 A film in three minutes, The Madness of King George. Whatever your views on Monarchy may be, it's hard to deny that the institution itself has some inbuilt problems. Whether you are a resolute loyalist or diehard Republican, placing an entire system of government on one single monarch, whether constitutional or otherwise, leaves said government at the mercy of a single individual's health. And should that king or queen have an unfortunate bout of, well, madness, then the potential for a complete systemic collapse is right around the corner. And unfortunately for those involved, that dilemma is exactly what happens in Nicholas Heitner's 1994 historical drama The Madness of King George. The story follows the reign of King George III, played by Nigel Hawthorne, the British monarch who famously lost the American colonies in the U.S. War of Independence. But to add to his woes, George begins to suffer the symptoms of a mysterious mental illness, making his tenure as King of Great Britain untenable. Working his selfish machinations in the background is his son, the Prince of Wales, played by Rupert Everett, who attempts to use his father's illness as a means of installing himself as regent, thereby becoming king in all but name. But George is not bereft of friendship during his struggles, as he eventually earns the trust of his unorthodox doctor, Francis Willis, played by Ian Holm, who, using his harsh treatment methods on the king mercilessly, eventually nurses him back to full health. Whenever the familiar setting of the British period drama props up, there is almost always an unspoken deference on show to those in power, with the personalities of wealth and privilege portrayed on screen becoming sacrosanct. But Alan Bennett's screenplay, based on a play penned by the writer himself, does away with all of the usual pomp and pageantry audiences have come to expect from such a film, giving us instead a satirical take on the absurdity of the system of monarchy itself, displaying for us wretched aristocratic sycophants and scheming disloyal politicians focused solely on their own ambition. Even the servants of the king are given their own personalities, often complaining and bickering amongst themselves about emptying pisspots and how little sleep they've had. However, Bennett's script leaves plenty of room for Hawthorne's portrayal of the troubled monarch to generate great sympathy, showing to us a man tortured by illness and trapped within the gilded cage of royal duty. The many scenes shared between the king and Dr Willis provide some of the film's strongest moments, especially during the doctor's first encounter with the madman. This combined with stylish cinematography, excellent production design and a stellar supporting cast elevate the film beyond the traditional conventions of a period drama. And regardless of your views towards Britain's most overdone cinematic genre, Hightner's film works as both a tribute to the importance of monarchy and as a searing comedy at its expense. With a script so witty, you may even say, if for only once in your life, God save the king.