I won't hide it, The King's choice is not a very good movie cinematically speaking.
However its subject and the way it is treated is damned interesting!
Why? There are 2 main reasons. First, it relates an historical and meaningful event that is not very well known and it does that without changing facts and creating artificially tension and emotion. Secondly, and that is its main asset in my opinion, it does not show people that know how to react to the extra-ordinary in a zillieth of a second. Some movies show main historical figures doubting, but that is generally a once in a lifetime. Otherwise, they always know exactly how to react. Not in this movie, it put you in their boots and make you think - at the same time they are thinking about what can be done. That reflexion about moral responsibilty, about how to face adverse events is really well led as it is not a ready-to-eat for the spectator. Each can make his own thoughts and agree or disagree with the decisions made during these days.
A few other thoughts. I don't know how much is true about Haakon and Olav, which are shown more than 100% devoted to their people and ready to give their life. However the fact is it was a king that made the choice to place its people sovereignty over all, a choice than Norway's elected government was not ready to make - and that is true for almost any elected government I think. It is noticeable to show in this movie 2 strong women, that are not only well thought but which advices are quite sought. That changes from the generally discreet and supportive woman that is shown in historical movies - if some were like that, it is generally a choice to focus on its (male) lead figure.
Why? There are 2 main reasons. First, it relates an historical and meaningful event that is not very well known and it does that without changing facts and creating artificially tension and emotion. Secondly, and that is its main asset in my opinion, it does not show people that know how to react to the extra-ordinary in a zillieth of a second. Some movies show main historical figures doubting, but that is generally a once in a lifetime. Otherwise, they always know exactly how to react. Not in this movie, it put you in their boots and make you think - at the same time they are thinking about what can be done. That reflexion about moral responsibilty, about how to face adverse events is really well led as it is not a ready-to-eat for the spectator. Each can make his own thoughts and agree or disagree with the decisions made during these days.
A few other thoughts. I don't know how much is true about Haakon and Olav, which are shown more than 100% devoted to their people and ready to give their life. However the fact is it was a king that made the choice to place its people sovereignty over all, a choice than Norway's elected government was not ready to make - and that is true for almost any elected government I think. It is noticeable to show in this movie 2 strong women, that are not only well thought but which advices are quite sought. That changes from the generally discreet and supportive woman that is shown in historical movies - if some were like that, it is generally a choice to focus on its (male) lead figure.