Sony's "The Interview" gets release

[Andrew Reid]

The Interview has now got a limited release and is expected to be shown on Sony owned VOD channel Crackle. With the intervention of the US government, Seth Rogen is now the poster-child for freedom of expression.

First of all Crackle's the wrong place for this trash. Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, Jerry Seinfeld, that's the Crackle target audience, much better. Their regular audience is not dumb, not one whooping at butt jokes, jokes belittling race, jokes belittling gays, jokes encouraging bullying and racism in the guise of humour, which essentially is what I think The Interview boils down to, in a similar vein to The Hangover Part 2.

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

"When the monkey nibbles on the weaner, it's funny in any language" - The Hangover, Part II

What I discover when I talk to the mainstream about these films and Seth Rogan's brand of humour is that so many people just don't spot the jingoistic nastiness in these films nor the blatant racism. This really baffles me, why can't they see it? Perhaps they've never travelled or fallen in love with another culture that isn't their own. Different cultures have different sensibilities. What's not offensive to Americans might be much more offensive to everyone else.

When a country is trying to improve ties with a rogue state in order to diffuse tension and to eventually shut down their nuclear weapons programme, the last thing you want is a film like The Interview and the potentially unpredictable consequences, not least for Sony.

Creative freedom is worth defending, the question is whether the 'creative freedom of Seth Rogen' is worth defending? Look at the early reviews for The Interview & the trailer, it's not hard to work out what it is. There's plenty of nasty passive aggressive stuff in it disguised as humour, pointed out in these reviews from people who HAVE seen the film -

"Kim loves basketball - with the hoops lowered so he can dunk"

"Much is made of Koreans rumoured to be starving to death."

"Franco mugs shamelessly to make sure we understand that he's being funny, which he's not, and the script as a whole turns a satirical - or at least farcical - premise into sour buffoonery."

"It feels as though the filmmakers targeted North Korea, one of the world's least-loved countries, because no one important would object to their mocking, almost sadistic treatment of its leader."

"If the would-be butt jokes and gay jokes were funnier, I'd be willing to let it slide, but they are not."

It's the ultimate sign of our times that this is now a film President Obama has ended up defending, championing it as an example of freedom of expression, but then he's been put in a difficult situation as well.

If he rewards the hackers by backing Sony's original decision not to show it, more hacks and cyberterrorism will be encouraged because they will have the scent of a reward, an incentive to try. If he does fight back and reverse Sony's decision to show the piece of trash, that's hardly a "win" for anyone either.

The political circus around this is more ridiculous than anything because it implies that under freedom of expression, filmmakers have no responsibilities whatsoever. We do. We can't be as offensive as we want with a major release and cause dangerous diplomatic tensions under the banner of 'creative freedom' and butt jokes. With power goes responsibility and Sony Pictures need to take some responsibility for the mess and damage as well rather than blaming it entirely on North Korea.

It's not fair to say "it's only a joke" when there's undertones of Western supremacism all the way through the film. The joke about the basketball hoops needing to be lowered isn't about North Korea, it's about a race of people, that the filmmakers get a kick out of portraying as weird small people who speak funny...guys this isn't humour, it's bullying and something that reinforces plenty of real world bullying in every school in the west.

The Interview was always going to be a blatant publicity stunt designed to stir up a diplomatic rift between the US and North Korea and Sony should never have green-lit it. The irony is The Interview is exactly the kind of trash Sony producers in the leaked emails were so keen to stop doing.

Finally, here's a quote from the review in Time Out New York - "The Interview confirms Rogen as the most ambitious mainstream comedian in Hollywood. In the unlikely event that it proves to be Sony's downfall, at least they'll go out with a bang."

Not so unlikely... and really? Was it all worth it for some crass jokes at the expense of Asians and gays?

[Nikkor]

In Spain we say: "Quien se pica, ajos come"

[Andrew Reid]

Care to translate?

[Kristoferman]

Dude it's a Seth Rogen and James Franco movie. Don't think it's supposed to be high art. I think it looks funny and will be seeing it if it plays near me. I quite enjoyed both This is the End and Pineapple Express and i figure this to be in the same vein. Comedy doesn't have to be politically correct, and in fact usually sucks when it is. Unless there are some overtly racist themes that aren't meant to be taken lightly, I think you're being a bit sensationalist. The jokes you mention in the post seem benign enough.

[Andrew Reid]

Did you just say jokes about Koreans starving to death are 'benign enough' or was it just me?

[Kristoferman]

Humor about death and horrible situations isn't a new thing. Did not begin with the Interview.

[Andrew Reid]

It's only humour if it's funny.

[Nikkor]

Care to translate?

If we take it exactly it's something like when you state an general annoying fact, and someone susceptible gets angry and feels insulted because he finds himself described by that fact. In that case you would say "quien se pica, ajos come", meaning that in the end there is something true to it. Anyway, even if it's not exactly the case here because it's obviously an direct attack, there is always some resemblance if the affected person gets offended.

Lets take Jesus for example, in Europe there was a time where interpretating ,for example, pedofile behaviour in the words of "let the children come to me", would have ment the death penalty. The fun resides that the "base pillar" of a society is , viewed in a plausible way, just a pedofile sect leader who is worshipped as the son of god, and also as god himself, milleniums after his death. Believe it or not some people enjoy Satire.

It's not so much about freedom of speech, but about the way we think, and I don't see why a whole society should change their way of thinking after so much success. As an English man you know how important it is.

[Andrew Reid]

I don't think it needs to be got into in so much depth.

It's a simple mess really.

Trash film ruins international relations, pisses off a rogue state who respond with cyberwarfare damaging Sony.

Trash film lauded as 'freedom of expression' by the US government, becomes infamous.

[smon222]

My parents love to watch comedy's on BBC. Personally I don't get Brit humor or think its really that funny. I enjoy main stream and slap stick comedies like Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen, The Hangover 1, Team America LOL etc. My wife hates them. To each his own I say, I would like to see the Interview if it comes around these parts.
 

[fuzzynormal]

"This is surely the best that could happen to a goofy American comedy like this."

"It is.  Sony knows what it's doing to take advantage of the PR situation ...and don't call me Shirley."

[Andrew Reid]

Personally I think Sony just want the film to die. A massive ball ache for them.

[fuzzynormal]

A massive ball ache for them.

​A massive ball ache with a lot of money making potential what with the global PR from this past week.  If anything talks in Hollywood it's money.  (Ball aches too, actually, but there's usually prostitutes involved)

 

Stoner comedies are what they are.  They're the "Tyler Perry's Madea" for suburban white kids that love stupidity.  It's a huge market here.  Don't underestimate the financial power of that segment of U.S. society.

[Tim Naylor]

While the US has its faults, unlike some "democratic" countries it has no strong tradition of banning media in the modern era (see Sex Pistols, Kubrick, James Joyce, Peter Wright and UK government). Obama's decision to defend what may or may not be a bad movie ascribes to democratic principles so eloquently put by Volatire: "I disapprove of what you say but I'll defend you to the death to say it." Quite the opposite of the craven position of Sony and its distributors. It's one of the rare moments that conservatives and liberals in the US agreed on something. 

What's left now is censorship's less official partner in prejudice - judging that which you haven't seen. It's a vile sentiment with a long history embodied by book burners, zealots, racists, movie boycott activists (see Passion of Christ), those who issue Fatwas, cultural snobs and the like. 

[Andrew Reid]

While the US has its faults, unlike some "democratic" countries it has no strong tradition of banning media in the modern era.

​Haha. You must be kidding me. Wikileaks?

And here's the rest - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States

Do your research before posting your ill informed opinions. Kubrick pulled A Clockwork Orange himself. The UK government did not. It was passed uncut actually. Again do your research.

Sex Pistols were not banned by the state. The BBC chose not to play a song. Hardly state censorship, more like an editorial decision by middle managers who didn't want to offend the narrow sensibilities of the vast majority of their viewers.

Censorship is not always bad. Censorship in this case with The Interview is warranted because A) it is pointless trash and B the politics of it are damaging.

When the napalm burns around schools and children in North Korea like it did in Vietnam, don't come running to me saying how worthy a cause it all is in the name of freedom. Because it isn't.

[Tim Naylor]

​Haha. You must be kidding me. Wikileaks?

And here's the rest - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States

Do your research before posting your ill informed opinions. Kubrick pulled A Clockwork Orange himself. The UK government did not. It was passed uncut actually. Again do your research.

Sex Pistols were not banned by the state. The BBC chose not to play a song. Hardly state censorship, more like an editorial decision by middle managers who didn't want to offend the narrow sensibilities of the vast majority of their viewers.

Censorship is not always bad. Censorship in this case with The Interview is warranted because A) it is pointless trash and B the politics of it are damaging.

When the napalm burns around schools and children in North Korea like it did in Vietnam, don't come running to me saying how worthy a cause it all is in the name of freedom. Because it isn't.

​Such strong opinions, you must have had a sneak preview that you're too embarrassed to tell us about. Regarding damaging politics, should've Satanic Verses and Animal Farm had been banned too? Regarding past atrocities both the US and the UK have plenty to account for, but conflating napalm in vietnam and the release of the Interview (or its non-censorship) as a war hawk policy is a desperate stretch at best.

[smon222]

Nevermind.

 

[Andrew Reid]

Regarding damaging politics...

Staying on topic isn't your strength is it? The cyber attack was extremely damaging both materially and politically. The team which carried it out used such sophisticated techniques, the most secure government networks in the country would have had trouble keeping them out. If they now as a result of the film being shown turn their attention to nuclear power plants in the US and government networks then at the least they have another wikileaks style leak of confidential info to deal with, or worst case a major nuclear disaster. Is The Interview worth that? No!

Don't under estimate the cyber attacks and what they can potentially unleash. Warfare is moving into the digital age.

Diplomacy with North Korea was the way to prevent this. That was well underway, whilst The Interview was being shot. Now the only thing that's shot is the diplomacy.

Regarding past atrocities both the US and the UK have plenty to account for, but conflating napalm in vietnam and the release of the Interview (or its non-censorship) as a war hawk policy is a desperate stretch at best.

​Not really, if history of war is anything to go by. A flash point can seem small at the time but it can end up really triggering hell. And it would be a shame to trigger hell based on such a pathetic flash point. A Seth Rogan comedy. It's not worth it! Ask Sony!

[sunyata]

Actually it really wasn't that sophisticated, which goes to show how serious this problem can become in the future; it's not limited to media companies or first amendment issues. This was a test post btw. Testing Testing.. 

[andrgl]

Actually it really wasn't that sophisticated, which goes to show how serious this problem can become in the future; it's not limited to media companies or first amendment issues. This was a test post btw. Testing Testing.. 

​It was extremely targeted. Not sure how any IT security folk can sleep at night. Their networks will be penetrated no matter how well they patch, obfuscate or airgap their systems.