I have yet to get around to seeing The King’s Speech, but I am hearing a lot of good things about it. That being said, despite its raving critical reviews, the film is not exactly raking in the cash, so they are proposing an edited version that would remove the foul language that earned it that dreaded R rating.
Wait… on a $15million budget, the movie (which had virtually no maketing in comparison to other blockbusters) is currently sitting at $107million worldwide. How is this a bad thing?
So imagine my surprise that with such positive word of mouth, news hits that the producers are looking to re-edit the film to remove some of the offensive language used in the movie to earn it a more family friendly rating – hoping this will allow the film to be enjoyed by a broader audience?
According to the LA Times (via THR) Weinstein is looking to trim some of the biopic’s so-called obscene language so that the R-Rated drama can be resubmitted to the dreaded MPAA for a PG-13 or even PG rating. He’s been hashing out this proposed plan of action with the film’s now Oscar-nominated director, Tom Hooper.
“The British numbers are huge because the rating lets families see the movie together,” Weinstein told the Times. “Tom and I are trying to find a unique way to do this that keeps his vision of the movie.”
I am stunned that a movie that is getting such positive reviews, and is earning a very successful amount of cash, would resort to these tactics to try and dig deeper into those pockets.
And honestly, if language is the harshest criticism the film is getting, I assure you all those Apatow films your kids are watching behind your back are going to be worse.
I could understand making the decision to change the dialogue to earn a more family friendly rating before the film is released. That is the filmmaker’s choice to find their mark while being financially responsible. But the film did NOT choose to alter the foul language, and as I understand, this adds more impact to the film’s premise of a speech therapist working with the King to clean up his dialect and public image.
To change this now is just plain and simple marketing. A cash grab.
Changing a film for ratings might be a financial decision I can respect, however it just tastes worse now because the movie has come out, and is already doing well.
This is great news. We can use this movie as a tool for kids. We can get kids inspired at tackling the stuttering problem at a young age. If they konw it can be solved then it will encourage them to work on it.
Honestly, this movie never should have been rated R to begin with. Yeah, there’s some language, but the language has a point to it. It’s not just saying fuck to say fuck — which makes it all the more offensive that the movie would be edited to remove that language to begin with.
It’s a movie about overcoming handicaps to meet life’s challenges, exactly the sort of movie that is good for families — I would have little problem bringing the family to a movie like this. A parent may want to talk about the movie after with their kids, including the language, to make sure it’s put into proper context, but I don’t think it’s a bad film for kids to watch.
Honestly, given all the movies that sneak in at PG-13, I think this movie is the perfect example of how flawed our rating system is in this country. As the movie stands, PG-13 would be far more appropriate, but I suppose it must use the word “fuck” five times instead of three, or some bullshit reason like that. Seriously, that’s how silly our system is in this country.
I haven’t seen the film. Aside from more money this might be a good thing for children to see. When I was younger I had speech impediment, and I am sure many other children do. Seeing a movie like this possibly would have made me feel better about it.
I, for one, don’t watch R-rated movies. So I love this news. I heard this was an amazing film, but due to the R-rating, I wasn’t going to go see it. So if they release a PG-13 version, I’d be all over it. I’d wish they’d do that to more R-rated movies.
this is further proof that the MPAA needs to be gotten rid of. It’s useless and does more harm than good. This movie should be rated PG, PG-13 would be harsh. This is a movie about history. If a child under 13 wants to see this movie, let them! There are plenty of parental guides out there for films..the MPAA is not needed. Having ratings such as a recommendation is fine because if you take your kids to a movie without knowledge beforehand of the film, but when a rating limits the audience potential by slapping a “R” rating, especially on a film like this, it’s absolutely ridiculous. I think it’s funny that media such as movies, music, and video games have ratings which in effect limit younger people from buying it. It’s obscene. You don’t see books have any ratings, do you? Why do you think that that is? You will find much more adult content in books than you will in movies, yet books are far more accessible. Sure, books aren’t as advertised as other forms of media, but that’s really beside the point. Do away with the MPAA and replace it with guidelines, not restrictions.
While I – and most everyone would agree – disagree with many of the MPAA’s ratings, I would prefer a group of thirteen year olds did NOT get into every R-rated splatterfest, sex-infused, and artsy drama I attended. They simply don’t need to, and for the most part aren’t even watching the movie.
And if they are, they don’t stfu.
They should not edit this movie! surely the oscar nominations should suggest that to them. It’s so good as it is and to take out a few swear words to ensure the movie appeals to the prudish too is a joke.
He has a stammer
they probably will make a good amount of more money and will attract school field trips
How low will the Weinstein brothers go?