Are the representations of Britain given by Cameron and Grant recognizably true and for what audience are

they intended? In addition, do you think Cameron was aware of the similarity of his speech to the one in Love Actually and if so, what purpose did he have in 'copying' or referencing the 2003 film?

In the film Love Actually (2003) Hugh Grant who stars as the British Prime Minister begins his speech responding to the American president outlining the relationship between Britain and America. He states that although Britain may be a small country, it is a great one too. As he proceeds to list all the things that make Britain so great he lists things that are known globally such as The Beatles, David Beckham and Shakespeare. He was trying to emphasis on the global scale of audiences that are aware of the successful talents Britain harvested. I think the main purpose of this speech was to only to show the Prime Ministers opposition against the American President, but also to bring Britain closer together by influencing them with pride for their country, values and accomplishments. David Cameron delivered a similar speech at Russias G-20 Summit in 2013. This was in response to a Russian officials remark that Britain is a small island that no one listens to. Very unlike to the scenario above where Hugh Grants playing Britains Prime Minister declares that Britains relationship with America is based only on what America wants, not taking into account what really matters to Britain. Much like the American Presidents criticism of Britain in the Love Actually speech, the Russian official belittles Britain, which sparks Prime Minister David Cameron to come back with an uplifting, nationalistic speech. Almost coordinate to Hugh Grants speech from Love Actually, Cameron begins by recognizing that Britain is a small country, a small island, a small group of islands. But this soon leads him on to stating that Britain has a proud history that is recognised globally. The use of the two words, pride and greatness really create a powerful message. Both speeches are alike by playing the small but robust card, which forms the patriotic tone of both speeches. Cameron goes on to list all the great things to come out of Britain, notably mentioning the boy group One Direction that have gained much successful. Cameron mentions the positive aspects of Britain and brushes aside any negative aspects Britain has been involved in, contributing only a empty truth. I believe that Cameron was more coherent than Grant and

their strategy of listing was highly effective and convenient as it highlights the expansion of Britain and the contributions it has made to the world.

Words: 448