What the F#&@!

The King's Speech, under the sadly failing and altogether pathetic guidelines of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) was given a R-rating because of one scene where speech therapist Geoffrey Rush advises future king Colin Firth to repeat the F-work in rampant succession.  Under MPAA guidelines, more than one F-work is merit enough for an R-rating despite specificity under which is used.  Now comes news that the mogul, puppeteer, Oscar-strategist extraordinaire Harvey Weinstein is considering re-releasing the Oscar-praised movie for a more family friendly PG-13 rating.  This all strikes me as a tad desperate and greedy.  Especially considering that The King's Speech has become a box office hit (it's current North American tally is $74.8 million), and stands a shot at becoming The Weinstein Company's top grossing film.  It calls to mind when Weinstein, back in his Miramax days released the Oscar-lauded Italian hit Life is Beautiful with an English dubbed version shortly after winning it's awards; as if let's cash in now by pandering and doing away with the marketing gamble (in that case it was pesky subtitles, here it's a few curse words), despite both films breaking out and becoming hits the old fashioned way.  Strangely enough, wouldn't The King's Speech be a likely candidate for G or PG-ratings sans f-bombs, otherwise it's squeaky clean?  But hey, why stop there, why not dig up your collection and re-release all of past R-rated triumphs-- Pulp Fiction, Clerks, The Crying Game (although that one might be confusing without the very nude reveal.)  On another note, even if The King's Speech does get it's phantom edit (one that objected too very heavily by director Tom Hooper after the initial rating call), will it really be more marketable and palatable for a younger crowd; the film is many things, and many good things, but I highly doubt the tweens are crowding the multiplex clamoring to sneak in...