Although this is not a review blog, I will say that The King’s Speech is a very good film. However, The King’s Speech suffers from a structural defect which I think writers can learn from.
The film has two climaxes.
This fact was not mentioned in most of the gushing positive reviews I read, but I did find mention of it here. To be specific, the film has a personal and a historical climax.
While discussing this fact, someone said to me, “but films are supposed to have highs and lows throughout.” Absolutely – but the last high has to be the highest. The argument between Bertie, who has become king, and Lionel, his speech therapist, is the real climax. Bertie discovers that Lionel has no credentials. He feels lied to as a friend. Additionally, his ability to speak clearly depends on his belief that his training is legitimate. Their friendship and the king’s self-belief are jeopardized in a major reversal. This is what the story is about.
Later, when we get to the historical climax of Bertie’s international speech, we see the importance of the event, but we don’t feel much doubt about the outcome. There’s no reversal here in any character relationship. The king doubts himself, but not due to any concrete change. This high does not top the previous high in its relevance to the story.
To fix this problem, the Lionel and Bertie crisis probably needs to piggy back the historical crisis, so that they feel like one issue. I think the first step would be to make sure the Nazi connection, which raises the story’s stakes, occurs prior to Lionel and Bertie’s crisis.
If you were doctoring this script, how would you fix it?
Screenwrite Now 