views and poetry from an anarchist perspective.
How could we not agree with the child's speech? However, the discourse of the image is superimposed in some way (film language): note the mark, somewhat authoritarian, with which the child has been (deliberately?) characterized (his imperative finger and gesture), while, finally, the "king" almost seems victim of his intransigence. We have to be very critical and careful when it comes to the cinematic language. The subliminal message exists and appears when you least expect it. At least that's what I think.
You are absolutely right,perhaps my amusement overruled my critical faculties.