Layer Cake (2005)

I've watched a lot of movies about gangsters, about wanna-be gangsters, about business men mistaken for gangsters, about people trying to break into the life, about people trying to break out of the life. There comes a point when you think that you've seen just about all there is to see in the genre. Sure, you'll still watch new films because of this actor or that set-up, and they're enjoyable, but the enjoyment is much like the premise, derivative.
Then along comes a movie like this one, which I must say that I've known about for years but didn't watch because it was always described to me as a, "British gangster flick about a good enough bloke who wants to get out of the life but due to matters beyond his control can't". Well, that sounds an awful lot like every Jason Statham gangster film I've ever seen. Sure, that first one was entertaining, and the second one had some funny bits, and the third one had that one hot actress, and then finally I'm not watching "that" film anymore. but then one day, as you're working your way through a particular actor's works, in my case Daniel Craig, it comes up again and you give in and think that at least Craig and co-star Sienna Miller are pretty to look at. And then you notice once you've finally got the box in your hand that the film also stars some other really great actors like Colm Meaney and George Harris, oh and some guy named Michael Gambon.
Craig plays Mr. X, well that's not his name, but they make a point of never naming him. He's a drug dealer at the distribution level. When the story begins he is finishing what is going to be his last job. He's put aside a lot of money which he has laundered and also has a stake in a very lucrative and more importantly legitimate business. But the boss that X works for has other plans. There is a girl that needs to be found and there is a huge - million pill - drug deal that needs to be brokered.
Nobody is what they seem in this film. X is a "businessman", or so he states at the beginning, but by the end of the film, well he's as gangster as gangster gets. There's his boss that pretty much forces him into this deal, who turns out to be a snitch. There is cool-headed Morty (Harris) that is X's right-hand man, that is until he runs into a guy who sent him down the river for ten, that when Morty is done with him is in a coma after an extremely sever beating in a diner. There is the top-of-the-top criminal overlord, Temple (Gambon) who turns out to be just as dirty and duplicitous as the gangsters he looks down upon.
The girl that X is supposed to be rescuing is Temple's daughter and she doesn't need rescuing, but that puts X on Temple's radar. And the drugs to be moved were stolen from a former Serb Warlord that wants his merchandise back along with the head of everyone involved.
Every time you think that X is down, he's up, and every time that you think he's up, he's down. But in the end, he ends up with his retirement after all and the girl. For a minute or two.
The movie is brutal in a couple of parts, but nothing that you wouldn't expect from this genre. You're also surprised by who does and who doesn't die and who kills them. I think this was good enough to get me to take another look at the gangster films again, particularly British gangster films.

The King's Speech (2010)

The film starts in 1925 when the Duke of York (Colin Firth) is to give a speech at the close of the British Exposition, in from of the masses at Wembley Stadium and broadcast via radio. It becomes apparent straight away that the Duke has a speech impediment. He had been accompanied by his wife (Helena Bonham Carter) who remained supportive after an embarrassing speech. When the Duke meets with his father, King George V (Michael Gambon), the King treats his son as if the stammer was because he just wasn't trying hard enough to get through the speech.
We move ahead to the mid-1930s when Hitler has started his rise in Germany. Having tried all the methods by all the doctors to overcome his speech impediment, the Duke is reluctant to try one last fellow, Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) that the Duchess has found. Loque meets with the Duke who proves to be a very stubborn man, but one who wants to improve his speaking.
When the King dies, and the Prince of Wales becomes Edward VIII (Guy Pearce), the Duke does his best to get the new King to take matters of state more seriously, but the King is only concerned with his romance with a married American woman. Eventually the King abdicates the thrown in favor of his lover.
The Duke must then ascend to the thrown, and when he brings Logue with him to prepare for the coronation, Archbishop Lang (Derek Jacobi) tries to discredit Logue so that he can put his own man in the spot and thus have more say over the King. The Duke feels as if he has been betrayed, that Logue has misrepresented himself, but Logue has not, it is the Duke who had assumed he was a doctor. Logue explains how he came to be doing speech therapy - he started with assisting returning veterans from the Great War in his home country of Australia.
Not long after becoming Kind George VI, he must give a speech broadcast to the whole of the British Empire announcing that through unfortunate circumstances they are prepared to be at war with Germany. Logue prepares the King for the most important speech of his life thus far After a halting start, the speech is well-spoken and a success.
-----
This film finally answers the question of how long it takes to rise from the level of Benedictine monk to the the Archbishop of Canterbury - 800 years in the onscreen presentation, 20 years in the life of the actor. I, of course, am referring to Derek Jacobi, who starred as Brother Cadfael in the Cadfael Chronicles, and then as the Archbishop in this film. Having just watched the Cadfael Chronicles in their entirety, I found this amusing.
And what did I watch before the Cadfael Chronicles? The Singing Detective starring one Michael Gambon as a writer suffering from a horrible disease. But, of course here he is as King George V, leading one to briefly entertain the thought that the King may have been leading a secret double life.

I had no idea this film was based on real events until I read the box. This has been on my list to watch and had I known how amazing it was going to be, I would have watched it sooner. I recognize some of the historical figures - Neville Chamberlin (Roger Parrott), Winston Churchill (Timothy Spall), a young Princess Elizabeth (Freya Wilson), but knew nothing more about the monarchy during World War II than that George V was King.
What can I say about this film that hasn't been said? I don't know - I haven't read any of the reviews because I wanted to see the film first. All I knew was that it came highly recommend from my usual source and she hasn't done wrong by me yet. So, I'll say what I want and not worry about repeating things (not that it would have stopped me anyway).
Rush and Firth are amazing. I can only imagine how hard it must have been for Firth to imitate a speech impediment and that he makes it so believable just adds to the difficulty. He handles it absolutley brilliantly. Coupled with Rush's portrayal of Lionel Logue, a failed actor who came to speech therapy because he wanted to help people, and his insistence that the Duke (and later King) be treated like his other patients, while remaining personable and genuinely concerned for his patient who has become his friend, this movie is unbeatable.
When Carter is added in the supporting role of the strong-willed, but loving wife, I eventually forget who they all really are and only see the characters. Which is something considering early on in the movie when Carter and Gambon have a scene together, I was wondering if after the director called 'cut' if they were reminiscing about the goold old days making the Harry Potter films and musing what a conversation between LeStrange and Dumbledore might be like.
On top of all the amazing acting, the film was beautiful, depicting England in a historically accurate manner, while still managing some great lighting and settings (I'm thinking mostly of the scenes in Logue's office) that makes you forget about the setting which is a country coming out of a depression and heading into a war. All of the office visits are brightly lit, I believe to give a sense of hope, while many of the "royal" and "official" scenes are darkly lit to give a visual cue to just how serious and important the matter at hand are.