The most hypocritical movie of 2003, according to Stephen King: “Money talks”
Hypocrisy is rife in just about every workplace and in every profession, but Stephen King had a particular problem with one of the most popular movies of 2003.
Not because of its quality, since he noted that it was a great film that deserved every ounce of critical, commercial, and awards season success that came its way, which it absolutely did, but more because he was adamant that Hollywood gave it a pass that other pictures wouldn’t be afforded.
You can see the point he’s attempting to make, in that trying to make sense of cinematic censorship is a fool’s errand. What’s acceptable for one filmmaker to commit to the screen in their latest production isn’t necessarily going to be allowed to fly for everyone else, and clearly, it pissed him off.
Since the advent of the MPAA, BBFC, and every other localised ratings board in existence, directors have faced plenty of struggles. Sometimes, it only takes a couple of seconds of excised footage to turn an R-rated movie into a PG-13, but on many other occasions, things have become much more heated.
At the end of the day, it’s called the movie business for a reason, and any flick that stands a greater chance of earning exponentially more money as a PG-13 release is more likely to be treated with kid gloves, because at the end of the day, the more cash it hauls in, the better it is for the industry.
John Carpenter is undeniably one of his era’s most influential and widely imitated auteurs, but he was never known for setting the box office alight. King, in what could generously be described as a loose apples-to-oranges comparison, invoked the Halloween and The Thing creator to try to wrap his head around how The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King was deemed family-friendly.
“What I disliked most about the ratings system in 1969 and dislike most about it now is the pure hypocrisy of the thing,” the author ranted. “You have to step down to the big-budget PG-13 pics to sample it in full flower, because, MPAA or no MPAA, the basic motto of the film business has never really changed: Money talks.” By his reasoning, since The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers made a fortune, “Peter Jackson is able to show a great deal of R-rated stuff and still get a PG-13.”
“Is The Return of the King a great movie? Yes,” King did acknowledge. “Does it deserve the ‘Best Picture’ Oscar, not only for itself but for its snubbed forebears? Yes. Is it PG-13 if it comes from another house, directed by John Carpenter, and titled… mmm, let’s say Shelob the Spider? No, then it’s R.” As fun as Carpenter helming an R-rated film about a giant spider sounds, there’s a huge difference between a straightforward horror and an epic literary adaptation, especially one in the fantasy genre.
There can’t have been many people who watched Jackson’s trilogy-capper and clutched at their pearls, wondering how it managed to sneak past the censors as a PG-13 adventure. Even if there were, over a billion dollars in ticket sales and 11 Oscars would have answered any questions they had, regardless of how hypocritical King found it to be.
