Editing The Madness of King George (section)

===Critical response===
The film received largely positive reviews. On [[Rotten Tomatoes]], the film has a 94% score based on 47 reviews, with an average of 7.8/10. The site's consensus states: "Thanks largely to stellar all-around performances from a talented cast, ''The Madness of King George'' is a funny, entertaining, and immensely likable adaptation of the eponymous stage production."<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/madness_of_king_george/ | title=The Madness of King George (1994) | work=[[Rotten Tomatoes]] | publisher=[[Flixster]] | access-date=30 March 2016}}</ref>

Reviewing for ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'', [[Emanuel Levy]] praised the film, writing: "Under Hytner's guidance, the cast, composed of some of the best actors in British cinema, rises to the occasion... Boasting a rich period look, almost every shot is filled with handsome, emotionally charged composition".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Levy |first=Emanuel |date=1994-12-16 |title=The Madness of King George |url=https://variety.com/1994/film/reviews/the-madness-of-king-george-2-1200439660/ |access-date=2023-11-23 |website=Variety |language=en-US}}</ref>

[[John Simon (critic)|John Simon]] of ''[[The National Review]]'' wrote, "''The Madness of King George III'' has survived the transfer from stage to screen, and emerges equally enjoyable on film." Simon praised the leading actors and most of the supporting cast, except for Carter's portrayal of Fox, which he said lacked charisma.<ref>{{cite book |title=John Simon on Film: Criticism 1982-2001|last1=Simon|first1=John |publisher=Applause Books |year=2005 |pages=450–451}}</ref>

[[Stanley Kauffmann]] of ''[[The New Republic]]'' wrote, "For those who, like myself, were disappointed in the play, the film contains pleasant surprises, all of them resulting from differences between the two arts."<ref>[https://www.rottentomatoes.com/critic/stanley-kauffmann/movies?page=8 Stanley Kauffmann at rottentomatoes.com]</ref>