $15 million. But now the movie, the director, the screenwriter David Seidler, who made it happen, and all the principal actors were nominated for Academy Awards. Geoffrey Rush had won once before.

"What advice to you have for this man who may very likely win the Oscar this year?" Pelley asked Rush.

"Well enjoy it. It isn't the end of anything because you will go on and do a couple more flops probably, you might even sneak into another film in which no one is in the house," Rush joked.

But on Oscar night, stammering King George had the last word. A lot of movies are based on true stories. But "The King's Speech" has reclaimed history.

The Real King's Speech

The story of King George VI of Britain and his struggles with his speech impediment and the unexpected responsibilities of the throne. The story of King George VI of Britain and his struggles with his speech impediment and the unexpected responsibilities of the throne. The story of King George VI of Britain and his struggles with his speech impediment and the unexpected responsibilities of the throne.

David Barrie
Mark Rossiter
Laurence Fox
King George VI
Sarah Bradford
1 User review

Self - Narrator
(as Lawrence Fox)

(archive footage)

Self - Biographer, George VI
Self - Co-Author, The King's Speech
Self - Former Logue Patient
Self - Biographer, The Queen

Self - Royal Biographer

All cast & crew
Production, box office & more at IMDbPro

More like this

Did you know

Trivia The narrator, Laurence Fox , himself played George VI in the same year's W.E. (2011) .
Connections References The King's Speech (2010)

User reviews 1

Hallelujah289
May 10, 2020
February 23, 2011 (United Kingdom)
United Kingdom
The King Speaks
1212 Productions
See more company credits at IMDbPro

Technical specs

Runtime 1 hour

More to explore

The best films about historical royalty

Posted: April 8, 2024 | Last updated: April 8, 2024

<p>To paraphrase Lorde, we may never be royals, but many people enjoy watching movies about royalty. There's excess, intrigue, romance, violence, and a whole lot more to films set in the world of modern and historical royals. While some of these films don’t land, many of them have been successful. These are the best films based on real royal figures. By the way, that means no King Arthur.</p>

The best film about historical royalty

To paraphrase Lorde, we may never be royals, but many people enjoy watching movies about royalty. There's excess, intrigue, romance, violence, and a whole lot more to films set in the world of modern and historical royals. While some of these films don’t land, many of them have been successful. These are the best films based on real royal figures. By the way, that means no King Arthur.

<p>Elizabeth II was Queen of England for decades before her September 2022 death at 96. She witnessed a lot, including the death of her one-time daughter-in-law Diana Spencer. <em>The Queen</em> is one of writer Peter Morgan’s explorations of British royalty, but this one had Helen Mirren at the center. Mirren won Best Actress for playing Elizabeth.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/24_movies_that_perfectly_showcase_teen_angst_031324/s1__39082518'>24 movies that perfectly showcase teen angst</a></p>

'The Queen' (2006)

Elizabeth II was Queen of England for decades before her September 2022 death at 96. She witnessed a lot, including the death of her one-time daughter-in-law Diana Spencer. The Queen is one of writer Peter Morgan’s explorations of British royalty, but this one had Helen Mirren at the center. Mirren won Best Actress for playing Elizabeth.

You may also like: 20 facts you might not know about 'Star Wars – Episode IV: A New Hope'

<p>Young Elizabeth II is in<em> The King’s Speech</em> as well. The film centers on her father. After George VI’s father died and his brother abdicated the throne, it was left to him to rule over the United Kingdom at the onset of World War II. However, George VI dealt with a stutter, and this film is about him overcoming that. <em>The King’s Speech</em> ended up a controversial Best Picture winner, with many feeling like <em>The Social Network</em> should have won.</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'The King’s Speech' (2010)

Young Elizabeth II is in The King’s Speech as well. The film centers on her father. After George VI’s father died and his brother abdicated the throne, it was left to him to rule over the United Kingdom at the onset of World War II. However, George VI dealt with a stutter, and this film is about him overcoming that. The King’s Speech ended up a controversial Best Picture winner, with many feeling like The Social Network should have won.

<p>Yorgos Lanthimos was never going to give us a normal movie about royalty. He’s the guy who directed <em>Dogtooth</em> and <em>The Lobster</em>, after all. However, this black comedy about Queen Anne and two of her royal consorts struck a chord with Oscar voters. Olivia Colman’s turn as Anne won her Best Actress.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/20_memorable_one_hit_wonders_from_the_2000s_040824/s1__38734169'>20 memorable one-hit wonders from the 2000s</a></p>

'The Favourite' (2018)

Yorgos Lanthimos was never going to give us a normal movie about royalty. He’s the guy who directed Dogtooth and The Lobster , after all. However, this black comedy about Queen Anne and two of her royal consorts struck a chord with Oscar voters. Olivia Colman’s turn as Anne won her Best Actress.

You may also like: 20 memorable one-hit wonders from the 2000s

<p>Talk about a polarizing movie. People seem to either love Sofia Coppola’s take on Marie Antoinette or despise it. She used pop music and all manner of anachronisms in her film about France’s controversial queen. You have to at least credit Coppola for not taking a run-of-the-mill approach to the material.</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'Marie Antoinette' (2006)

Talk about a polarizing movie. People seem to either love Sofia Coppola’s take on Marie Antoinette or despise it. She used pop music and all manner of anachronisms in her film about France’s controversial queen. You have to at least credit Coppola for not taking a run-of-the-mill approach to the material.

<p>Cate Blanchett is considered one of the best actors of her generation, and it all began with her breakout turn starring in <em>Elizabeth</em>. Now, this film is about Elizabeth I, not the monarch played by Helen Mirren roughly a decade later. This period piece earned Blanchett her first Oscar nomination but not her last.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/the_25_greatest_villain_names_of_all_time_040824/s1__35686598'>The 25 greatest villain names of all time</a></p>

'Elizabeth' (1998)

Cate Blanchett is considered one of the best actors of her generation, and it all began with her breakout turn starring in Elizabeth . Now, this film is about Elizabeth I, not the monarch played by Helen Mirren roughly a decade later. This period piece earned Blanchett her first Oscar nomination but not her last.

You may also like: The 25 greatest villain names of all time

<p>About a decade after <em>Elizabeth</em>, director Shekhar Kapur reunited with his star for another film about Elizabeth I. This one covers the later period of her reign. Blanchett (and Geoffrey Rush) returned, and you’ll never guess what happened. Yes, Blanchett was nominated again for Best Actress, putting her in rare company among people who have been nominated more than once for playing the same character (or historical figure, in this case).</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'Elizabeth: The Golden Age' (2007)

About a decade after Elizabeth , director Shekhar Kapur reunited with his star for another film about Elizabeth I. This one covers the later period of her reign. Blanchett (and Geoffrey Rush) returned, and you’ll never guess what happened. Yes, Blanchett was nominated again for Best Actress, putting her in rare company among people who have been nominated more than once for playing the same character (or historical figure, in this case).

<p>The vast majority of these films are about European royalty or, in this case, non-European royalty through the prism of a white person. <em>The King of I</em> is based on a popular musical. In this version, Yul Brynner (who is very much not Thai) plays the King of Siam, while Deborah Kerr plays Anna.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/20_movies_that_are_guaranteed_to_make_you_cry_081723/s1__38945950'>20 movies that are guaranteed to make you cry</a></p>

'The King and I' (1956)

The vast majority of these films are about European royalty or, in this case, non-European royalty through the prism of a white person. The King of I is based on a popular musical. In this version, Yul Brynner (who is very much not Thai) plays the King of Siam, while Deborah Kerr plays Anna.

You may also like: Musical acts from the '80s who are still playing today

<p>The British also have an affinity for royalty from other countries, apparently. This is a British film about Tsar Nicholas II and his wife, Alexandra, the last ruling royals of Russia. Things did not turn out well for them, but <em>Nicholas and Alexandra</em> had a better go of it. The movie got a Best Picture nomination</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'Nicholas and Alexandra' (1971)

The British also have an affinity for royalty from other countries, apparently. This is a British film about Tsar Nicholas II and his wife, Alexandra, the last ruling royals of Russia. Things did not turn out well for them, but Nicholas and Alexandra had a better go of it. The movie got a Best Picture nomination

<p>Let’s not forget the Pharaohs, the royals of Ancient Egypt. Cleopatra is one of the most famous royals in history. She was played by Elizabeth Taylor in this film. The making of <em>Cleopatra</em> was infamous for its bloated budget and the personal lives of stars Taylor and Richard Burton. In the end, though, that all overshadowed the fact the movie turned out just fine.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/two_part_harmony_the_best_musical_couples_of_all_time_031324/s1__39242062'>Two-part harmony: The best musical couples of all time</a></p>

'Cleopatra' (1963)

Let’s not forget the Pharaohs, the royals of Ancient Egypt. Cleopatra is one of the most famous royals in history. She was played by Elizabeth Taylor in this film. The making of Cleopatra was infamous for its bloated budget and the personal lives of stars Taylor and Richard Burton. In the end, though, that all overshadowed the fact the movie turned out just fine.

You may also like: 20 facts you might not know about 'The Hunger Games'

<p>Queen Victoria is one of England’s most famous monarchs, but she usually only pops up fleetingly in films, like various Sherlock Holmes tales. She got to be the star of <em>The Young Victoria</em>, though, with Emily Blunt in the role. Julian Fellowes, the creator of <em>Downton Abbey</em>, wrote the screenplay.</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'The Young Victoria' (2009)

Queen Victoria is one of England’s most famous monarchs, but she usually only pops up fleetingly in films, like various Sherlock Holmes tales. She got to be the star of The Young Victoria , though, with Emily Blunt in the role. Julian Fellowes, the creator of Downton Abbey , wrote the screenplay.

<p>Alexander the Great reigned over large swaths of land and became a hugely impactful historical figure. <em>Alexander</em> is a flawed film. It is, after all, written and directed by Oliver Stone. Colin Farrell is compelling as Alexander the Great, and this is the best film about a massively important historical person.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/the_most_memorable_vikings_in_popular_culture_031324/s1__37237165'>The most memorable Vikings in popular culture</a></p>

'Alexander' (2004)

Alexander the Great reigned over large swaths of land and became a hugely impactful historical figure. Alexander is a flawed film. It is, after all, written and directed by Oliver Stone. Colin Farrell is compelling as Alexander the Great, and this is the best film about a massively important historical person.

You may also like: The most memorable movie character deaths

<p>Richard Burton is back as Thomas Becket, who was Archibishop of Canterbury and a key person in the life of Henry II. This film is about the relationship between the two, which ended with Becket effectively martyred. Peter O’Toole played Henry II, and the movie won Best Adapted Screenplay.</p>

'Becket' (1964)

Richard Burton is back as Thomas Becket, who was Archibishop of Canterbury and a key person in the life of Henry II. This film is about the relationship between the two, which ended with Becket effectively martyred. Peter O’Toole played Henry II, and the movie won Best Adapted Screenplay.

<p>Not only is O’Toole in this movie, but he played Henry II again. However, the focus is on his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine this time. Anthony Hopkins was given his first major role as Richard the Lionheart. Hepburn won Best Actress, her third in that category, further establishing herself as an all-time legendary actor.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/women_who_shaped_millennial_feminists_012924/s1__38887376'>Women who shaped millennial feminists</a></p>

'The Lion in Winter' (1968)

Not only is O’Toole in this movie, but he played Henry II again. However, the focus is on his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine this time. Anthony Hopkins was given his first major role as Richard the Lionheart. Hepburn won Best Actress, her third in that category, further establishing herself as an all-time legendary actor.

You may also like: The 25 most memorable hip-hop one-hit wonders

<p>William Shakespeare wrote a lot of historical plays about royalty. One of those is <em>Richard III</em>. It contributed to a not-so-great reputation for the king as the centuries went on. In this particular adaptation, the action is moved to the 1930s, with Ian McKellen playing Richard III as a fascist. Historically accurate? Not so much, but interesting nonetheless.</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'Richard III' (1995)

William Shakespeare wrote a lot of historical plays about royalty. One of those is Richard III . It contributed to a not-so-great reputation for the king as the centuries went on. In this particular adaptation, the action is moved to the 1930s, with Ian McKellen playing Richard III as a fascist. Historically accurate? Not so much, but interesting nonetheless.

<p>King George III is famous in America, as he was King of England at the time of the American Revolution. It was also thought, for many years, that he was mentally ill. <em>The Madness of King George</em> picks up that ball and runs with it. While it may not be entirely accurate, it was well-received in the United States and the United Kingdom. Even after that whole revolution thing, we can still find common ground.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/the_essential_eric_clapton_playlist_081623/s1__31655945'>The essential Eric Clapton playlist</a></p>

'The Madness of King George' (1994)

King George III is famous in America, as he was King of England at the time of the American Revolution. It was also thought, for many years, that he was mentally ill. The Madness of King George picks up that ball and runs with it. While it may not be entirely accurate, it was well-received in the United States and the United Kingdom. Even after that whole revolution thing, we can still find common ground.

You may also like: The 20 best character actors in television history

<p>The film that Kenneth Branagh built his career on. He starred, wrote, and directed this adaptation of a Shakespeare play. He had never directed before but was nominated for Best Director and Best Actor. This basically let Branagh adapt Shakespeare plays until the cows came home, which he happily did.</p>

'Henry V' (1989)

The film that Kenneth Branagh built his career on. He starred, wrote, and directed this adaptation of a Shakespeare play. He had never directed before but was nominated for Best Director and Best Actor. This basically let Branagh adapt Shakespeare plays until the cows came home, which he happily did.

<p>This Best Picture winner is more about Thomas More, but you can’t tell More’s story without Henry VIII. More is the man who refused to sign off on Henry VIII’s divorce, which did not sit well with the monarch. Robert Shaw plays Henry, but Paul Scofield won Best Actor for playing Moore.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/celebrities_with_the_most_difficult_names_to_pronounce_012924/s1__28843502'>Celebrities with the most difficult names to pronounce</a></p>

'A Man for All Seasons' (1966)

This Best Picture winner is more about Thomas More, but you can’t tell More’s story without Henry VIII. More is the man who refused to sign off on Henry VIII’s divorce, which did not sit well with the monarch. Robert Shaw plays Henry, but Paul Scofield won Best Actor for playing Moore.

You may also like: 20 country artists you need to watch in 2024

<p>Peter Morgan is back. This time, with a not-very-accurate retelling of the story of Anne and Mary Boleyn. Mary was Henry VIII’s mistress until he married her sister Anne, who became his second queen. That didn’t take either. Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johansson played the Boleyn sisters, while once again, Henry VIII plays second fiddle in a film.</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'The Other Boleyn Girl' (2008)

Peter Morgan is back. This time, with a not-very-accurate retelling of the story of Anne and Mary Boleyn. Mary was Henry VIII’s mistress until he married her sister Anne, who became his second queen. That didn’t take either. Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johansson played the Boleyn sisters, while once again, Henry VIII plays second fiddle in a film.

<p>The one animated film on this list. Don Bluth’s movie is about Anastasia, daughter of the aforementioned Tsar Nicholas II. There was a longstanding rumor that Anastasia had survived the Russian Revolution, which sets the table for this movie. Christopher Lloyd is also on hand as Rasputin. Oh, and it’s a musical, by the way.</p><p>You may also like: <a href='https://www.yardbarker.com/entertainment/articles/20_oscar_winning_songs_still_worth_listening_to_012924/s1__39174457'>20 Oscar-winning songs still worth listening to</a></p>

'Anastasia' (1997)

The one animated film on this list. Don Bluth’s movie is about Anastasia, daughter of the aforementioned Tsar Nicholas II. There was a longstanding rumor that Anastasia had survived the Russian Revolution, which sets the table for this movie. Christopher Lloyd is also on hand as Rasputin. Oh, and it’s a musical, by the way.

You may also like: The most underrated rock guitarists of all time

<p>We started with <em>The Queen</em>, and we end with <em>The King</em>. The movie is based on a few of Shakespeare’s historical plays and stars Timothee Chalamet as Henry V just as his star rose. He has a wild haircut in this movie and is not the only one. The Netflix movie is not entirely successful, but it has quite the cast and some pieces that really work.</p><p><a href='https://www.msn.com/en-us/community/channel/vid-cj9pqbr0vn9in2b6ddcd8sfgpfq6x6utp44fssrv6mc2gtybw0us'>Did you enjoy this slideshow? Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.</a></p>

'The King' (2019)

We started with The Queen , and we end with The King . The movie is based on a few of Shakespeare’s historical plays and stars Timothee Chalamet as Henry V just as his star rose. He has a wild haircut in this movie and is not the only one. The Netflix movie is not entirely successful, but it has quite the cast and some pieces that really work.

Did you enjoy this slideshow? Follow us on MSN to see more of our exclusive entertainment content.

More for You

Choosing Types of Patio Doors: the Pros and Cons of These Popular Doors

Job trend 'resenteeism' has employees coasting through workdays and hanging on, rather than quitting

Teen Psychosis Risk May Be Linked to Computer and Video Game Use

What to Know About Cervical Vertigo (Cervicogenic Dizziness)

Francis Ford Coppola's ‘Megalopolis' to Debut at Cannes in Competition

A general view of the Bashneft-Ufimsky refinery plant is seen outside Ufa, Bashkortostan

Exclusive-Russia considers easing gasoline environmental requirements, sources say

Oklahoma family awarded $2.9M after home seized

'We wanted to stay there forever': This Oklahoma family was awarded $2.9M in lawsuit against turnpike authority — here's how to fight eminent domain

DIY A Stunning Butler Pantry For Extra Kitchen Storage

Study highlights impact of aldehydes on DNA damage and aging

The BRP Sierra Madre in the Second Thomas Shoal.

Marcos Says He’s ‘Horrified’ by Duterte Sea Deal With China

How to Do Back Extensions Without Jacking Up Your Lower Back

Conan O'Brien's Return to ‘The Tonight Show' Was Melancholy, Powerful TV

20 ways to make your sleep better

0411 Today in History

‘Tulsa King' Background Actor Responds To Insults Allegedly Made On Set Of Sylvester Stallone Series: "I Do Feel Like I Was Singled Out"

AES starts phase one operation of Arizona's largest wind farm

RWE to partner with WhiteRock to 'supercharge' U.S. renewable energy plans

Estimate The Cost Of Your Kitchen Countertops With These Simple Tips

“A vote for Biden, a vote for Trump is a vote for Biden and a vote for Trump,

Cornel West chooses Black Lives Matter activist Melina Abdullah as his vice president

Black-and-white shot of Andrew Scott as Tom Ripley leaning against a shop window

Ripley: a 'scintillating and noirish' adaptation

If you’re looking for a way to improve your focus, manage stress or simply relax, walking might be the answer.

Positive steps: Why walking in nature benefits the mind

IMAGES

The King’s Speech review
The True Story Behind "The King's Speech"
THE KING’S (REAL) SPEECH [VIDEO]
The Real King's Speech: King George VI's Stutter (1938)
The Real King's Speech
3 life lessons I learned from ‘The King’s Speech’

COMMENTS

How historically accurate is the movie The King's Speech
The King's Speech accurately shows the real problems caused by the future George VI and the entire Royal Family. In one scene at the opening of an exhibition celebrating the British Empire, George struggles with a speech and becomes visibly upset. The movie shows many senior officials and members of the Royal Family becoming gravely concerned ...
The True Story Behind "The King's Speech"
"The King's Speech" is a 2010 biographical film, recounting the friendship between King George VI of England and his Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue. ... In real life, he encouraged Edward VIII not to abdicate in 1936, and remained a supporter of the royal, believing something could be worked out without having to resort to abdication
How historically accurate is The King's Speech?
The King's Speech is a critically acclaimed film about the struggle of King George VI to overcome his stammer. But how faithful is it to the historical facts? Hugo Vickers, a royal expert who ...
The story behind "The King's Speech"
February 20, 2011 / 11:46 PM EST / CBS News. With 12 Oscar nominations, "The King's Speech" is among the most nominated films of all time. It's based on the true story of George VI, the father of ...
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, ... the film was 74.4% accurate when compared to real-life events, summarising: "Some nips and tucks of the historical record, but mostly an accurate retelling of a unique friendship".
Forgotten archive reveals true story behind 'King's Speech'
The grandson of the Geoffrey Rush character in the movie has the real Lionel Logue's papers. They include letters between King George VI and his grandfather. The two men were really friends for a ...
Tom Hooper: On Directing 'The King's Speech'
The King's Speech was recently nominated for 12 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Director. In 1925, Albert, Duke of York, began seeing a speech therapist to correct his pronounced ...
The real story behind 'The King's Speech'
The actor's commitment finally helped get the award-winning film made. And now, after waiting nearly a lifetime to tell this story, Seidler has become, at age 73, the oldest writer signed to UTA ...
Perspective: How true is 'The King's Speech'?
Perspective: How true is 'The King's Speech'? By David Freeman, Special to the Los Angeles Times. Feb. 13, 2011 12 AM PT. If any best-picture contender was going to face questions about ...
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 True Historical Story
Although gorgeously produced, he says, the film as history "is worthless because of its addiction to long-exploded myths.". When the king made a speech on the evening of September 3, 1939, the ...
The King's Speech Transcript for King George VI
In his first speech, on 3 September 1939, King George VI said: "In this grave hour, perhaps the most fateful in our history, for the second time in the lives of most of us we are at war. Over and over again we have tried to find a peaceful way out of the differences between ourselves and those who are now our enemies. But it has been in vain.
The King's Speech: the real story
The King's Speech is mesmerising, moving and beautifully judged, and cinematically it is right up there with Dame Judi Dench's Mrs Brown and Dame Helen Mirren's Oscar-winning The Queen.
The King's Speech: Real vs. Reel Royalty
King George VI. He took over the British throne following his older brother's abdication in 1936. Because of a crippling stutter, he was terribly shy. With the help of an unorthodox Australian ...
Letter Reveals Truth Behind Colin Firth's Role The King's Speech
A long-forgotten letter from King George VI to his speech therapist has revealed more about the true story behind Colin Firth 's Oscar-winning role in The King's Speech . Written at Windsor ...
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 Real King's Speech
Here's the real speech King George VI delivered on September 3rd, 1939 addressing Britain's involvement in World War II. His Australian speech therapist Lion...
The King's Speech: Royal broadcasts in the BBC archives
The British film, The King's Speech, nominated this week for seven Golden Globes, tells the story of George VI's battle to overcome a terrible stammer. He was a reluctant king, thrust into the ...
The King's Speech
A comparison between the film "The King's Speech (2010)" and King George VI's actual speech broadcasted live on September 03, 1939.
The Real King's Speech: King George VI's Stutter (1938)
King George VI stutters and stammers while opening the Empire exhibition at Ibrox Park in Glasgow, Scotland in 1938. Queen Elizabeth is there (formerly The Q...
The story behind "The King's Speech"
Extra: The real King George Extra: Colin Firth, King and Queen Extra: Firth's Oscar-nominated roles ... But "The King's Speech" has reclaimed history. First published on June 12, 2011 / 8:47 PM ...
The Real King's Speech (2011)
The Real King's Speech: Directed by David Barrie, Mark Rossiter. With Laurence Fox, King George VI, Sarah Bradford, Peter Conradi. The story of King George VI of Britain and his struggles with his speech impediment and the unexpected responsibilities of the throne.
The best films about historical royalty
Young Elizabeth II is in The King's Speech as well. The film centers on her father. After George VI's father died and his brother abdicated the throne, it was left to him to rule over the ...
The King's (Real) Speech
Rare footage and audio of King George VI speaking in public. His stammer becomes quite pronounced midway through.
The role of the Monarchy
The role of the Monarchy. Monarchy is the oldest form of government in the United Kingdom. In a monarchy, a king or queen is Head of State. The British Monarchy is known as a constitutional monarchy. This means that, while The Sovereign is Head of State, the ability to make and pass legislation resides with an elected Parliament.
Cody Fisher trial: Two men sentenced to life after nightclub murder
Two "weak and cowardly" men who stabbed a footballer to death after he accidentally bumped into them in a nightclub have been sentenced to life in prison.. Cody Fisher, 23, was attacked in ...