In this age of reboots and revivals, few shows carry the weight of expectation quite like King of the Hill. After a 15-year hiatus, the beloved animated series has returned on Hulu, bringing the Hill family and their propane-fueled world back to a modern audience.
The revival has been met with glowing reviews, with critics and fans alike praising its ability to recapture the original series’ tone while aging the characters gracefully. However, a surprising detail has emerged from showrunner Saladin K. Patterson about the creative process: the new season was almost a lot more foul-mouthed. In a recent interview, Patterson revealed that while the show was given more leeway than its original broadcast run on Fox, the “Disney of it all” still imposed limitations, forcing the removal of all F-bombs from the new episodes.
This decision, rooted in Disney’s desire to avoid a TV-MA rating for the show on Hulu, highlights a fascinating tension between creative freedom and corporate standards. While the original King of the Hill was never known for being overly vulgar like some of its animated counterparts, the show did use mild profanity. The idea of Hank, Peggy, or Dale dropping an F-bomb feels both out of character and, for some, like a natural evolution of a show returning in a different era. Patterson himself admitted it wasn’t a “big loss,” stating he’s not a fan of gratuitous cursing anyway. This revelation sparks a wider conversation about how streaming giants are influencing the content we consume and whether these standards and practices ultimately benefit or hinder storytelling.
Why did Disney make them remove the F-bombs?
The primary reason for the F-bomb removal was to maintain a TV-14 rating for the King of the Hill revival. Hulu, which is now heavily integrated with Disney+, has certain guidelines to follow to ensure a more family-friendly streaming environment across its platforms. While Hulu’s streaming service technically allows for more mature content, the connection to Disney means they want to avoid a “TV-MA” label whenever possible. This strategy aims to broaden the show’s audience and keep it accessible for viewers who might be watching on Disney+ through the Hulu hub.
This move is not entirely a surprise. Disney has always been a brand associated with family entertainment, and while they own properties like Marvel and The Simpsons that push boundaries, their underlying principles still guide content decisions. For a show like King of the Hill, which has always been known for its subtle humor and grounded characters rather than shock value, the decision to limit explicit language seems to align with its core identity. It also shows a clear distinction between how streaming services under the same corporate umbrella—like Hulu and the more boundary-pushing FX on Hulu—are being managed.
How does this affect the new season and the show’s legacy?
For many fans, the absence of the F-bomb won’t change the show’s quality. In fact, early reviews for the new season are overwhelmingly positive, with some outlets calling it one of the best revivals ever. Critics and audiences on platforms like Rotten Tomatoes have given it a perfect 100% and a 92% audience score, respectively. This reception suggests the heart and humor of the show remain intact despite the content restrictions.
The revival’s strength, according to these reviews, lies in its ability to tell relevant, modern stories while staying true to the characters. The show reportedly handles complex topics like the gig economy and modern political discourse with the same subtle, nuanced touch it always had. The characters have aged—Bobby is now a successful restauranteur, and Dale is a local conspiracy theorist—but their relationships and personalities are consistent. The aformentioned limitations on language haven’t hampered the show’s ability to deliver a poignant and funny experience. This might be a valuable lesson for other revivals; staying true to the spirit of the show is more important than chasing a “more adult” or “edgier” label. The true legacy of King of the Hill is in its characters, not in its curse words.
Is this part of a larger trend in streaming media?
The King of the Hill situation is a great example of a growing trend in the streaming landscape. As major corporations like Disney, Warner Bros., and Amazon acquire and consolidate streaming platforms, there is an increasing push to streamline content and adhere to overarching brand guidelines. This can lead to seemingly contradictory situations, such as an adult animated comedy airing on a platform owned by a family-friendly company.
This trend is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it ensures a certain level of quality and avoids content that is purely sensational. On the other hand, it can stifle the creative freedom that initially made these shows popular. In the case of King of the Hill, it seems the show’s creative team, led by Patterson, was able to navigate these limitations without compromising the show’s integrity. For other creators, however, these guidelines might pose a more significant challenge. As streaming services continue to evolve, it will be interesting to see how this balance between corporate brand identity and creative expression plays out.
