Michael Cieply

It is the king?s to lose. Dual victories by The King?s Speech at a pair of closely watched awards ceremonies over the weekend have put the film on track to win a best picture Oscar, unless the vagaries of a new Hollywood math or simmering questions about the movie?s chief subject, King George VI, get in the way.

On Sunday night the movie, about a stammering British monarch and his rhetorical struggle with the Nazis, won the ensemble cast award from the Screen Actors Guild, as well as an individual award for its star, Colin Firth. The night before, the film picked up a prize for its director, Tom Hooper, from the Directors Guild of America.

The movie had already been named the year?s outstanding film by the Producers Guild of America, and picked up 12 Oscar nominations last week, to lead a field that includes True Grit, The Fighter and The Social Network, among others

Within Hollywood, the alignment of guild awards points to enormous good will for The King?s Speech, a British-made film that is distributed in the US by the Weinstein Company.

While the film is small, with a budget estimated at only about $15 million, and its performance at the box office is still relatively modest?it reached $72 million over the weekend, after more than two months in theaters?it has so far gone down like a plateful of comfort food.

Its themes are familiar (friendship and the overcoming of personal demons). Its story is uplifting. (All turns out well.) And its anti-Nazi stance is a draw.

But the Oscar ballots are not in the mail yet. Those will be dispatched to the 5,755 voting members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences with camera-ready publicity flourish at the academy?s Beverly Hills headquarters at 10 am today.

And before those ballots come due on February 22, an army of competing Oscar strategists will be probing for any sign that The King?s Speech can be beaten. In the last week or two a flurry of news reports and Internet banter have chewed over questions about King George, particularly whether he was actually less than stalwart in his opposition to the Third Reich.

On January 24, for instance, Christopher Hitchens wrote on Slate.com that the king was devoted to Neville Chamberlain?s policy of appeasement, and ?even after the Nazi armies had struck deep north into Scandinavia and clear across the low countries to France, did not wish to accept Chamberlain?s resignation.?

So far, there has been no sign that any stain on the real George has tainted the more heroic portrayal by Firth.

Nor is it clear that any competitor has circulated such reports, in possible violation of an academy rule that forbids ?casting a negative or derogatory light on a competing film.?

The Weinstein Company has had a battery of publicists poised to respond to any negativity with countermeasures that point to the film?s authenticity and the king?s integrity.

?We?re obviously prepared,? said David Glasser, the Weinstein Company?s chief operating officer. ?A lot of time and planning went into writing the screenplay and making the movie, to ensure the accuracy of this picture,? Glasser said.

And it is lost on few here that a primary competitor, The Social Network, has also faced questions about the veracity of its portrayal of the Facebook entrepreneur Mark Zuckerberg, so any showdown between that film and The King?s Speech over matters of fact and fiction might end in a draw.

Early in the awards season The Social Network, which was released on October 1, ran strong with the critics and picked up a string of awards, including a top prize from the National Board of Review and a Golden Globe for best drama. But none of those honors came from groups heavy with Oscar voters, as are the Hollywood guilds, which are clearly leaning toward The King?s Speech.