The King's Speech is an extremely well-made film with a seductive human interest plot, very prettily calculated to appeal to the smarter filmgoer and the latent Anglophile. But it perpetrates a gross falsification of history. - Christopher Hitchens on the historical revisionism of The King's Speech. The LA times suggests that this, along with the History Channel digging up footage of King George VI not really stuttering all that badly at all, might be the beginning of a backlash against the film, which has been gaining Oscar momentum since it's SAG Award wins. With The Social Network, 127 Hours and The Fighter also having a basis in reality, is today's film making too hung up on the "true" story?
Speaking of artists' rights, one of the less obvious front lines in that war is the current Actors' strike against ad agencies (yep, Zach, it's still on), where the union is insisting on extending the concept of Residuals to cable TV and the web, while advertisers want to do away with residual payments altogether. The unlikely union leader in this battle is America's answer to David Tomlinson, and now drawn into the fight is a certain Presidential candidate who's putting non-union "real folks" in his ads. And if you don't think this is a pivotal battle, Hollywood's writers do.