The Madness of King George (1994)

When King George III goes mad, his Lieutenants try to adjust the rules to run the country without his participation.

Director:

Nicholas Hytner

Writers:

Alan Bennett (play), Alan Bennett (screenplay)

Stars:

Nigel Hawthorne, Helen Mirren, Rupert Graves

Won 1 Oscar. Another 15 wins & 18 nominations.

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
Rupert Graves	...	Greville
Helen Mirren	...	Queen Charlotte
Amanda Donohoe	...	Lady Pembroke
Charlotte Curley	...	Amelia
Peter Bride-Kirk	...	Royal Children
Eve Camden	...	Royal Child
Thomas Copeland	...	Royal Child
Joanna Hall	...	Royal Child
Cassandra Halliburton	...	Royal Child
Russell Martin	...	Royal Child
Natalie Palys	...	Royal Child
Rupert Everett	...	Prince of Wales
Julian Rhind-Tutt	...	Duke of York
David Leon	...	Footman
Martin Julier	...	Footman

Storyline

Aging King George III of England is exhibiting signs of madness, a problem little understood in 1788. As the monarch alternates between bouts of confusion and near-violent outbursts of temper, his hapless doctors attempt the ineffectual cures of the day. Meanwhile, Queen Charlotte and Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger attempt to prevent the king's political enemies, led by the Prince of Wales, from usurping the throne.

---

Plot Keywords:

porphyria | king of england | restraint | self destructiveness | politics | 

---

Taglines:

His Majesty was all powerful and all knowing. But he wasn't quite all there.

---

Genres:

Biography | Comedy | Drama | History

---

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated PG-13 for thematic elements

Details

Country:

UK

Language:

English

Release Date:

28 December 1994 (USA)

Also Known As:

La folie du roi George

Filming Locations:

Wrotham Park, Barnet, Hertfordshire, England, UK

Box Office

Gross USA:

$15,238,994

Company Credits

Production Co:

The Samuel Goldwyn Company, Channel Four Films, Close Call Films

Technical Specs

Runtime:

110 min

Sound Mix:

SDDS (8 channels) Dolby SR

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

Sir Nigel Hawthorne, a stage and television actor, had little theatrical movie experience. He was so determined to reprise his award-winning stage role on-screen that he took the part of Dr. Raymond Cocteau in Demolition Man (1993) to prove that he had screen presence. Hawthorne was the producers' automatic choice for the lead. Alan Bennett only agreed to his play being turned into a movie if Hawthorne was cast as George III.

---

Goofs

Pitt and Thurlow go to visit the King at Kew during the winter - but the leafy green trees outside clearly indicate that the scene was filmed in summer (shooting took place from July to early September).

---

Quotes

George III: By your dress, sir, and general demeanor, I'd say you were a minister of God.
Dr. Willis: Oh, that's true, Your Majesty, I was once in the service of the Church. Now I practice medicine.
George III: Well, I'm sorry for it. You've quitted a profession I've always loved and embraced one I most heartily DETEST.
Dr. Willis: Our Savior went about healing the sick.
George III: Yes... but He had not seven hundred pounds a year for it.
[laughs]
George III: Well, that's not bad for a madman.

---

Connections

Featured in At the Movies: Speechless/Dumb and Dumber/Legends of the Fall/Little Women/Death and the Maiden/The Madness of King George (1994)

---

Soundtracks

Zadok the Priest
(uncredited)
Music by George Frideric Handel (as G. F. Handel)

User Reviews

"I have you in my eye, Sir"

A great performance from Nigel Hawthorne makes this movie very enjoyable. His portrayal of the 'Mad King' is in turns entertaining, poignant, sharp, and commanding. The rest of the cast back him up well. The conversion from stage play to screen works well here... the production design is excellent, and the direction is dynamic enough to ensure that the movie never drags. Best of all though is Alan Bennett's script which is full of wonderfully comic and intelligent soundbites. This is a sumptuous period drama which is never too intense, but at the same time never too pithy, and it makes for very pleasant viewing. The film never takes itself too seriously or gets bogged down - after all, what other 18th century costume drama can boast such lengthy discourse regarding the constitution of a British monarch's fetid stools?