Weinsteins combat questionable MPAA decision with questionable decision of their own...

As time winds down to the presentation of the 2011 Academy Awards, word on the street is ever stronger that The King's Speech is a dead cert, as it were, to garner Oscars for both Colin Firth (Best Actor) and the film itself (Best Picture), among other potential victories. Released in theaters last November 26, the film details a quasi-historically accurate account of King George VI's crippling stuttering problem when faced with the necessity of recording a speech across British airwaves to stiffen the populace's upper lip against the encroaching Nazi threat in the late 1930s. Critics have lauded all aspects of the production and it would appear, at least at this late stage, that this particular horse is a nose ahead of the competition coming down the home stretch.

That's not to say that the trip has been a smooth one. Last year, in a bitterly-contested move, the MPAA bestowed a dreaded 'R' rating on the movie before release, to the vehement disagreement of studio head Harvey Weinstein. The bone of contention is largely a single scene, in which speech therapist Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) encourages King George (Colin Firth) to let loose a barrage of expletives to help overcome his severe nervousness. The MPAA classified the picture 'R' due to profanity, almost totally on the merits of that single scene, after which Weinstein famously objected and refused to alter the film. The King's Speech eventually debuted to the public with said 'R' rating attached.

In January, it was reported by Starpulse that Weinstein had not given up looking for a loophole around the restrictive MPAA rating and had asked director Tom Hooper to re-edit the movie so that it could be re-evaluated as a 'PG-13' film in the United States. Now comes word from Film School Rejects that, even though Hooper was widely quoted as refusing to edit the film in any way, Weinstein has apparently been successful in altering The King's Speech and that the film has been re-submitted to the MPAA and earned its desired classifications. Furthermore, the MPAA has waived a usual rule which states that there must be 90 days of cinema inactivity between a film's original version and any releases of subsequent edited versions.

So what does this mean for the bevy of moviegoers who will wish to see the film in cinemas after its probable Best Picture win? Simply put, the likely scenario is that the current and pristine version will soon be pulled worldwide from cinemas; in which case, future viewers will see a prominent, award-winning, and widely-released film edited not when it comes to television, but while it is still in the theaters. Talk surrounding the re-edited version is that the scene is too important to cull entirely from the film, so the offending colorful language has been muted. In other words, as the King is gleefully shouting profanities to relieve tension on screen, theater patrons will hear only interspersed silence akin to listening to GoodFellas on basic cable.

Quite obviously, The Weinstein Company's move to soften its star vehicle's rating is a purely financial one, designed to allow The King's Speech to be lumped into the 'family film' genre and gain access to a wider public. In the meantime, the distributor is preparing an advertising campaign to alert the public to the new 'family friendly' version of the acclaimed period piece.

It seems difficult, however, to paint this as anything but a disturbingly petulant act of a man unused to not getting his way. Say what you will about the ridiculous tendency of the MPAA to pin crushingly-severe ratings on films for the sin of a few scattered curse words (Roger Ebert, for example, could fill a library with his written disdain for the folks at the MPAA). But Weinstein has, for the sake of a few dollars, decided that two wrongs do, in fact, make a right and has ultimately resorted to a form of censorship in that last stronghold of uncensored visual media - the movie theater - in order to have things his way. One wonders how far, on the basis of this example, that studio executives will attempt to extend their reach in the future to either bow to MPAA pressure or, worst of all, undermine their filmmakers.

So if you wish to behold what will likely be this year's Best Picture in all its unspoiled glory, never mind the bollocks, see The King's Speech and see it quickly. Or you'll be waiting until it comes out on DVD.

IF YOU ENJOYED THIS ARTICLE, PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR SITE, AT NO COST WITH ONE CLICK ON THE FACEBOOK 'LIKE' BUTTON BELOW: