Call me cynical, but I suspect a lot of the Academy are going to take time off from wishing they were Charlie Sheen to demonstrate their moral fiber by passing over the superb "The King's Speech" because of all the — period and character-correct — smoking in it.
Anti-tobacco groups and academics such as those at the UC San Francisco as well as film review sites such as ScreenIt! have already pounced on the issue. Even the Internet Movie Data Base warns of it.
Anti-tobacco groups and academics such as those at the UC San Francisco as well as film review sites such as ScreenIt! have already pounced on the issue. Even the Internet Movie Data Base warns of it.
In the midst of the current push to vilify any movie with smoking in by granting it an R-rating as MPAA policy, will this historical fact hurt a fine movie with today's shallow and ignorant Hollywood?
5 comments:
That is just plain, unvarnished stupid. If they edited out all the smoking in, say, Out of the Past, the movie would only run about 20 minutes.
If you ever watch Errol Flynn's "Dive Bomber" there is something almost comically frantic about the smoking. No sooner does a character make his entrance than he or she is desperately clawing a pack of Luckies out and puffing on one like a drowning man finding a snorkel...
I was happy to see I was wrong to be worried, though. Outstanding movie, no matter how much Greg Gutfield whinges about it.
I'm no fan of smoking, but obviously all the smoking in the movie is historically accurate. People just don't remember.
There are plans to edit the profanity out too. It is an accurate part of the therapy. The Weinsteins and Tom Hooper should tell the lobbyists to kiss their golden @$$, because the movie won the Oscar with all the "objectionable" parts in it. Brilliant movie. Don't try to fix what ain't broken, fellas.
Deborah Leigh
Post a Comment