^ The same justification was used (possibly apocryphally?) to explain the renaming of Bennett's The Madness of George III to The Madness of King George when that movie adapation of the play was filmed.
An urban myth has developed that the title change derives from the fear that American audiences would think the film was a sequel, because of the use of Roman numerals in its title. However, [director Nicholas] Hytner has stated that the principal reason was to clarify that this was a film about a king, particularly in America as it is a country that has always been without royalty.
Then there was the Bill Cosby movie Leonard, Part 6
, which was only pretending to be part of an ongoing series; I seem to recall reading that it was titled that way as a deliberate attempt to confuse audiences and make them think there were earlier films.
I'm sure the latter is apocryphal, I don't think audiences are that
stupid and besides they don't generally clamor to see the part 6 of anything.
The irony(yeah, I'm sure I'm not using that word right) of the King George thing is any audience that would be confused by it would never watch the movie in the first place.