Is "The King's Speech" Worthy of an Oscar Night Acceptance Speech?

Oscar Quest 2011 continues. I only have a few more left to see. Earlier this week, I watched "The King's Speech", which is usually my (and the Academy's) favorite type of film. It fulfills all my usual requirements - solid acting, decent writing, and the whole England connection doesn't hurt. In addition to this, there's also references to Nazis - another Oscar Rule adherence.

But as I watched the film, I kept realizing that I was WATCHING A FILM. I didn't really feel any connection to the characters, and how can I? The film takes place in the 30s in England as a young king abdicates the throne to run off with a divorcee and leaves all of England (including his brother) with a challenge.

On the front cover of this week's "Entertainment Weekly", it says "King's Speech vs. Social Network". And that's what this year's Best Picture race comes down to, my friends. As usual, there's two films battling it out and eight "It's nice to be nominated"s. But the more Oscar conversations I have, it is being brought to my attention that there might be something more than that.

This comes down to one thing - old school vs new school. Does the Academy reward the stodgy, well-acted, outdated biopic or does it give the bald guy to the new kids in town, the ones who supposedly changed not just cinema, but society in general? What's more important - society then or society now?

But as far as "The King's Speech" goes, I was entertained, but not mesmerized. It's a good film, but not a great film. I don't want to own it. I'd like Colin Firth to win, since I've loved his work since "Pride and Prejudice" (as all good British girls do). But he was nominated last year in a part that moved me far more than this - moved me to tears, in fact. For the whole run time, a voice inside my head kept reminding me that I've seen this film before. More than once.

Actually, you can make a case that the two films are marginally similar. Both tell the story of a man who was basically an afterthought, and went on to a position of great power. Each needed the help of another man to help him get there. Both affected the course of history. Both have to do with a society affected by the advent of new technology. And they have one last thing in common - neither film is great.

I'm not sure, but I think I'm getting too jaded. Maybe I'm just not into film right now, although I am trying. But maybe it's society, that's changed, not just me. But the real question is whether or not the Academy has changed. We shall see.