What Does the PG-13 'King's Speech' Poster Say to You?
Teacher says, every time a bell rings an angel gets his wings.
There's probably a better comparison out there to be made, but this just released poster for this weekend's release of the PG-13 version of The King's Speech reminds me entirely of the poster for It's a Wonderful Life. Not exactly sure if that's the vibe they were going for, but to say it seems entirely disingenuous would be an understatement.
Perhaps we should play a game. Forget everything you know about The King's Speech, look at that poster and tell me what it tells you this film is about. Everything from the slogan at the top to the orange "RATED PG-13" bar is rather quite despicable if you ask me.
I've heard there is a trailer playing on television, but I haven't seen it and can't find it online, but as the Jimmy Kimmel edited version included in this post says, it's all just a bunch of "poop, poop and fudgin' poop."
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 47 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
God forbid children hear the word "fuck."
haha
Still havent seen it, but all the clips I saw were very gray and bleak. This is light and happy. Looks like a Disney poster.
Come all ye Mormons!
Yay! Extreme photoshopping…NOT.
This poster says to me- MPAA needs to relax and understand that the full version should have been pg-13 in the first place.. That poster is ridiculous… Let's hold up the child so we know we're friendlier (see we really are we haven't even dropped her yet).. and my smiling wife beside me (we are so into family and family means no F-Bombs).. ahhhhh.. stupid
What does this poster say to me? That it didn't deserve Best Picture.
LOL
I was under the impression that they secured the R-rating in the first place because it wouldn't appeal to children. I mean, it's a movie about a king who learns how to speak properly. Not exactly a children-pleaser. I thought they'd be satisfied with the R-rating because it'd draw in the crowd it was meant for: adults.
Yes, it is stupid that a few measly f-words gets a movie an R-rating when middle-schoolers hear AND use the word every single day. But in this particular instance, I don't see what is gained by having a PG-13 version of this movie, edited or not, for family consumption.
You indicate that the King "learned to speak properly". The King had a severe stuttering problem – which is a neurological problem. It is not about speaking properly.
How didn't The Social Network win Best Picture again?
agreed
totally agree
second the motion.
Inception should have won Best Picture. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 should have been nominated, but I can see why they didn't nominate it, what with it being Part 1 and everything. Toy Story 3 should have done better, and Kick-Ass, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and TRON: Lecacy were all snubbed. But Social Network was WAY better than the King's Speech.
2 words: Hype Backlash. Social Network was way too up it's own ass to be taken seriously. I also rekon the voters, even to this day, still don't know how to use Facebook.
That said, "Family event of the year"? More likey to be Transformers 3 than King's Speech.
"look at that poster and tell me what it tells you this film is about."
It tells me besides cutting the fuckity fucks they're hiding Geoffrey Rush out of sight too, to eliminate the slightest whiff of buggery bromance.
I believe they're also insinuating that Lord Voldemort is Queen Elizabeth's biological father. Which doesn't really surprise me. http://tinyurl.com/5uqzzxr
its says that it obviously didn't deserve best picture.
I laughed out loud at that poster. That has got to be one of the worst, most unintentionally hilarious movie posters ever, and makes the much maligned first poster for this film look like a work of art. The Weinsteins are just desperate to keep the film in the news, because once it finally stops making money, the only thing it will be remembered for is stealing Best Picture and Best Director Oscars from several more worthy candidates.
"from several more worthy candidates."
Like what?
Inception, True Grit, Social Network, Black Swan, The Fighter, Winters Bone and Toy Story 3.
Carlos, The Ghost Writer, Animal Kingdom, Shutter Island, I Am Love, Another Year, The Town
@John PT and Ryan Adams:
Inception-Far from BP-worthy.
Carlos-Haven't seen it.
True Grit-Ditto.
The Ghost Writer-Good, but not good enough.
The Social Network-This I agree with.
Animal Kingdom-Ditto.
Black Swan-Not good enough either, but it will be a film I will return to.
Shutter Island-Haven't seen it.
The Fighter-I loved this film and I bought it last week. I look forward to seeing it again.
I Am Love-Did not see it, and have no interest in doing so.
Winter's Bone-Loved this as well, but other films overshadow it.
Another Year-Did not see it, I may check it out.
Toy Story 3-This would have made an interesting (and equally deserving) winner.
The Town-Very well done, but not quite the best film of the year either.
My top ten:
1.The Social Network
2.Animal Kingdom
3.The King's Speech
4.Let Me In
5.Toy Story 3
6.The Fighter
7.Winter's Bone
8.The Town
9.Black Swan
10.The Secret in Their Eyes
The top 6 were the films I gave 10/10's to. I would have been happy with any of those winning.
What the Hell are Carlos, The Ghost Writer, Animal Kingdom, I Am Love and Another Year? Inception, True Grit, The Social Network, Black Swan, The Fighter, and Toy Story 3 were better than The King's Speech, as were Shutter Island, The Town, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, Kick-Ass, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, TRON: Legacy, and even Alice in Wonderland, Iron Man 2, How to Train Your Dragon, and countless other movies, including but not limited to Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, Legend of the Guardians, and Robin Hood. Need I say more?
Jackass 3D! There aren't a lot of movies like it (apart from the first 2 Jackass Movies of course).
Could you imagine if Jackass 3D won the Golden Globe for that year and went on to beat The King's Speech at the Oscars?
Here's a potential scene
(King George ranting to knoxville and co.)
King George VI (Bellowing angrilly): You can't leave me out! I have a voice!
Wee Man (relaxed): OK then Hi Five
(Gets smacked in the face by a giant hand and they all laugh)
Knoxville (Gleefully): He fell for Hi-Five
Steve-O (while dragging King George to St Edward's Chair in the portaloo): I'm Steve-o and this is the St Edward's Poo Cocktail Supreme
(Danger Ehren launches the portaloo into the air and King George is silenced by dog shit).
In short: Jackass 3D is 100 times the movie King's Speech ever will be.
They should've fired the one that made the first poster, and now this?
WOW. This gives new meaning to "Sell-Out".
That's what I feel about it
Isn't the swearing in this film kind of the point? Reminds me of watching predator on tv many years back when arnie was edited to say "you are one ugly muddy funster". It haunted me as a child – i thought my vocabulary was limited and i should know what a "muddy funster" was. It caused me great emotional distress. Bring on the PG13 version of howl!
That poster says to me "Hi, I'm one of the best movies of the last 10 years, and I didn't deserve to be rerated." In the words of Colin Firth as The King:
Fuck. Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck… that Shit Shit Shit Shit Shit Shit Shit
THis movie was BRILIANT as it was, and should have been PG-13 to begin with. To quote The King again, the MPAA is a bunch of "Beastly Bastard"s I officialy HATE the MPAA, and I'm starting to hate the Winesteen Brothers for ruining such charming, uplifiting, and increadible movies!!!!!!!!
"The Family Film event of 2011" my ass!!!!
The only flaw in this comment is that it directs hate toward the Weinstein Company. Otherwise, you have hit it perfectly.
Colin Firth's face is a Photoshop disaster.
And the poster looks like a parody of itself.
Just goes to show that those Weinstein snakes are trying to milk every last cent of their Best Pic winner. Come on, the film is due on DVD in mid April, and they felt it was necessary to edit this down to a PG-13? Oh, and it has also made well over $100 mil. If I was Tom Hooper I would've adamantly been opposed to any trimming. Let's hope the R version will be available still on DVD and Blu-ray. It's a great film and deserved the win, but this poster is ridiculous and the new marketing this late in the game is preposterous. Those money-hungry Weinstein brothers. They have no shame.
"Come on, the film is due on DVD in mid April, and they felt it was necessary to edit this down to a PG-13? …Let's hope the R version will be available still on DVD and Blu-ray."
I hope the Blu-ray will be branching, with an option to just watch the 2-minute NC-17 wall-to-wall fuck & tits version.
I wouldn't see it if it were rated PG-13, PG, G, or XXX.
@Brad Brevet: I hate to go on a little soap box here, but I completely disagree with you calling the new Tbe King's Speech-lite despicable.
When I was kid, my parents introduced me to lots of adult-themed films: Gone With The Wind, Lawrence of Arabia, Ben-Hur, My Left Foot, Braveheart, Platoon and many others. However, my parent's were also very much Evangelical Christians. While they were more of the liberal variety (they were children of the 60's & 70's afterall, so they embraced Civil Rights; but after the drug culture faded – they got more excited about the JESUS movement).
Profanity was always a problem. Since neither of my parents used profanity they always hated films that were filled with it. So for most of my childhood, the worst I heard was "shit" or "damn" or "hell." In fact I never got to experience Saving Private Ryan or Platoon until 1997 when my parents purchased a TV Guardian device which mutes the profanity from films.
Now some might call that excessive, crazy or stupid – but I respected my parent's views – even though, I longer share them. So some people don't wanna hear profanity – big deal?
I for one am no longer offended by profanity in films and believe that removing language from a films is to some of the artistic intent of the film. However, its not despicable for the studio to make the film more accessible to folks like my parents and their children.
The King's Speech is a rewarding film that SHOULD be shown to families, teenagers, college kids, seniors and especially to disabled individuals. Its a film about hope and overcoming obstacles to achieve greatness. They're just taking out some of the profanity to make it more accessible to a large portion of our society which finds profanity offensive. James Cameron included a "family" version of AVATAR – I think studios would be foolish to not consider this more often…however, it should probably be left ONLY for the DVD release.
Thems the facts
*Correction: My parent's purchased the TV Guardian device in 1999 – Saving Private Ryan was of course not released until 1998 and the DVD didn't come out till 1999.
It's not at all a good poster………….thank all forty-something fucks I saw it the first time round.
Anyway, I still can't see average teenagers in the US being anymore interested in seeing this themselves than they were before. You might get parents who wanted to see it taking their kids of a younger age that they would otherwise need to get babysitters or something for when it was R, but that's not likely to be floods of people and the whole matter boils down to the fact the film never should have been an R in the first place.
Mind you regarding Best Picture I think I would have gone with perhaps True Grit at this point. I enjoyed The King's Speech enough to not be devastated when it 'stole' it, but having seen the terminally dull The Social Network there's no way it automatically deserved to win either.
Haha! The family event of the year!
This is OUTRAGEOUS!! The censored film did NOT win ANY Awards!!
The swearing scene is a stand out scene from the King's Speech as it's so uplifting. By changing it, it's taking away a brilliant scene.
And does anyone else think Colin Firth's face seems weirdly photoshopped?
"And does anyone else think Colin Firth's face seems weirdly photoshopped?"
Elizabeth, doesn't matter if that's a facial expression Colin Firth can't humanly produce. The Family Values target audience responds to his stupefied glaze on a subconscious level. http://tinyurl.com/49bf2zy
Okay Ryan, now that one was funny.
The poster is misleaing. The film is not about the King's relationship with his children, no matter how delightful the penquin story scene was. It is about his relationship with his commoner therapist.
Why does his therapist have him swear? Because his repressive childhood contributed to, maybe even caused, this stammering. Letting out a string of parentally-forbidden words was therefore empowering to him, helping him to master his speech defect. MPAA & the others who bowdlerize this masterpiece, are just as repressive as "Bertie's" parents.
And it was the original film that won the awards. They should be sued for palming off the mutilated version as being Oscar-worthy without a re-vote by the Academy.
Family event of the year… That's just ridiculous. This is the stupidest poster in a long time and the re-editing is just a bunch of poop, poop and fudgin' poop.
I've seen the trailer on TV, completely absurd. This poster does not represent the film at all. I think a lot of his obvious frustration will be lost by taking the stronger language out. If people want a Disney, fluffy movie they should go see Hop.