Producers Might &*@%ing Bleep The King's Speech

[Stabby Joe]

I doubt someone of the age they mention will voluntarily go out of their way to watch this film.

Also bleeps seem to be more of a comedic use and the lines in the film are very dramatic... so obviously a bleep would instantly kill the drama.

 

[Swaki]

AW FUCK!, i have really been looking forward to watching this movie, but for some reason good movies take 3-4 months getting to Denmark, oh sure we get the latest crap title the same day as the states but movies that might be interesting, maybe after 4 months of hearing how awesome it is from our yankee friends, i can only hope that they wont cut or bleep the version we're getting, especially since our rating system has been updated several times to stay relevant, i mean i saw south park the movie when i was 9 and it did no harm (i did sing uncle fucker for a few weeks, but as far as i know king's speech has no catchy songs and dance numbers), i cant imagine that a 13 year old will be shocked by a few swear words, especially if its the kinda 13 year old who wants to see the king's speech.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

There's always the chance that the swearing will throw off the Oscar chances too, can't be seen to glorify a movie with rude words in it now can they?

Now I haven't seen it, and everything I've heard about it, says it's a fine movie and deserving of some awards, however, it's a bit tiresome to see anything that isn't a drama overlooked for oscars, and stick a woman in a corset and put a few wigs and brass buttons on the men and suddenly everyone gets a new statuette for the downstairs bathroom.

Seriously, I don't begrudge a good movie its awards really, just the 'worthy' selection process. To agree with most of the people here however, what *** bunch of ****filled ****ing ****s want to censor one of the most important scenes in the movie to get an extra 3 kids into a showing, considering it's already been out and most people will have seen it by now?

Why not just put a beep track on the dvd that's an option.

I think almost everyone's seen the legendary Die Hard TV redubs, and it seems this might go the same way.

Look how much better such classics as Casino, Die Hard II and Pulp Fiction are once the kiddies have been protected!

www.filmdogsonline.com/2010/02/17/censored-the-best-movie-dub-overs-of-all-time/

 

[Diligent]

This is why Canada's rating system makes more sense. It only got a PG rating here.

We really shouldn't hold ourselves as the paragon of sensible ratings though. Just recently the CRTC has decreed that Money for Nothing by Dire Straits is too offensive to play on the radio after 25 years.
Mind you that's not the movie ratings or anything...

I'm really against censorship in any form. The words they're talking about exist in everyday language, and in a movie geared towards adults it makes no sense to try to bleep them out or remove them so you don't hurt somebodies ears. As usual if you don't like it don't see it, and trying to change a scene in a movie so that it has a better chance at winning the oscars is the epitome of what is wrong with the movie industry these days.

 

[samsonguy920]

Movies should not be changed so more people can see it. It goes against the original spirit of the film. Not old enough? Wait till you're older.

Agreed. Why would they want to attract those people who would sleep through it anyway out of sheer boredom?

 

[wammnebu]

Movies should not be changed so more people can see it. It goes against the original spirit of the film. Not old enough? Wait till you're older.

i agree, besides name one eight-year old who wants to see the King's Speech

 

[Nouw]

A bleep?

Are you -bleeping- serious? I've never seen a movie with swearing blocked and I don't intend to any time soon.

Someone should start swearing during the film where the bleeps are >.>

 

[microwaviblerabbit]

Wouldn't taking a child to see this film make them less likely to swear? I doubt many kids have aspirations to be stuttering royalty, and it would certainly make swearing much less cool for them.

The rating of the film makes no sense, but then ratings boards aren't exactly full of genius ideas. Jesus's face = ban, Mixed race = ban, Happy ending for gays = ban;but if they kill themselves then it is fine. I remember growing up in the UK, we always had both the English and Irish ratings on DVDs. The Irish board was less uptight if I remember correctly.

If a child is old enough to go to the movies on their own, then swearing shouldn't be an issue. If they are there with an adult, that's why we have PG. If you think little Timmy can't handle it, don't take him.

 

[Mikeyfell]

first off swearing isn't a bad thing
secondly 6 of the 10 movies up for best picture are R rated
thirdly I'm sorry you released Oscar-bait during Christmas time and didn't make a lot of money, but bleeps will make it worse

 

[Infernai]

I've said it once and I'll say it again: FUCK BEING FAMILY FRIENDLY! It just makes everything damn near unbearable...and also guts anything that was once sophisticated and intelligent until only flashy lights and beeps remain in place of what was once good....urgh.

 

[Sonicron]

Say what? You can say 'fuck' and other expletives in a movie! TV is already shackled by nonsensical amounts of censorship, and now they're going to put a muzzle on cinema, too? Bollocks.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

This is why Canada's rating system makes more sense. It only got a PG rating here.

We really shouldn't hold ourselves as the paragon of sensible ratings though. Just recently the CRTC has decreed that Money for Nothing by Dire Straits is too offensive to play on the radio after 25 years.
Mind you that's not the movie ratings or anything...

I'm really against censorship in any form. The words they're talking about exist in everyday language, and in a movie geared towards adults it makes no sense to try to bleep them out or remove them so you don't hurt somebodies ears. As usual if you don't like it don't see it, and trying to change a scene in a movie so that it has a better chance at winning the oscars is the epitome of what is wrong with the movie industry these days.

Any chance you can elaborate on why the blazes they would prevent that from being played in the radio?

 

[Diligent]

This is why Canada's rating system makes more sense. It only got a PG rating here.

We really shouldn't hold ourselves as the paragon of sensible ratings though. Just recently the CRTC has decreed that Money for Nothing by Dire Straits is too offensive to play on the radio after 25 years.
Mind you that's not the movie ratings or anything...

I'm really against censorship in any form. The words they're talking about exist in everyday language, and in a movie geared towards adults it makes no sense to try to bleep them out or remove them so you don't hurt somebodies ears. As usual if you don't like it don't see it, and trying to change a scene in a movie so that it has a better chance at winning the oscars is the epitome of what is wrong with the movie industry these days.

Any chance you can elaborate on why the blazes they would prevent that from being played in the radio?

Why yes, yes I can. First of all, it was the CBSC (Canadian Broadcasting Standards Council) not the CRTC, that was a mistype. Second, because one person in Newfoundland called the CBSC and complained that he/she was offended by the word "******" in the song, it gets a nationwide radio ban, or must be edited to be played, but lots of stations are just pulling the song. Here is a link to the full story (and it shows the offending lyrics).
http://jam.canoe.ca/Music/2011/01/12/16867536.html

This hot on the heels of the whole Huckleberry Finn censorship issue, and now talk of this movie...since when was it every single persons RIGHT not to be offended by anything ever?
I'm personally more offended by all this censorship.

 

[Falseprophet]

This is why Canada's rating system makes more sense. It only got a PG rating here.

I work with the Ontario Film Board Ratings every day (I buy movies for a public library system) and I'm still astounded that the government-run ratings board that David Cronenberg condemned as totalitarian and in the same league as Iran's 30 years ago, is now the picture of reason compared to the MPAA. Looking at the ratings chart, language can only drive an OFRB rating above PG if it's "aggressive", contains slurs, or accompanied by sex or violence (in other words, content that would already drive the rating above PG).

But things can vary across the country. Quebec has a more European sensibility: they're pretty cool with sexuality, but violence drives the ratings way up. Manitoba's generally the opposite.

 

[FROGGEman2]

F**k yeah, Helena Bonham Carter. Keep awesome.

On a related note- I've heard the ratings system in the US is based on (one swearword- M, two swearwords- R), and that really pisses me off. Unless it's false.

I hope this censorship isn't international, but that would really screw me over. Not that I was planning on getting it, but, you know, morals 'n' shit. Australia seems far cooler with swearing. Except when it wants to impress the big boys. idk, the commercial channels are always really worried about it, but the government channels chuck 'em out like it's nobodies business.

TANGENT

Oh A(ustralian)BC, how I love you. You show the best shows, you have the best business values, a human public face, aren't afraid to do radically new things and hold yourself to an extremely high standard of journalism. Seriously, ABC News is the most unbiased news you will ever see, ever. They fucking know it too, and constantly make sure to keep their show very professional. I dunno, it's just compared to international news, their news is faster, less chatter-filled and more aesthetically pleasing.

Also, best intro music evaaaaaaaaaaaar

/patriotism

 

[Russian_Assassin]

Fuck censorship and FUCK those money hungry bloated uncreative marketing TWATS! Your impulses and idiotic decisions are a blight to every art form out there. You are what is keeping the gaming industry down and all we get is this shitty cookie cutter games no one but 8 year olds that fantasize about being a fucking space marine like.

What a spontaneous rant that was... If I'm angry it means I haven't smoked in a while. Time to fix that...

 

[dubious_wolf]

what kid 18 and under will want to go see this film without the coercion of parents?

 

[Jaded Scribe]

The MPAA fails on so many levels.

According to the MPAA, two uses of the word "fuck" will get you an R rating. Air Force One was one that just barely crossed that line, when in all honesty, it was a PG-13 film.

The King's Speech uses cursing in a therapeutic, non-confrontational, non-aggressive.

My husband and I just finally saw this movie (absolutely excellent by the way) this weekend. Our 5-year old also has a speech problem, and sees a therapist weekly. We were talking about having him watch it because he'd be able to relate. Our primary decision for not having our youngest watch it had nothing to do with the language. It was 100% because since it is a "grown up" movie, he'd just get bored and disinterested.

Not to mention that the MPAA has a history of disliking the Weinsteins, so that probably played a large role as well.

 

[The Harkinator]

This problem has a very simple solution. Somebody can watch the film before they add the bleeps then watch it again in the cinema and swear whenever a bleep sounds. That way someone can be safe in the knowledge that they played a vital role in the film and everyone else can watch a film how it is supposed to be seen.

Just don't do it if there are any young children around. Anyone under the age of 4 wont know what it means. Anyone 4 or older probably knows.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

This is why Canada's rating system makes more sense. It only got a PG rating here.

We really shouldn't hold ourselves as the paragon of sensible ratings though. Just recently the CRTC has decreed that Money for Nothing by Dire Straits is too offensive to play on the radio after 25 years.
Mind you that's not the movie ratings or anything...

I'm really against censorship in any form. The words they're talking about exist in everyday language, and in a movie geared towards adults it makes no sense to try to bleep them out or remove them so you don't hurt somebodies ears. As usual if you don't like it don't see it, and trying to change a scene in a movie so that it has a better chance at winning the oscars is the epitome of what is wrong with the movie industry these days.

Any chance you can elaborate on why the blazes they would prevent that from being played in the radio?

Why yes, yes I can. First of all, it was the CBSC (Canadian Broadcasting Standards Council) not the CRTC, that was a mistype. Second, because one person in Newfoundland called the CBSC and complained that he/she was offended by the word "******" in the song, it gets a nationwide radio ban, or must be edited to be played, but lots of stations are just pulling the song. Here is a link to the full story (and it shows the offending lyrics).
http://jam.canoe.ca/Music/2011/01/12/16867536.html

This hot on the heels of the whole Huckleberry Finn censorship issue, and now talk of this movie...since when was it every single persons RIGHT not to be offended by anything ever?
I'm personally more offended by all this censorship.

Good grief, that is so silly! I've listened to that song a million times and never even noticed that I should be offended.

I agree. You have a right to be offended, but that does NOT trump every other persons right to figure out for themselves if they are offended. If (and it happens very rarely) I get offended I just decide that I will not listen/watch/read this in the future. I would NEVER invalidate other peoples choice to make up their own minds. That is, as you wisely say, offensive.

I would be your friend if ever we met.