The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2013)

[knives]

Apparently Jeunet has another film that sneaked into American films this year and it's in english. Surprising it's going so quietly.

[Dylan]

Apparently Jeunet has another film that sneaked into American films this year and it's in english. Surprising it's going so quietly.

Yes, The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet from 2013 finally got a release over here in the last month and I'm very interested in seeing it. I adored A Very Long Engagement - his best film in my opinion - but Micmacs was a disappointment, so we'll see. It is surprising how quiet this release has been considering that Amelie continues to be more popular with young people than ever before - T.S. Spivet could potentially attract a huge audience based on that connection if it were to be marketed decently. Then again, I recall an excellent trailer and poster and fairly wide distribution for A Very Long Engagement (which came out only a few years after Amelie) and that barely did any business in America (which surprised me at the time, and still does). Perhaps it isn't as easy as it seems to get the millions of Amelie fans in the seats for a new Jeunet.

[cdnchris]

I'm trying to find the article but I'm pretty sure Weinsteins buried the film because Jeunet had final cut and he refused to bow to their editing "suggestions" for an American release. So they're just dumping it.

EDIT: This isn't the one (the one I read was written Friday I believe) but this article from February hints at it. As does this one from January.

[zedz]

I saw T.S. Spivet last year, and it's a charming, slightly dark quest film, nicely realized and non-cloying. There are two main issues that led to its dumping in my opinion. It's squarely a film intended for children, and a pretty good one, BUT Judy Davis lets loose a big bunch of "fucks", which effectively makes it unmarketable to children.

Maybe even more damaging for the American market and absolutely crucial to the meaning of the film is that it's resolutely anti-gun culture:

Spoiler

A horrendous gun accident is essential to the back story of the characters, and the film's emotional breakthrough comes at the end when Helena Bonham-Carter admits to her son that allowing nine-year-olds to play with loaded guns is absolutely insane.

Everywhere else in the world, that's basic common sense. In the USA, it makes the film an embarrassment that must be buried.

[swo17]

It's squarely a film intended for children, and a pretty good one, BUT Judy Davis lets loose a big bunch of "fucks", which effectively makes it unmarketable to children.

And yet it's still rated PG here? Since the advent of the PG-13 rating, that's unheard of.

[swo17]

It's squarely a film intended for children, and a pretty good one, BUT Judy Davis lets loose a big bunch of "fucks", which effectively makes it unmarketable to children.

And yet it's still rated PG here? Since the advent of the PG-13 rating, that's unheard of.

I just caught up with the U.S. home video release of this film and I don't know how it played theatrically but the DVD is unceremoniously censored. (At one point Judy Davis calls the little kid a "mother lover." The other times she just kind of grunts.)

[MichaelB]

It must have been the same theatrically. Language along the lines that zedz describes is a mandatory PG-13 at the very least.

[zedz]

I wonder if the original version was released theatrically or on home video anywhere?

[swo17]

It's funny to compare reviews on IMDb and Netflix because they're all either "what a great family-friendly movie!" or "keep your kids away from this!" depending on which version they saw

[John Cope]

I wonder if the original version was released theatrically or on home video anywhere?

The French disc is evidently uncut.