What Kind of Person Actually Likes a Movie Like This?

I held my tongue for six years, just hoping we'd see a general improvement in the quality of films. But improvement hasn't happened, so I thought I'd start with this film, which is where we hit rock bottom, to see if anyone could help me to understand the kind of people who are supporting this trash.
This one was pure Oscar fodder, as most "period pieces" are. As such, it was created for people who think they're smarter than they actually are and want the self-satisfaction that comes from being able to "appreciate" such a "masterpiece". There was British humor sprinkled throughout, none of which was actually funny, and yet the American audience I sat with all chuckled in unison, as if to announce to each other that they were smart enough to laugh at such highbrow humor (though you could tell none of them actually thought anything was funny). I knew immediately that I was not a part of this "club". Let's not get too political, but does the fact that such a pretentious film is popular reflect a decadence in society?
How can I jump immediately to the conclusion that the film was pretentious?
Well, first and foremost, the premise was ridiculous. A king with a speech impediment. Let me repeat that: a KING... who stutters. If there was ever a worse subject for a movie, I haven't found it. I don't care if it was a true story or not. Why don't we also make a movie about a spoiled girl who got a Mercedes instead of a Bentley at her sweet sixteen party? OK, so maybe I missed the point and we weren't supposed to feel any real sympathy with this king. So what was the point then? Enlighten me.