TO PLAY THE KING

REVIEWED BY CHARITY BISHOP

Our rating: 2 out of 5

Because of: homosexual elements, adultery, thematic elements

Rated:

It's been several years since Frances Urquhart (Ian Richardson) wrangled his way to political power and earned the position of Prime Minister in the British government. Infamous for his underhanded tactics of influence and persuasion, Urquhart has had very little opposition in the House until now. A new King (Michael Kitchen) has been crowned and much to the annoyance of Urquhart, shows political ambitions. Liberal-minded and outspoken, the King opposes the Prime Minister's stance on such policies as welfare. His concerns are popular with the general public and therefore pose a threat. Urquhart fears a battle may be forthcoming and readies the guns. He sets his Chief Whip Tim Stamper (Colin Jeavons) to dirt-digging and decides to recruit a brilliant young political mind into his office to help them foresee possible attacks of the enemy.

Sarah Harding (Kitty Aldridge) is newly married and happily busy as a freelance writer, but she finds Urquhart fascinating and happily accepts a role as a high ranking official in his offices. Together they are a formidable team as they pit up against the King and ultimately threaten to bring down the monarchy through a trail of lies, deceptions, and scandal. Torn with strife, for the King has been recently divorced from his beautiful young wife, and his sister was forced to abdicate due to pressures concerning her sexual lifestyle, the royal family is about to be set against with a siege of accusations and dirty tricks, all the while earning the respect of the common people with moving speeches and pleas for greater consideration for the poor. Throughout the escalating electoral race and uncertain polls, Urquhart must contend with his feelings of guilt... the last woman who became involved in his schemes wound up with her neck broken, and such tactics are not beneath him again if needed.

Politics can be a dirty game and much of the lure of this production is seeing just how devious the players can be. This addition to the three-part series created massive controversy in England when it was first promoted due to its controversial topics. It bears a very strong resemblance to then-current affairs, including the divorce of Prince Charles and Diana, the scandalous lifestyle of the royals, and various opinions on current policies. Although the writer adamantly denies any form of a slur against the monarchy it's obvious that the characters were modeled after Charles and Diana. A king newly divorced, known for being something of a womanizer, his beautiful blonde wife and her equally engaging child, beloved by the public. Michael Kitchen also employs various likenesses to Charles through his movements, figments of speech, etc. I was slightly surprised at how obvious the miniseries was in some respects but to be fair, they treated the King's character well. He's very empathetic even though his policies are often radical.

Speaking outright, conservatives will be offended by their portrayal in this film. Liberals are portrayed as honest, above-board, and deeply interested in the care of the common people, while conservatives (including Urquhart) are vastly right-wing. Their policies of allowing people to be responsible for their own welfare (as opposed to having the government take care of them), treating the wealthy with equal respect, lowering taxes, and increasing the military (through a modern draft) are given a vulgar tarnish. They are also the narrow-minded party that gets up to the dirtiest tricks. Conservatives have been treated this way before but it never lessens the blow against our intelligence and could be considered liberal propaganda. Because of this, the film strays into many sensitive topics. It contains a sub-plot involving the King's right-hand assistant. After his marriage falls apart, he discovers he's a homosexual and begins a gay relationship with a man he met in a bar. Near the end, knowing Urquhart will use the information against him, he comes out of the closet and promptly resigns.

The two men are never shown directly intimate but much is implied through conversations, attending bars together, holding hands, kissing on the cheek, etc. Twice they're shown sleeping in the same bed. Urquhart needs to get rid of an opposing force in the House and leaks information concerning his pedophile crimes to the press. Princess Margaret carries on a sexual relationship with a local newspaper editor, who collects her stories about the royal family and publishes them. Urquhart forces him into it by threatening to reveal pictures of their indiscretions to the press (briefly seen and suggestive). An intentionally ambiguous remark by the King's chairwoman leaves the audience uncertain if His Majesty is accustomed to sending out for prostitutes or not. Sexual noises are overheard several times as conversations are eavesdropped on. Urquhart and Sarah engage in an adulterous relationship; it's heavily implied but no activity is ever shown.

Language isn't as bad this time around but does contain numerous instances of British slang and profanity (bloody, buggar, etc), mild abuse of deity, one misuse of Christ's name, and several instances of s**t. Clever word plays turn Urquhart's initials into double meanings (FU) in various newspapers across the country. There is some violence involved. A body is dumped out of a van with a bloody head wound. An accident levels a building, leaving wreckage and broken bodies. Two car bombs are set off, killing the people inside. Urquhart has violent flashbacks to an earlier murder. The film is interesting because of the psychology behind it, the deadly power-hungry primary character who is actually being wielded by his clever wife. Unfortunately there are far too many content concerns to make it recommendable.

© www.charitysplace.com - all rights reserved.