"Mad King George" tells the story of the "Regency Crisis" in England in 1788. The cause of the "Regency Crisis" was that King George III went mad, and someone in Parliament called for the establishment of the Prince of Wales as regent. Although the King of England in 1788 was no different from a "rubber stamp", considering that the king still had some influence on political affairs, the proposal to appoint a regent was still very sensitive, and the parliament was bickering about it. Later, George III miraculously recovered, and the regent's proposal was finally settled. Many details of "Regency Crisis" are detailed in the film, but what I want to say today is the madness of George III. The madness of George III is well known in history. Although he escaped the regency crisis of 1788, in 1811 he was finally forced to make the Prince of Wales (later George IV) regent due to madness. Scientists explain that George III's madness was due to a disease called porphyria, which is also mentioned at the end of the movie. But the whole movie seems to suggest another explanation. George III was definitely an exception among the Hanoverian monarchs. Excluding Queen Victoria, he was the only king without a mistress, the only morally blameless king, the only diligent king. His great-grandfather George I could not speak a word of English, and he didn't even bother to live in London; his grandfather George II only thought about how to fight France and Austria all day, and then his daily life was with Queen Caroline of Ansbach Together they mocked and abused their heir, Prince Frederick, the father of King George III. Thus, in the eras of Georges I and II, the power of the British Parliament was greatly strengthened due to the neglect of the king in state affairs. George III had the intention to revive the kingship, but the parliament was no longer in the pool, and he was unwilling to be at the mercy of him. This is probably an important reason for George III's madness. In the movie, George III wanted to show the majesty and power of the king everywhere, but helplessly, his efforts were ineffective. He forbade people to say "America" and demanded that they still call it "colonial" -- except that Prime Minister Pete Jr. didn't buy his account at all. A pregnant palace servant wanted to sit and watch the play, but he refused on the grounds that it did not conform to the palace rules; unexpectedly, he had just left the room with his forefoot, and everyone, regardless of gender, age, and child, sat down. Inferring the meaning of the screenwriter and director, George III's political proposals in the previous dynasty were clearly and directly rejected by the parliament, and the orders in the harem were only passively opposed by the servants and female officials. Isn't that the greatest irony of being a king who wants to make a difference? Maybe it's nothing for people like Jin Huidi, But George III was in a very high mood. He is a king with a strong sense of responsibility and mission, a king who wants to accomplish great things. However, it is because this sense of responsibility is so strong that when he feels unable to achieve his goals, he will be too self-blame. The film repeatedly hints at George III's remorse and self-blame for the loss of America. His ban on people saying "America" is another manifestation of this remorse. Eventually, George III went mad. He kissed the Marquise of Pembroke in front of Queen Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz - you know, George III and Charlotte had a good relationship, and he never had a mistress in his life . George III's illness immediately became a tool for the Prince of Wales and his henchmen to seize power. In order to prevent the situation from worsening, Prime Minister Pete Jr., Queen Charlotte and the Marquise of Pembroke recruited a famous doctor specializing in madness. At first glance, the treatment methods of famous doctors seem to be inhumane. He set all kinds of strict rules for the king, and claimed that the king would be punished if he didn't follow the rules. How to be punished? Kings will be tied to chairs, and even their mouths will be gagged - where is the King of England, not even a prisoner! George III obviously could not stand this "famous doctor", but the doctor said: "You must learn to control yourself." self-control! These four words express the key to the cure of George III's madness. Why was George III crazy? Because he wanted to show the majesty and power of a king, to really rule the country like the emperors and kings of the European continent. However, what he did was not recognized by the people, and his orders were not obeyed by the people. why? Is it because his personal ability is too poor or his character is too poor to convince the public? No, it is because Britain is not France - the king cannot be an autocratic monarch, and can only exercise royal power within the limits of the authority stipulated in the constitution. The sadness of George III is that he is unwilling to face this fact at all, unwilling to restrain his behavior and be a constitutional monarch who conforms to people's wishes. Fortunately, the moment the Regent's proposal was brought to parliamentary debate, George III recovered. His recovery shattered the Prince of Wales's power grab in an instant. The doctor followed George III into the palace and supervised him to receive the Prince of Wales. The Prince of Wales, who originally thought his father would be furious, saw that his father met him with a pleasant face. What's the secret? Because George III learned to control himself - although he still exudes a bit of "authoritarian" style from time to time. At the end of the film, the king's family dressed up for a public event. George III told his son to be happy, because this is the royal family the public wants to see. To please the public, I did not expect even George III to do it. England has restricted the power of the king since the promulgation of the Magna Carta in 1215. For hundreds of years, the king and the parliament have been fighting against each other, culminating in the execution of Charles I in 1649. With the expulsion of James II from the Glorious Revolution in 1688 and the enactment of the Bill of Rights in 1689, constitutionalism in England flourished. Because of this, George III's personal will to strengthen the monarchy is not only unfulfilled, but can only drive him crazy. When George III reigned, he was just a rubber stamp, and even Charles I when he was guillotined was more powerful than him. King George's madness stems from the wrong positioning of himself, from outdated conservative ideas. The compromise of the royal family to the public is even more prominent in another film, "The Queen." "The Queen" is actually a public relations crisis, and what triggered the crisis was the death of the "People's Princess" Diana. In this film, we see two very different values of the royal family and the people. The royal family's initial attitude was to hold a private funeral, not to make a statement and not to attend the funeral. why? There is one detail that illustrates the problem. When Prince Charles said that Diana's body would be brought back on a royal plane, the Queen said: "She is no longer Her Royal Highness." In the Queen's view, it is unreasonable to use royal property to welcome back a commoner who has been expelled from the royal family. But the common people do not think of these problems. Although Diana lost the title of Princess of Wales, in their minds, she was the princess forever. As a result, the old-fashioned royal etiquette has become a cold-blooded machine in the eyes of ordinary people. For a time, all parties attacked the indifference of the royal family. The media played a role in inciting the flames, and as an important part of a modern country, the media is an important tool for influencing the direction of public opinion - in fact, the attitudes and emotions of the public largely depend on the direction of the media. Seeing that the confrontation between the two sides is deepening, the two groups are not monolithic. Prince Charles cautiously tried to draw a line with the royal family to show his closeness to the people; Prime Minister Blair also tried to communicate with the Queen when he was praised by the media as "the people's prime minister", hoping that the royal family would take action to resolve this crisis. The Queen is conflicted. On the one hand, as she puts it, she was brought up that way; the values and ideals she adhered to did not allow her to compromise. The flag on Buckingham Palace has never been lowered by anyone other than the king in 400 years - not even when George VI died. Why should it be lowered for a woman who has been expelled from the royal family? The arrogant queen mother said to the queen: "Your ancestors will not leave here just to appease a group of rabble with candles." on the other hand , she had to face up to the fact that today's royal family is no longer the god-given lord of the monarchy of the past. The Queen was shocked when Blair told her nearly a quarter of the population wanted to abolish the royal family. Inferring the meaning of the queen, it is not that she is really worried about being deposed, but that she is frightened by the low status and evaluation of the royal family in the eyes of the public. Times are changing, ideas are changing, but the only constant is people's hearts. To be a queen who wins the hearts and minds of the people and the mother of the British people is the rule that the queen adheres to. So, the queen chose to compromise. When the royal family returned to London, all crises immediately disappeared. In front of Buckingham Palace, the Queen said to a child holding flowers: "I'll help you put the flowers there." The child said, "No." At that moment, the queen was extremely embarrassed. The child continued, "This is for you." The Queen had expected this. "That's the way we as a nation do things," she told Blair. When the people feel ignored by the royal family, they will protest and even clamor for abolition; but as long as the royal family pays attention to them, they will immediately return to docility and moderation. This is very much like the relationship between a child and a parent. When children are ignored by their parents, they cry to get their parents' attention; as soon as the purpose is achieved, they will immediately return to quiet. The Queen plays the role of the mother of the British people. When she was young, she was educated to be a traditional and unsmiling queen, because the people liked this kind of queen at that time; when she entered her old age and the society underwent major changes, she also had to follow this trend, because now The people like another queen. (The content is reproduced from the Internet) Pay attention to them, and they will immediately return to be tame and gentle. This is very much like the relationship between a child and a parent. When children are ignored by their parents, they cry to get their parents' attention; as soon as the purpose is achieved, they will immediately return to quiet. The Queen plays the role of the mother of the British people. When she was young, she was educated to be a traditional and unsmiling queen, because the people liked this kind of queen at that time; when she entered her old age and the society underwent major changes, she also had to follow this trend, because now The people like another queen. (The content is reproduced from the Internet) Pay attention to them, and they will immediately return to be tame and gentle. This is very much like the relationship between a child and a parent. When children are ignored by their parents, they cry to get their parents' attention; as soon as the purpose is achieved, they will immediately return to quiet. The Queen plays the role of the mother of the British people. When she was young, she was educated to be a traditional and unsmiling queen, because the people liked this kind of queen at that time; when she entered her old age and the society underwent major changes, she also had to follow this trend, because now The people like another queen. (The content is reproduced from the Internet)
View more about The Madness of King George reviews
