 | |
List Price: $14.98 | | Label: MGM (Video & DVD)
Salesrank: 19226
Released: June 5, 2001 |
| Our Price: $5.99 |
| Used Price: $3.96 |
|
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
Written by Alan Bennett from his stage play and featuring a towering performance by Nigel Hawthorne, and a stunning screen directorial debut (Variety) by Tony Award winner* Nicholas Hytner, this Academy AwardÂ(r)-winning** masterpiece of royal intrigue ispotent, engrossing and thrilling (Los Angeles Times). Just five years after losing the 'rebellious colonies, it appears that England's King George III (Hawthorne) is now losing his mind! Suddenly, the stately monarch is hallucinating, shouting obscenities, behaving lewdly towards the Queen's (Helen Mirren) comelylady-in-waiting and generally becoming a candidate for the lunatic asylum. The palace doctors are baffled, but the Prince of Wales (Rupert Everett), tired of playing the waiting game, conspires to take advantage of the situation. Will the King's supporters be able to restore their monarch's wits before he's stripped of his throne? *1994: Director (Musical), Carousel **1994: Art Direction
Description of The Madness of King George:
Nicholas Hytner had an international stage phenomenon with Alan Bennett's play The Madness of King George, starring Nigel Hawthorne as King George III, the British monarch who lost the American colonies. But in this film adaptation, Hytner unfortunately yields to the old temptation to "open up" the piece with lots of arbitrary exteriors, rushed set pieces, choppy editing, and so on, robbing Hawthorne's acclaimed stage performance of coherency and power on the big screen. Viewers are forced to fill in emotional gaps for themselves (and try to imagine what Bennett's work must have looked and felt like originally), and the whole enterprise has a pseudo-cinematic, self-congratulatory air. --Tom Keogh
The Madness of King George Reviews:
madness of king george 
2009-10-17 - the region index for australia is R4 and all other regions are not compatable. we can however view the dvd on a computer but not on a wide screen t.v. which is a bit disconcerting. this is the second time we have tried for this dvd - the first time we returned it and received a refund and am still deciding what to do with the second as we have been trying for years to get it.
regards
maurice phillips
George III: A King Who Wrestles with Sanity
2009-09-26 - Some years ago I journeyed to the Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM) to see the British import "The Madness of George III." The play was superb. This movie adaptation (1994) is excellent, and it releases the play into the broader world showing the royal panoply and vivid British scenes of Parliament and palaces. As in the play first produced in 1991, it stars Nigel Hawthorne as the witty, strong-willed, but for a time batty sovereign. Alan Bennett wrote the brilliant play and adapted it for the screen.
At that point in history, no one knew why the king had gone off his rocker, but his urine had turned blue. Experts now think it was porphyria, an inherited disorder. George III had a long rule from 1760 to 1814. He was not an absolute ruler as was obvious in the movie when we see him maneuvering with William Pitt, the prime minister. It was George III who lost the American colonies, and he could never really forgive them for their impudence.
His worthless wastrel of a son, the Prince of Wales, was dissolute and extravagant and portrayed in the movie by Rupert Everett as a foppish glutton and twit. The future George IV was frothing at the bit hoping that Parliament would name him Regent over his dotty daddy. The movie gives an absorbing look at the pageantry of a royal household, its opulence and intrigues. In one sense it's an historical costume drama, but it is far too entertaining and emotionally charged to stay in that category.
This a very human drama in which we see a real human being suffering from bouts of madness. He is treated as a menial mental patient by his three servants who put him in a straitjacket to restrain him. The king and his queen (Helen Mirren) are a loving couple who address each other as Mr. King or Mrs. King. The court can tell when George is going off on a tangent when he start uttering "What! What!" There's one hilarious scene when the daffy king has entertainers at a court presentation begin again their performance.
Nigel Hawthorne is masterful as the king who gradually comes back to sanity by the intervention of a clever doctor-veterinarian whose tough-minded therapy program works. It's fast paced, enjoyable and extremely illuminating.
Well done movie about an intriguing historical theme... 
2009-03-30 - This movie is a superb historical attempt to portray the Madness of King George III of England. It takes place shortly after the American Revolution, and combines a couple incidents in King George's life into a condensed time period. Although not 100% historically accurate, it is superbly done. Great acting, cast and sets. Nice movie for those interested in the time period or historically themed movies.
Passing over this masterpiece would be sheer madness...
2009-03-23 - I don't know if I feel like continuing my rant on how mediocre `Forrest Gump' was, but every time I watch any film from 1994 I am left bewildered at the fact that it lost to that piece of Hollywood fluff. Even a film like `The Madness of King George', that had no chance at winning top honors because it wasn't nominated, deserved a win over that horribly mediocre film; and knowing that Tom Hanks won the Best Actor trophy over, not only Morgan Freeman and John Travolta but also this tremendously moving and brilliantly controlled performance given by Nigel Hawthorne, is utterly repulsive. I have not seen Paul Newman's turn in `Nobody's Fool' (why is this not on DVD?) but from what I've heard I can say without hesitation that Hanks was in all likelihood the WORST of the nominated five.
Okay, no more about `Forrest Gump'; I promise.
So, Alan Bennett adapted his own stage play for this big screen adaptation, and while I cannot say for certain that it is better or worse (I have not seen the stage production) I can say that this film is stupendous from start to finish and serves as one of the best films of the year that was 1994. It boasts an intelligently woven plot (based on real events) with lavish set pieces, beautifully decorated costumes and most importantly, a slew of commanding and utterly unforgettable performances.
The film focuses on the darkest part of King George III's reign, where he fell into a form of dementia and was stripped of power by his greedy and resentful son George, the Prince of Wales. Exploiting the corruption within the castle walls, as well as the ignorance with regard to the King's mental condition, the film never skirts around the obvious but remains honest throughout. It balances perfectly the dramatic tensions of the situation and the sly humor that makes Hawthorne's performance so legendary.
Honestly; Hawthorne is a revelatory genius here.
I don't understand the complaint that the film is not emotionally connecting. I think the exact words were "viewers are forced to fill in emotional gaps for themselves, and the whole enterprise has a pseudo-cinematic, self-congratulatory air". I'm sure this guy thought that `Forrest Gump' was a remarkable example of emotional honesty. UGH, I promised I wouldn't bring up that film again, but really, that reviewer's explanation of this film mirrors my sentiments of the eventual Oscar winner. `The Madness of King George' never manipulates the audience but insists on creating an honest and touching portrait of the loss of sanity, and the damaged caused by misunderstanding that sanity. The film tackles a variety of subjects, from mental health to loyalty, greed, respect, love and power; and it handles all of them gallantly.
With fine supporting performances by Helen Mirren (a sublime example of grace and distilled admiration and affection), Ian Holm (a marvel at subtle nuances), Amanda Donohoe (such chilling passages of repressed loyalties) and Rupert Everett (dastardly deception at its finest) as well as sharp dialog that captures wit as well as emotional relevance, `The Madness of King George' is a complete package.
A GIFT OF HISTORY
2009-02-19 - I count this movie as one of the best I have ever seen.
The director, screenwriter, costume designer, art director, and actors take what is a less-than-fascinating incident in the life of a (less-than-fascinating?) historical figure and, with artistic and intellectual brilliance, produce a luxuriant, vibrant, spectacularly colorful, intellectually stimulating and thought-provoking film. It is dramatized history and extravagant cinema at their best!
In real life, George III of England suffered from what scientists think was probably porphyria, a disorder whereby liver enzymes fail to be excreted from the body and produce, among other symptoms, insanity. The disease has remissions and exacerbations that are unpredictable, and we are watching the first time the disease presents itself in George III, in the 18th century, after England lost the Revolutinary War to the American colonists.
It is not the king and his disease that make for great cinema. It is the relationships among king, courtiers, the House of Peers, the House of Commons, the Prince of Wales, Queen Charlotte, the two court doctors, a country doctor who originates a sensible and relatively compassionate treatment for the mentally ill, and the people of England that make this a dynamic tour-de-force. Each character is so incredibly alive and vivid.
For example, one of the king's advisors, a Mr. Penn, a nobleman in the House of Peers, is so exquisitely portrayed that he could be a movie in himself: he is a dour, almost sour young man whose lack of humor makes him the [...] of jokes by his more fun-loving colleagues. He dresses like a Puritan. He sides with a Mr. Fox in the House of Commons and the Prince of Wales, who is going out of his mind in the restless anticipation of replacing his father on the throne, that the king should be removed if, indeed, he is insane, and that this should be done by an act of Parliament. However, as the king's illness and treatment progress, Mr. Penn proves to be a thoughtful, moral man of honor and integrity. He feels it is his duty to support the king as his subject as he struggles to break free of his madness. When King George's recovery is imminent, although he was considering backing parliamentary revocation of the throne when the king was mad, he announces the recovery publicly, in Parliament, thus making insurrection impossible.
In addition to the actor's splendid characterization, this character was enhanced (as were all the characters) by absolutely spectacular costuming and make-up. Mr. Penn, in face and figure, happened to resemble an eighteenth-century man in a Gainsborough painting, and thus his slightly coarse, wavy, light-brown hair was teased into a Gainsborough 'fro, and he looked exactly as though he stepped out of an 18th century painting. Perhaps the most delightful results of the hairdressers', makeup artists' and costumers' art was the Prince of Wales and his younger brother. They were both portrayed as insufferable fops, and the aforementioned artists worked them up to a la-de-da beyond the last frontiers of outrageousness and camp that truly has to be seen to be appreciated.
The net result of all of the above is that history jumps right into your lap. Never has an epoch become more alive than in this film, from the details of costume and mannerism to the exposition of philosophical ideas and values that distinguished 18th-century England and were passed from her to her American cousin, even as they became separated.
If you love history and love cinema, do not fail to see this film.
