'The King's Speech' Gets Edited Down to a PG-13 Rating
Blankety, blankety, blank this blank
Back on January 26 I mentioned how The Weinstein Co. was looking to edit this weekend's Best Picture front-runner The King's Speech for a PG-13 rating. The reason for the R-rating, as you will see in the video included to the right, was due to the utterance of the word "fuck" 15 times along with a slew of other words in the midst of a therapeutic exercise. The language wasn't directed at anyone as much as it featured the film's lead getting a certain amount of frustration off his chest. Well, that frustration will be a little less impactful going forward.
Following the news Weinstein head honcho, Harvey Weinstein, wanted to find a way to get the film in theaters in a PG-13 format director Tom Hooper told EW, "I wouldn't support cutting the film in any way. I think we looked at whether it's possible to bleep out the fucks and stuff, but I'm not going to actually cut that part." According to The Los Angeles Times that's exactly what's happened.
"The contentious F-words have been muted out," writes Nicole Sperling as the MPAA and National Association of Theatre Owners announced the PG-13 rating as well as the fact they had waived a rule requiring distributors to fully withdraw the original version of the film from theaters for 90 days before replacing it with an alternative.
MPAA's interim president and CEO Bob Pisano was quoted saying, "The Weinstein Co. has undertaken a commitment to ensure, through a revised advertising campaign, that it will be clear to consumers that a newly rated version of this film is coming to theaters near them. In this case a waiver is justified."
So just when will this new cut hit theaters? It sounds like it will happen almost immediately. With only two days to go until the Oscars and The King's Speech primed to win Best Picture and most likely take home the largest number of statuettes I would think Weinstein would want the more accessible cut in theaters as soon as possible. As a result, yes, the R-rated version will be removed from theaters at the same time.
Previously Harvey Weinstein said, "The British numbers are huge because the rating lets families see the movie together. Tom and I are trying to find a unique way to do this that keeps his vision of the movie."
The R-rated version of The King's Speech has racked up over $106 million to date as one of five of this year's Best Picture nominees to crack the century mark. The film is currently screening in 2,386 theaters this weekend, 300 more than last weekend when it added an additional $6.5 million to its tally. Inglourious Basterds is currently the Weinstein's highest grosser at $120.5 million. It will be interesting to see where The King's Speech ends up, especially considering it's already slated for an April 19 DVD and Blu-ray release.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 20 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
This really, really bothers me. Its not that the movie is better with the R vs. a PG-13, just the fact they're so blatant with the fact that its simply a business decision.
I would be perfectly happy if they released an edited down version on DVD, so parents could show their children, or so teachers could show it in class. That makes sense, and other studios have done that(Edward Zwick's Glory comes to mind), but for them to do this as a money grab is just flat out stupid, and I cant imagine its going to help the numbers that much here in the states.
It's absolutely ridiculous that you can see any number of heinously violent, bloody, and horrifyingly gruesome acts against humanity depicted in a PG-13 film, but more than 3 curse words in the film and it gets slapped with an R. It's especially ridiculous in this instance. The MPAA is embarrassingly priggish and Puritanical and needs a good overhauling.
Yeah, because thirteen to sixteen year olds have never heard the word "Fuck" before, and such footage with brainwash their already filthy, porn-filled minds to include the word to their vocabulary.
It's not like fifteen year olds are going to be running to the theaters to watch a film in which a World War II king learns to get over stuttering, anyways. This doesn't appeal to them. Transforming robots, CGI explosions, teenage vampires, incredibly unnecessary special effects, and the aforementioned porn, appeals to them.
It's also not likely that fifteen year olds are going to flock to theatres to watch a film in which an anti social billionare is sued for copywright over a social networking website named Facebook. There's still a lot of people who, even to this day, still don't know how to use Facebook.
Completely disagree. The Social Network appeals to teens a lot more than The King's Speech. A lot. Not. Even. Close.
Have you seen the commercials for The Social Network?
Modern pop/hip-hop music.
Drunken college parties.
Justin Timberlake.
Facebook.
Surely, it may not have the the appeal of Twlight, but it's definitely no The King's Speech. I can't even fathom a teenager having desire to watch The King's Speech, especially an American teen. It's completely, completely, COMPLETELY, unrelatable with them. And even, even, on the very, very slight possibility that a 14 year old will wake up one day and think "Hey, you know what? I feel like watching that new WWII-era film, about a British king trying to improve his speech- that's completely unrelatable with me, my culture, my environment, and my entire demographic", even on the extreme impossibility of that happening…the kid will just pirate it online. And can you blame him? He can't possibly ask his buddies to go to the theaters with him to watch The King's Speech. They'll look at him like if he's stupid. They don't want to go watch The King's Speech. No way. That's lame for them. They watch to see Big Momma's: Like Father, Like Son. To avoid looking like a geek, the kid will just illegal download it off torrents, and watch it at the piracy of his room.
The King's Speech getting edited down to PG-13? Completely unnecessary. Completely.
Completely. Completely. Completely.
The MPAA says they are not a censorship group, but doesn't the act of them doing this (giving an originally R rated film a PG-13 because it bleeps out the offending words) prove that they are indeed a censorship group, because in order to get a certain rating you have to conform your art to fit their standards? Isn't that censorship in a nutshell?
Yes.
Obviously just an attempt by Weinstein to get more money for the film after it wins all its Oscars on Sunday. Interesting how they waited until after Oscar ballots were submitted to announce this decision. Also interesting how they get a special exemption to the 90-day rule. Amazing what can happen when you pass a little cash under the table. Oh well, at least this film won't have any long-term cultural relevance or staying power…unlike several superior films it's going to beat at the Oscars.
And yes, I agree the MPAA is basically a censorship group.
I don't understand something. How does being R-rated prohibit families from watching it together? Does anyone not realize that parents can take their kids to R-rated movies?
PG-13 just lets teenagers go alone. And I doubt many teenagers want to see this movie anyway.
My parents won't let me see something because of their rating, G,PG,PG-13, and R means everything in their minds in movie standards. If it is R, my religion (im a mormon) will not allow me to see it. Frankly however I went ahead and watched it, and I absolutely loved the movie, and thought it was amazing. I am also a 15 year old, and I hear the word "Fuck" 10X more at high school than in that movie.
It's definitely a cash play by the Weinstein's to draw more money into the pot (even though it's been doing absolutely fine with the R rating so far, so go figure) but even without it TKS looks as if it can pass Inglorious Basterds $120 million at this point anyway.
After seeing the film I never understood why it was an R anyway, but I don't approve of this censorship of the film as it was originally produced. The removal of the word dilutes the point of the scene anyway and as also noted I doubt that 13 year olds are unfamiliar with the word (or the use of it), or that this type of film is high on their 'must-see' list anyway.
It seems to be a rather redundant move at this point. Unless it's just to try and get more money. Which, obviously, we know it is.
This is so stupid.
The scene will lose all of its dramaticity.
Shaking My Head.
With all the money this has made for The Weinsteins, couldn't they have petitioned for an APPEAL, given the context of the language? I remember a documentary a couple of years ago that was downgraded from an R to a PG-13 because its profanity was used in a certain context.
In the movie, he nevers says "I fucked that girl", he never says "I'll fucking stop those Nazis", he says the singular word FUCK to relieve stress in a therapy session! The fact that the film was ever rated R was ludicrous enough. Now they have to censor their film and rob that scene of its entire purpose to make some extra cash?
Can't wait to watch this backfire, Weinsteins.
In Canada it's Rated PG with a warning (may not be suitable for young children & language may offend).. it doesn't need any more than that.. it's a good movie but that literal one scene of a few words, really, and R rating.. silly.
In Québec, it's simply rated G, with no mention of being unsuitable for young children or offensive language. However, I don't know how the French dubbed version handles the repeated use of Fuck…maybe they substitute something else.
i agree although i have not seen the movie i watched the clip and editing it won't make any sense at all unless it's optional for the dvd or sonething like that kinda like they did when my history teacher in 8th grade got an edited version of glory that cut all the inapporiate stuff so we could watch it in class
The sheer stupidity of this decision is just mind boggling. Why is the American public so frightened by expletives and for that matter nudity let alone sexual content and when in comes to violence anything goes? Currently "The King's Speech" has the same rating as Rambo from 2008. That's laughable.
I completely agree, for saying that word in a non-obscene sense, and not having ANYTHING else bad in that movie at all it never would deserve that rating, perhaps a new rating system, frankly i would never put a movie that swears in the same category as one that contains heavy nudity.
It is useless to edit the film to a PG-13. It isn't going to make much more money. I am 14, and none of my friends have even heard of this movie, and even if they have, they don't want to see it.
Sure, but in my family, my 30 year old siblings won't go see it because of that rating. So I think it would make more money.