
Too evil! Too smutty! Too Thatcher! When TV stars demand their scenes are cut
As professional show-offs with A-list ambitions, you might assume that any TV star wants to maximise their screen time – the meatier the role and the more minutes in the limelight, the better. Yet that isn't always the case. Sometimes, actors want their scenes to be cut, either from the script or from the edit. And they can have all sorts of reasons, from personal politics to second thoughts about stripping off.
The recent Channel 4 docudrama Brian and Maggie, written by Sherwood's James Graham, saw Dame Harriet Walter deliver a nuanced, non-cartoonish portrayal of the, let's say, 'divisive' figure of Margaret Thatcher. The lady wasn't for turning. She was for being left on the cutting room floor, though.
In depicting the unconventional bond between the Conservative prime minister and Labour MP turned TV journalist Brian Walden, whose infamous 1989 grilling of the PM would trigger her downfall, programme-makers put their personal politics aside. The Guardian's Lucy Mangan wrote that we are 'in a bad way when Thatcher begins to look like the way and the light'. For once, the Telegraph agreed: 'Channel 4 has made a sympathetic drama about Thatcher by mistake.'
'In the edit, we cut something because I thought it was a bit too kind,' Coogan told Emily Maitlis in the Radio Times. 'Of course I had huge antipathy towards Thatcher. I was very anti-Thatcher. I was worried about being too compassionate because at the end, she was definitely a victim of sexism.' At a press screening, Coogan clarified that the scene in question was the awkward post-interview drinks: 'It was a line where Brian said: 'She's worth 100 of them.' I thought it was too syrupy for him to say that after stabbing the knife in. Raising a glass to her was sufficient. Best to be more subtle.'
Coogan has form for demanding tweaks to his TV biopics. In The Reckoning, the queasy 2023 factual drama about Jimmy Savile, he asked to change a necrophilia scene in a Leeds hospital morgue because he was 'uncomfortable' performing it. 'It was as disturbing as it looks,' said Coogan. 'A certain shot was planned that I didn't want to do. It was just a detail that I was uncomfortable with. I had a conversation with the director [Sandra Goldbacher] and we came to an agreement on the most appropriate way to depict it.'
Whether it's down to professionalism, power dynamics or an ego-fuelled desire to maximise their screen time, actors asking for their own scenes to be cut is a rare occurrence on TV. The cases we know about, at least.
With depressing predictability, instances often involve female actors fending off demands to bare all. Evangeline Lilly, who played Kate in Lost, admitted that she disliked most of the character's later storylines. She felt kick-ass Kate had been reduced to 'chasing men around the island' and felt 'cornered' into partially nude scenes during the third and fourth seasons. In the end, Lilly told execs she would no longer do nudity.
Not one but four Euphoria actors – Sydney Sweeney, Chloe Cherry, Martha Kelly and Minka Kelly – asked controversy-baiting creator Sam Levinson to cut 'unnecessary' nude scenes from the script. Allison Williams was the only one of the four female leads in HBO's Girls who didn't appear naked, explaining that she 'didn't want my future children to see that'.
Male actors tend to push back over sexually predatory plotlines, rather than flesh-flashing. Penn Badgley, star of Netflix potboiler You, was 'disgusted' after filming a sequence where the antihero Joe masturbates outside his lust object's apartment. Badgley said he didn't want to do the scene and has admitted that playing obsessive serial killer Joe takes a mental toll on him.
Joseph Fiennes refused to film a scene in The Handmaid's Tale where villainous Commander Fred Waterford rapes his wife Serena (Yvonne Strahovski). 'As abhorrent and evil as Fred is, I have to defend parts of him because he's still human,' said Fiennes, who stood firm with 'long emails, defending and pushing'. He won the argument. The assault was never filmed.
Actors also resist certain scenes for character consistency or fear of fan backlash. The breakout moment from Netflix's teen-goth phenomenon Wednesday was nearly very different. Moody Ms Addams' prom dance, which went viral on TikTok, was originally meant to escalate into a flash mob. Actor Jenna Ortega thought a stage musical-style number was jarring and demanded it was changed.
'Everyone was supposed to pick up on it and start dancing with her,' said Ortega. 'I vetoed it because why would Wednesday be OK with that? She'd knock someone out.' Ortega also expressed disappointment that the series put Wednesday in the centre of a love triangle with fellow Nevermore students, arguing it made 'no sense' for the character.
In the American version of The Office, John Krasinski wouldn't allow Jim to cheat on wife Pam. The eighth season was supposed to see him kiss the new temp Cathy (Lindsey Broad) on a work trip. Krasinski believed this would alienate viewers, so declined to film it: 'That's the only time I remember putting my foot down. I remember saying, 'I'm not going to shoot it. If you push the audience too far and show Jim cheating, they'll never come back'.''
Similarly, Matt LeBlanc initially refused to do the Friends storyline where Joey dated Rachel. NBC showrunner Kevin S Bright said: 'Matt was very firmly against it, saying Joey would never steal his buddy Ross' girlfriend.' Bright admitted it 'took a lot of conversations' for LeBlanc to be persuaded.
A Friends plot twist that didn't get past the cast was Rachel flat-sharing with Central Perk mainstay Gunther, who harboured a puppyish peroxide crush on her. A planned season six subplot had Jennifer Aniston's character moving out of Monica's apartment and shacking up with the lovestruck barista. Actor James Michael Tyler said: 'I remember seeing the first draft of the script and thinking, 'Oh man, they're never going to make this work.' It didn't read right, even to me. I looked over at Jen and she wasn't convinced either.' Producers soon realised it was a bad idea and spiked it.
The Sopranos' Drea de Matteo, AKA mob moll Adriana, lobbied the show's producers to remove a scene before she got whacked in the woods. It was a scene in which she didn't even appear.
'In the script, Christopher went to Tony Soprano and told him I was an FBI rat,' recalls De Matteo. 'So when Tony calls me and says Silvio will pick me up, the audience know I'm driving towards my death. That bothered me. The walk to her death wasn't going to be suspenseful. It would make it kind of gratuitous. I fought for that phone call to be cut. A few other actors were onboard and helped argue my case. They took it out, thank God. They ended up using it as a flashback the following season.'
More recently, the singer turned actor Alexandra Burke asked for a particularly distressing scene to be cut from the Paramount+ dystopian drama Curfew. Burke said the content was too dark: 'It was the most challenging role I've ever tackled but there were some things I didn't think I could do,' she admitted. 'I spoke to the producer and they agreed to take it out. I was like, 'Thank you, because I'm not sure I could act that. And you've already shot scenes with me, hun, so the contract's done!''
Finally, for a cuter variation on the theme, Nicola Coughlan's negotiations with Netflix and Shondaland included them producing a family-friendly edit of Bridgerton episodes – for the express purpose of showing her mother. Each instalment of the Regency romp, in which Coughlan plays Penelope Featherington, is supplied to her in an alternate cut with less sex and nudity.
'It's literally written into my contract,' says Coughlan. 'People think I'm joking but we grew up Irish Catholic. That's just not how we vibe.' You can take the girl out of Derry …
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Ladbrokes ads banned over use of ‘Ladbucks' likely to appeal to under-18s
The TV ad, seen in December, featured a voiceover that stated: 'This is a Ladbuck, the new way to get rewarded at Ladbrokes, and these are some of the 100 million Ladbucks that will be dropping weekly. 'Collect them on our free to play games and choose rewards like free spins, free bets and more … Plus you can even use them to play your favourite games for free in our Ladbucks arcade. Like Fishin Frenzy and Goldstrike.' A Video on Demand ad, seen on Channel 4 around the same time, was the same as the TV ad. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received two complaints that the term 'Ladbucks' was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s. Ladbrokes said the term 'Ladbucks' was chosen as a play on the word Ladbrokes, and because it referenced, through the use of the term bucks, that it had value on the Ladbrokes website. They said the word had no origins in youth culture and believed that it was not of inherent strong appeal to under-18s, and highlighted that both ads had targeting restrictions to reduce the likelihood of children viewing them. The firm said it believed that the term was not associated with any coins from video games which were popular with under-18s, adding that 'V-Bucks' from Fortnite and 'Robux' from Roblox were in-game currencies that had to be purchased before being used to buy in-game items. Further, it did not believe the term 'lad' referred to a boy or young man and said its brand had never been used in that context. The ASA said several online games popular with under-18s, such as Roblox and Fortnite, had their own in-game currencies, which were called Robux and V-Bucks respectively. These currencies, which could be both bought and earnt through gameplay, were depicted as coins, and spent within in-game stores, usually on cosmetic items that enhanced gameplay. According to Ofcom's 2024 report into media use and attitudes, 60% of children aged between three and 17 years gamed online, while 89% of 11 to 18-year-olds gamed online weekly, with categories of games that were most popular including building games, such as Roblox, followed by games played against others, such as Fortnite. The ASA said it considered the term 'Ladbucks', through the suffix 'bucks', had strong similarities to the in-game currencies Robux and V-Bucks. It said the name 'Ladbucks', when considered alongside the imagery and the application of the coin in the ads, was 'depicted in a manner which was similar to features in video games popular with children'. 'We therefore considered the term in the ads was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s and breached the Code,' it said. The watchdog ruled that the ads must not appear again in their current form, adding: 'We told Ladbrokes not to include content in ads that was reflective of youth culture or which had strong appeal to those under 18 years of age.' A spokesman for Entain, which owns Ladbrokes, said: 'We are disappointed by the ASA's ruling on our 'Ladbucks' advertising campaign, and we are seeking an independent review of what we consider to be a flawed decision. 'For example, it is based on an inaccurate comparison with games such as Fortnite or Roblox and their in-game currencies. Entain works extremely carefully to ensure that its advertising does not target or appeal to under-18s. 'We maintain that this was a responsibly created and targeted campaign, pre-approved by Clearcast and only shown after the watershed.'


Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
When did we become so boring?
Recently, I found myself trying to explain to a much younger colleague who Oliver Reed was. We'd got on to the subject of the hell-raising actor because I was bemoaning the fact – perhaps rashly – that today's world is completely anodyne. Fear of offending others means it's better to keep your thoughts to yourself; after all, who needs the police investigating them for a non-crime hate incident? Brave is the person who brings their whole self to work, as many of us are encouraged to do. The government's Employment Rights Bill, which some are calling the 'banter ban', may mean we're even more reluctant to speak our minds. This prohibition against saying anything even vaguely controversial extends to all walks of life – including television. So, I cited Reed's legendary appearance on the late-night Channel 4 discussion programme After Dark as an example of a time when we didn't have to weigh every word before uttering it. During an episode on men, Reed got hammered on the free booze, became argumentative and gave horrified feminist author Kate Millett an unsolicited peck on the cheek. Eventually, after being told off by Helena Kennedy, he was asked to leave. Some may think he confirmed masculine stereotypes with his boorish behaviour, but it was one of the funniest things ever broadcast and went down in the annals of television history. From today's vantage point, it seems almost unthinkable that an unscripted debate – where guests were plied with free booze – could ever be broadcast on terrestrial television. Instead, we're fed a diet of inoffensive pap featuring vacuous individuals with perfect hair, unblemished skin and 'Turkey teeth'. Intellectually challenging television is a thing of the past. Now, we have to endure endless crime dramas and cookery programmes, which are little more than chewing gum for the mind. God forbid we be allowed to view anything that jolts us from our collective stupor. I hanker after moments like 1985's Live Aid when Bob Geldof jabbed the table and said: 'Fuck the address, let's get the numbers!' when emphasising the urgency of getting donations by phone rather than giving out postal addresses. Interviewed on Sky News in 2014 about critical reactions to the re-recording of Do They Know It's Christmas, he said: 'I think they're talking bollocks.' Asked not to repeat the word, he responded to another of the presenter's assertions with: 'Complete load of bollocks.' The interview ended abruptly. Absolute comedy gold. I, for one, am sick of today's bland entertainment. We need TV programmes fronted by louche characters with several days' beard growth who look like they've come straight from a nightclub. Their rasping voices should suggest a 40-a-day habit. And the news would be far more interesting if presented by people who'd clearly enjoyed a good lunch on expenses. Broadcaster and journalist Reginald 'Reggie' Bosanquet often appeared worse for wear while fronting the News at Ten. One of his co-presenters, Anna Ford, recalled: 'Reggie was a dear. I mean, you wouldn't have chosen a man who had epilepsy, was an alcoholic, had had a stroke and wore a toupée to read the news, but the combination was absolute magic.' Just imagine how ratings would soar for any channel brave enough to put a modern-day Bosanquet in front of the camera. It would be compulsive viewing. Forget the daily diet of doom – you'd tune in to see how pissed they were. And if we must suffer never-ending food programmes, at least let the chef have a fag planted in the corner of their mouth (Marco Pierre White is the only living cook I know to have done this). Then we could watch transfixed as the inch of ash hanging precariously from the tip threatened to drop into whatever they were preparing. It would be even more compelling if they were helping themselves to liberal amounts of alcohol like the late Keith Floyd. Sadly, because everything's now so carefully choreographed, there's no danger of anything spontaneous and, therefore, interesting happening. Gone is the era when a group of young musicians like the Sex Pistols could appear on live TV and turn the air blue. When challenged to say something outrageous by host Bill Grundy, guitarist Steve Jones responded by calling him a 'Dirty bastard' and a 'fucker'. It caused outrage, but the nine-year-old me was delighted. It just couldn't happen now. Neither the producers nor the band's management would allow it. We need TV programmes fronted by louche characters with several days' beard growth who look like they've come straight from a nightclub I like to imagine that, in the unlikely event I'm ever invited on to Today, I'd say something that would have the punters choking on their cornflakes: 'Sorry, Emma… [prolonged sniffing] Feeling a bit liverish. I'm afraid I had a couple of grams of Bolivia's finest washed down with a bottle of Jack D. Never a good idea on a school night.' Raffish laughter. But in reality, I'd be utterly craven. Anyway, I've switched to Radio 3. As for comedy, fuhgeddaboudit! I recently watched the first episode of Tina Fey's Four Seasons and nearly wept at the banality. Anything from yesteryear seems to have to carry a health warning. Can you imagine a new series of Little Britain making it past the morality police? Neither can I. Comedy from the 1970s and 1980s? Don't even go there. There is some hope: The White Lotus – a satire about the entitled rich – has produced some sublime moments. But it's a drama. We need more real-life characters in the media: rakish individuals and loose cannons, preferably those with charm, intellect and wit. Give John Lydon, aka Johnny Rotten, his own show. He may have mellowed with age, but he could be relied on to ignore the script. This isn't a rallying cry for bad behaviour for its own sake – or an argument against common courtesy, which is already in decline – but rather a call to loosen the fetters that mean, in today's world, it's easier and safer to say nothing at all. Our fear of opprobrium means public debate is the poorest quality I can ever remember. Rather than reasoned discourse, we have facile comments or pure vitriol. So come on, commissioning editors, instead of rendering us insensible with unmitigated twaddle, bring back cerebral discussion programmes whose participants aren't censored. Invite bon viveurs, intellectuals, raconteurs and wits. Mix it up occasionally with a disreputable character or two, supply the guests with a heavily laden drinks trolley and something contentious to debate, and you'd have an explosive cocktail – as well as the makings of brilliant television. Sadly, Oliver Reed died while filming Gladiator. He met some off-duty sailors in a bar and challenged them to a drinking match but fell ill and collapsed with a heart attack. My God, what an epic way to go. Of course, I could never say that to my younger colleague because the age of giants is over, and the unexceptionable are now in charge.


North Wales Chronicle
5 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Ladbrokes ads banned over use of ‘Ladbucks' likely to appeal to under-18s
The TV ad, seen in December, featured a voiceover that stated: 'This is a Ladbuck, the new way to get rewarded at Ladbrokes, and these are some of the 100 million Ladbucks that will be dropping weekly. 'Collect them on our free to play games and choose rewards like free spins, free bets and more … Plus you can even use them to play your favourite games for free in our Ladbucks arcade. Like Fishin Frenzy and Goldstrike.' A Video on Demand ad, seen on Channel 4 around the same time, was the same as the TV ad. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received two complaints that the term 'Ladbucks' was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s. Ladbrokes said the term 'Ladbucks' was chosen as a play on the word Ladbrokes, and because it referenced, through the use of the term bucks, that it had value on the Ladbrokes website. They said the word had no origins in youth culture and believed that it was not of inherent strong appeal to under-18s, and highlighted that both ads had targeting restrictions to reduce the likelihood of children viewing them. The firm said it believed that the term was not associated with any coins from video games which were popular with under-18s, adding that 'V-Bucks' from Fortnite and 'Robux' from Roblox were in-game currencies that had to be purchased before being used to buy in-game items. Further, it did not believe the term 'lad' referred to a boy or young man and said its brand had never been used in that context. The ASA said several online games popular with under-18s, such as Roblox and Fortnite, had their own in-game currencies, which were called Robux and V-Bucks respectively. These currencies, which could be both bought and earnt through gameplay, were depicted as coins, and spent within in-game stores, usually on cosmetic items that enhanced gameplay. According to Ofcom's 2024 report into media use and attitudes, 60% of children aged between three and 17 years gamed online, while 89% of 11 to 18-year-olds gamed online weekly, with categories of games that were most popular including building games, such as Roblox, followed by games played against others, such as Fortnite. The ASA said it considered the term 'Ladbucks', through the suffix 'bucks', had strong similarities to the in-game currencies Robux and V-Bucks. It said the name 'Ladbucks', when considered alongside the imagery and the application of the coin in the ads, was 'depicted in a manner which was similar to features in video games popular with children'. 'We therefore considered the term in the ads was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s and breached the Code,' it said. The watchdog ruled that the ads must not appear again in their current form, adding: 'We told Ladbrokes not to include content in ads that was reflective of youth culture or which had strong appeal to those under 18 years of age.' A spokesman for Entain, which owns Ladbrokes, said: 'We are disappointed by the ASA's ruling on our 'Ladbucks' advertising campaign, and we are seeking an independent review of what we consider to be a flawed decision. 'For example, it is based on an inaccurate comparison with games such as Fortnite or Roblox and their in-game currencies. Entain works extremely carefully to ensure that its advertising does not target or appeal to under-18s. 'We maintain that this was a responsibly created and targeted campaign, pre-approved by Clearcast and only shown after the watershed.'