General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsUm…who the Hell green-lighted this picture???
Is it really a GOOD IDEA in this frightening world to posit that two American Cornholios should go and assassinate a foreign leader at the behest of an agency of its own Government? Really? It would be one thing if it were one of those intriguing spy thrillers wherein the American or Brit has to save the life of a despised King-For-Life or President-For-Life in order to maintain balance or some other contrived crapola, but when I saw the trailer for the film and the commercials on TeeVee, I cringed in my clothes. We as Americans claim to be so deeply affected by the assassinations and attempted assassinations of our own prominent people, and then we are asked to pay money to see a film in which we seem to be drafting civilians into joining a comedy-based international death squad tasked with killing a leader of a foreign country? Really? Not just puerile, but downright stupid, and moronically conceived from the beginning.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)SoCalNative
(4,613 posts)when TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE came out.
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)Maybe North Korea didn't have hacking ability back then!
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)TNNurse
(6,927 posts)Did it single out actual people who are currently alive to kill??? Because that would have been immature and ignorant, too.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Team America: World Police, a paramilitary anti-terrorism force, has a home base located inside Mount Rushmore. The team comprises Lisa, a psychologist; Carson, her love interest; Sarah, an alleged psychic; Joe, a jock who is in love with Sarah; and Chris, a martial arts expert who harbors a deep mistrust of actors. The team is led by Spottswoode and a supercomputer named I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E.. Having tracked down a group of terrorists in Paris, France, the team inadvertently destroys the Eiffel Tower, the Arc de Triomphe and The Louvre during a gun battle. Carson proposes to Lisa, but a surviving terrorist guns him down. As a replacement, Spottswoode recruits Gary Johnston, a Broadway actor with college majors in Theater and World Languages. Unbeknownst to the team, North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il is supplying international terrorists with weapons of mass destruction.
Using his acting skills, Gary successfully infiltrates a terrorist group in Cairo, Egypt. The team manages to kill the terrorists and foil their plot, but the city is left in ruins. For their actions regarding Cairo, the team is criticized by the Film Actors Guild (F.A.G.), a union of liberal Hollywood actors led by Gary's favorite actor, Alec Baldwin, and also consists of Matt Damon, Liv Tyler, Samuel L. Jackson, Janeane Garofalo, George Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Ethan Hawke, Helen Hunt, Martin Sheen, Danny Glover, Sean Penn, and Tim Robbins. As the team relaxes following their victory, Gary tells Lisa about his childhood: his acting talent caused his brother to be killed by gorillas. While the two express their feelings and have sex, a group of terrorists blow up the Panama Canal as retaliation for what had happened to Cairo.
The Film Actors Guild again blames Team America over the incident regarding the Panama Canal. Gary, realizing that his acting talents have once again resulted in tragedy, abandons the others. The original members depart for Derkaderkastan, but are captured by terrorists, which include the North Korean government. Filmmaker Michael Moore vengefully infiltrates the team's Mount Rushmore base and suicide bombs the area. In North Korea, Kim Jong-il hosts a peace ceremony, inviting the Film Actors Guild and all the world's political leaders. Using the ceremony as a mere distraction, Kim Jong-il plans to detonate a series of bombs throughout the world, reducing every nation to a Third World Country. During a depressed state as an alcoholic, Gary finds himself reminded of his responsibility by a speech from a drunken drifter. Upon returning to Mount Rushmore, he finds the area in ruins, though Spottswoode and I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E. have survived.
After regaining Spottswoode's trust by giving him a blowjob and undergoing a one-day training course, Gary is sent to North Korea, where he uses his acting skills to free the other members. The team then engages in a violent battle with the Film Actors Guild in which most of the actors are brutally killed. After Gary uses his acting skills to save Chris's life, Chris finally confesses to Gary that he mistrusts actors because when he was 19 years old, he was raped by the cast of the musical Cats. The team then confronts Kim Jong-il. Gary goes on stage and convinces the world's leaders to unite by using the drifter's emotional speech. Kim Jong-il kills Alec Baldwin with an assault rifle, and then is kicked over a balcony by Lisa. He is impaled on a Pickelhaube and is revealed to be an alien cockroach from the planet Gyron. The cockroach then departs in a miniature spaceship, promising to return. As Gary and Lisa begin a relationship, the team reunites, preparing to combat all of the world's remaining terrorists.
MORE
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)to state the obvious.
Thank you.
Earth Bound Misfit
(3,554 posts)No argument here.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Even the higher-ups hated this movie. Why was it made? They are probably counting their blessings that they have an excuse to let it get flushed.
http://defamer.gawker.com/leaked-emails-the-interview-sucked-for-sony-even-befor-1671234001
"A previous report by Bloomberg said Sony execs altered the gory finale of The Interview, toning down the extent to which Kim Jong Un's head is exploded and set aflame. But the movie faced more problems than just Supreme Leader's immolation sceneSony executives and distribution partners around the world were worried that the movie was too offensive, "desperately unfunny," and worst of all, starred James Franco.
Emails sent from UK Sony Pictures exec Peter Taylor to president of Sony Pictures Releasing International Steven O'Dell are particularly harsh, describing the comedy as a "misfire," "unfunny and repetitive," with "a level of realistic violence that would be shocking in a horror movie." Taylor holds one of the film's co-stars in particularly low regard: "James Franco proves once again that irritation is his strong suit which is a shame because the character could have been appealing and funny out of his hands."
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)FSogol
(45,488 posts)icymist
(15,888 posts)Every single time Rogen's name is mentioned!
chrisa
(4,524 posts)Hekate
(90,714 posts)Hyuk hyuk hyuk with mouth wide open and head a-bobbin'
It figures he was in on the so-called joke, but that begs the question as to whether there were any grownups at all involved in this process.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)See Boss, these two guys who are like Dumb and Dumberer go to North Korea and get involved with zany shit, try to kill the PM. You can just see that hilarity ensues!!! Can't miss boss. Let's drop 100 million on the production...
freshwest
(53,661 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,321 posts)you captured his essence. He thinks he's hilarious.
a kennedy
(29,673 posts)And you're right his laugh is most annoying.
TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)If occasional bombs and blunders happen, so much the better. At least it's some risk-taking, and not just the normal pablum that passes for cinema in modern Hollywood.
liberalhistorian
(20,818 posts)progressive site are getting their knickers in a knot because they cannot dictate what movies can be made and seen. Sickening.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)PCIntern
(25,556 posts)Did I say that they can't make this film? Did I say that the government should stop them from making it? Did I infer that I didn't think it was a good idea to make this film? These are different issues. But then again I wasn't attempting to start a specious argument.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)culture we live in now, saying somebody in the industry should have stopped it = a threat to freedom of speech.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)All I said was that I personally, if I am actually entitled to hold an opinion around here, thought that it was foolish to green light the project. Jesus if I posted that 2+2=4, there'd be five people up my asshole that I was prejudiced against odd numbers. But that is their whole purpose for being here .
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)that cannot be fathomed by some. I agree--the black & white thinkers have invaded. "I'm right so you must be...wrong."
Tiring. But that's their purpose, yes.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)DU Rules prevent me from venting my spleen.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)our own President.
Yep, that would go over big, no doubt. Free speech and all that.
Shrek
(3,981 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)The pukefest currently under offer names the current NK Pres and apparently uses his image.
Action_Patrol
(845 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)I mean we "won" but barely. Won all the way to the bank to the tune of 161 million... And no terrorist threats. Ain't America great?
DawgHouse
(4,019 posts)kwassa
(23,340 posts)This film, judging by the trailer, is today's typical comedic pablum.
Ykcutnek
(1,305 posts)PCIntern
(25,556 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)No one should decide what to produce to cater to the mega-ego of that murdering little asshole.
xocet
(3,871 posts)Beaverhausen
(24,470 posts)I can't believe what some are saying here.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)It's a shame that Sony caved in to a bunch of half-assed terrorist wannabes, though.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)what I almost cannot believe is that they made this without thinking of the ramifications. Expensive mistake maybe. We shall see.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)But what makes you think you have ANY IDEA about a film being green-lighted or not??
Maybe you need to stop "saving life's" and go into the movie business!
liberalhistorian
(20,818 posts)Ebola epidemic that, according to the OP, was supposed to have swept us nationwide and taken out half the country or more by now, unless dictatorial measures were taken to stop it. Yep. Still waiting.........and waiting.............
Logical
(22,457 posts)PCIntern
(25,556 posts)But you're not worth the effort.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Where they screwed up was using a real nut when they could have made it generic, perhaps with strong hints. Borat cost $18 mil to make and pulled down $261 mil in theaters before going on to DVD, Netflicks, etc. So Hollywood does what Hollywood does...
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)He just made asses of people.
NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)a film about assassinating Queen Elizabeth, or Prime Minister Stephen Harper, or President Francoise Holland.
IOW, it's beyond the pale, even if we dislike the leader. IMO. We'd never tolerate it if the film were about our own named leader.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)But hey maybe I need better glasses.
Action_Patrol
(845 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)America, in fact, did not give a flying fuck about it. That includes Bush, who frankly would have had a right to express some distaste for the project but did not.
2006. Death of a President
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/
Always amusing when people claim 'we'd never' when we already have.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)The fictional country in Borat had hints of Afghanistan and Pakistan but claimed to be neither of those.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)According to this article on Slate: "Borat's Kazakhstan bears little resemblance to the real Kazakhstan. Little resemblance, but not no resemblance."
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)In 2012 an athletic event in Kuwait erroneously played the Borat parody version of Kazakstan's anthem during a gold medal ceremony as seen here:
"Then Maria Dmitrienko's turn came," he said. "She got up on to the pedestal and they played a completely different anthem, offensive to Kazakhstan."
The spoof song praises Kazakhstan for its superior potassium exports and for having the cleanest prostitutes in the region.
...
The film outraged people in Kazakhstan and was eventually banned in the country. The government also threatened Baron Cohen with legal action.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-17491344
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)The Kazak govt threatened to sue Cohen - they didn't threaten to bomb theaters.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)I wouldn't have seen it anyway, but it's a strange subject to broach. OTOH it's preposterous, so I think the outrage is sort of dumb.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)I'm sure Saddam didn't appreciate being Satan's lover. I'm sure Hitler didn't like being portrayed as a bumbling idiot by Chaplin.
Who gives a fuck? It's a movie--don't like it, don't see it. Plenty of sand to go around.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a single movie in the "Leprechaun" series.
I've survived not seeing them too.
chrisa
(4,524 posts)Leprachaun: Back To Tha Hood was worth every minute. A tear fell from my eye a few times, and I gave a standing ovation at the end.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)PCIntern
(25,556 posts)Holding a grudge I see. You're right: I'm the first person to post about this subject.
And BTW, since you like three-letters, I was exactly correct about the Ebola nightmare.
Logical
(22,457 posts)liberalhistorian
(20,818 posts)American victims you were breathlessly and hysterically predicting unless drastic, dictatorial measures were taken? Where's the disintegration of our society you were predicting along with such numbers of victims, again, unless such dictatorial measures were taken? Let's see, less than ten American victims as opposed to the countless numbers you were insisting would happen because the big bad government didn't clamp down on people the way you wanted it to. Yeah, you sure were "exactly correct" alright. LOL.
And now you want to dictate what movies can and cannot be made and what we can and cannot see. No fucking thank you. We still have some modicum of freedom in this country, we are not North Korea yet.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Day of the Jackel. The various films and books about killing W. Hell, Lincoln.
If this stands we get more of it. Mine a harbor.
neverforget
(9,436 posts)and people can decide for themselves if they want to see the movie or not. But thanks to North Korea and their hacking of Sony, we don't get to decide if the movie was good or not. Terrorism works.
Tommymac
(7,263 posts)liberalhistorian
(20,818 posts)thank you. We've become a nation of fraidy-cat wimps.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Been playing since 1948.
The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol52no2/intelligence-in-recent-public-literature-1.html
951-Riverside
(7,234 posts)ohnoyoudidnt
(1,858 posts)To think they have never thought such an attempt could happen until this movie was made is pretty silly.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)All any stupid little tantrum trowing piece of shit has to do now is to threaten mayhem.
And we concede.
Yeah.
And you you give a screaming toddler in the checkout line the candy bar and totally fuck the rest of your life.
We are totally fucked
ohnoyoudidnt
(1,858 posts)I am afraid so. We have enough problems with elements within our own government without citizens wanting to cave and change our behavior because of outside threats.
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)...look like 2001, Gone with the wind and Citizen Kane....all wrapped up in one.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Apparently son is more sensitive
WhiteTara
(29,718 posts)Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)As she is a full-fledged card-carrying member of the War Party it makes sense that she'd be involved in this.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)your post? for real???
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Exactly like the Neocons.
brush
(53,787 posts)taste in movies, Angelina Jolie's lack of talent and that Denzel Washington shoot never be cast in big international movies because he's black.
Green lighting that movie was about the same level of stupidity as writing that stuff in emails and pressing send, thus documenting it in cyberspace for forever.
CincyDem
(6,363 posts)What happened to the idea that free speech is my accepting your right to say something with which I disagree.
The movie's isn't on my to-do list and you're right..whoever decided to push it though should have their head examined. That said, for some unknown reason, someone unknown (assumed to be NK related) desperately does not want you and I to see it.
Feels like we're creating a bad precedent here because the content being suppressed is so easily ridiculed.
How are we going to feel when some indie film group does an amazing movie about how two rich brothers have co-opted a country with the world's most powerful military. Those two brothers eventually "but the country" through their political contributions and they're about to get handed the "nuclear football" when Wesley Snipes (escaped from prison) and Kristen Bell suddenly expose the brothers for who they are - just a couple greedy libertarians who got theirs in the past and now want to be sure nobody else gets theirs today.
What happens when that indie studio is hacked by some "unknown group" and their opening is threatened with violence.
Will we be so quick to say "that was a dumb movie".
Separate the content from the process here and it looks pretty f'ing scary.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Note: The article below is from our sponsor, Safeminds. Please join us in thanking Lyn Redwood for her tenure on IACC, where she fought for families facing all of the challenges of autism from vaccine induced cause through adult issues. She stepped down this year. If you're relatively new to Age of Autism and/or the vaccine injury community, please read Evidence of Harm by David Kirby to learn how Lyn Redwood, a nurse, set off the earliest alarm bells about mercury and vaccination, when doctors, scientists and governement watchdogs were oblivious.
December 10, 2014
By Lyn Redwood
Years ago I was interviewed for a news story regarding my sons mercury toxicity related to medications I received while I was pregnant and his exposure to mercury from his early infant vaccines.
The reporter did an extensive interview with my husband, who is a physician and myself, a registered nurse, at our home. The show was to include a review of my sons medical records. The television crew also interviewed several local experts for the report, which was scheduled as a hard-hitting three-part investigation regarding mercury and autism.
The promotions began airing the same morning that the first part of the series was scheduled to run. It was to be shown during the evening news.
By 2:00 p.m. that afternoon I received notification that the story had been pulled.
I was shocked.
This was my first time personally dealing with censorship by the media.
Unfortunately it was not my last.
Several years later I was approached by a movie production company that planned to produce a feature film based on David Kirbys best selling book Evidence of Harm. They wanted to use the personal story of my son as a major part of the movie.
But after purchasing the movie rights to the book and embarking on development of the script for 36 months, the production company decided not to move forward with production of the film. Insiders told us that external pressure from several high-profile individuals caused the production company to reconsider.
Shortly thereafter the production company partnered with CDC and made the movie Contagion, a medical thriller about a global pandemic.
Need I say more?
<>
So I wasnt surprised to see that journalist Jennifer Margulis, Ph.D., who reports so meticulously and reasonably about vaccines that she has been criticized by both pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine camps, recently had her work censored.
When that TV show exposing the vaccine-autism link was pulled from the airwaves all those years ago, the censorship was so effective that no one knew what had happened or why.
The mainstream media had a stranglehold on what information reached the public.
Thats no longer the case...
alarimer
(16,245 posts)By some anti-vax nutter.
Utter and complete bullshit.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)You know not of what you speak. Redwood's expertise is undeniable though you may disagree with her conclusions.
Lyn Redwood, R.N., M.S.N., is co-founder and board member of SafeMinds and cofounder of the National Autism Association.
In 2000, she testified before the Government Reform Committee on Mercury in medicine: Are we taking unnecessary risks? and in 2003 before a Congressional sub-committee on health.
She has published in Neurotoxicology, Molecular Psychiatry, Medical Hypotheses, Mothering Magazine, and Autism-Aspergers Digest; appeared on Good Morning America and the Montel Williams Show; and been interviewed by U.S News and World Report, Wired Magazine, and People.
She is prominently featured in David Kirbys award-winning book, Evidence of Harm.
Lyn Redwood also served on the Department of Defense Autism Spectrum Disorder Research Program from 2007-2009 and served as a public member of the National Institutes of Health Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee for the past eight years.
She was awarded the National Autism Associations Believe Award in 2013 for her dedication to the autism community.
http://www.safeminds.org/about-2/mission/
http://www.safeminds.org/advocacy-2/advocacy/
Off-topic, so I'll beg off. You can have the last word.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)Nobody has right to make anyone else show it.
Sucumbing to pressure from a foreign country on his movie is in absolutely no way related.
May I repeat, anti-vax bullshit harms people, the movie harmed no one.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Check out some of those National Childrens Study Proposed Core Hypotheses: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014966033
Check out the MUMPER STUDY: http://najms.net/wp-content/uploads/v06i03.pdf#page=34
May I encourage you to define your pejorative terms with greater care: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5944629
IMO, information is part of informed consent and is for everyone, not just policymakers.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)I am no lover of the drug companies. But much less a lover of those who make money on false studies and garbage products.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)lastlib
(23,247 posts)Oughta be a blockbuster......! Given the vapidity of so many Americans these days, and what they are willing to absorb as "entertainment", and spend money for.........bound to be a hit!
niyad
(113,340 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)X_Digger
(18,585 posts)ErikJ
(6,335 posts)He said he didnt want to do another mindless stoner movie but something to make a political statement with humor.
progressoid
(49,991 posts)There is no shortage of crap to watch.
BlueEye
(449 posts)Had the studios pulled Oliver Stone's "W." because the Bush Administration protested, everyone here would have a fit. And rightfully so. But the OP is propagating a double standard.
It is disturbing to me that any government, foreign or domestic, can suppress a work of fiction, made freely and with artistic license, however tasteless. It is censorship, at the behest of a despicable regime nonetheless.
Only a matter of time before a Koch Brother's documentary gets pulled "for being factually inaccurate" or something.
Boomer
(4,168 posts)Censorship would be the U.S. government grabbing this movie from Sony and forbidding them to show it. That did not happen.
Sony pulled the picture because they decided the cost of being assholes was too high. When you have the right of free speech, you're not guaranteed freedom from consequences. They thought -- for some bizarre reason -- that this insulting and incendiary "comedy" about assassinating a country's ruler was a good idea and they yell "Fire!" in a crowded movie theatre without anyone getting hurt.
Pulling the movie is considerably more prudent than the decision to produce it. They were not FORCED to withdraw the movie by the U.S. government or by the North Korean government. But they certainly were forced to consider the consequences of their actions.
Blue_Adept
(6,399 posts)of being bombed or attacked.
The cost of distribution is now too high for the few theaters that would end up showing it.
DawgHouse
(4,019 posts)People will stay away from the theaters out of fear.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,414 posts)That they (Koch Bros) deemed too critical of them?
BlueEye
(449 posts)It's a damn shame if they did. There is a Koch Bros documentary on Netflix that did survive the corporate censorship process, it's pretty decent.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,414 posts)But I do believe that they loudly objected to an NPR doc or story (maybe it was Frontline) and I guess they had some leverage w/NPR to get it pulled.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)A-Schwarzenegger
(15,596 posts)And I was in my living room.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)ButterflyBlood
(12,644 posts)Seriously. Some have reported that he owned a private copy and apparently enjoyed it.
Stardust
(3,894 posts)country made a film, a *comedy* no less, about assassinating our president. We'd be rattling our sabers, at the very least.
Once again, I'm embarrassed for our country.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)No need for anyone else to do it.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)And it was deadly serious. America, Bush included, yawned at the sight of it.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Bumblefuck Nation
liberalhistorian
(20,818 posts)a state-controlled, state-run media and entertainment industry in this country? You are aware that studios have the right to make whatever movie they want without government interference and that we have, or should have, the right to see those movies if we so choose without that same government interference? You're aware that you're sounding just like the fuckwit pea-brained dictator who demanded it be removed under threat (and WTF was he going to "do" to us anyway, for Christ's sake?) You're aware that this chicken-shit backing down makes us look, well, weak and chickenshitty just like said fuckwit pea-brained dictator wants? And that you're playing right into it? Basically, who are you to tell studios what movies to make and Americans what movies they can and cannot see? Last time I checked, we were not a dictatorship.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)like Sony Pictures Entertainment, a Japanese multinational technology and media conglomerate. There are no good actors in this drama (and I'm not even referring to the bad acting of James Franco, which speaks for itself). Sony is enormous. It can eat the losses on this stupid production. And filmgoers everywhere will honestly probably not be missing a thing. Kim Jong whatever can go back to his crazy.
This is not some kind of tragedy. It's tragi-comedy, on all sides.
neverforget
(9,436 posts)or the corporations can eat the losses and you deemed this movie unworthy to be seen, I guess it's okay. Giving in to threats, bullies and black mailers works!
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)liberalhistorian
(20,818 posts)whatever movie they want without government interference or interference by foreign fuckwit pea-brained dictators who think they can get their way by throwing tantrums and jumping up and down like a two-year-old. Well, guess what? The NK pea-brain has shown the world just what chickenshits we really are and that he can do just that, throw a tantrum and we'll give in to it.
It doesn't matter that the movie's subject is in poor taste and offensive. It doesn't matter that it's not a good movie or that people won't be missing much. It wouldn't matter if it were the worst movie ever made. It Just. Doesn't. Matter. Studios have the right to make the movies they want and we have the right to choose which ones we want to see, period. You don't get to make that decision for everyone else. We are not yet living in a full-fledged dictatorship.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)frazzled
(18,402 posts)Then they pulled it because of controversy and threats, and because theaters didn't want to show it. (And theater chains have the right not to show anything they don't want to show.) Sony made a stupid decision to make it. What's your beef? Or do you just like to say "fuckwit peabrain" a lot?
Movies are shelved all the time.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)being how crazy he is, isn't known. And when you don't know if a lunatic with Nukes might decide to use them, maybe you shouldn't tempt fate by making a stupid movie that is probably not worth watching anyhow to taunt him with.
And you must be aware that the Government didn't shut down the movie, or tell anyone not to make it.
Obviously the morons who did, were too stupid to realize they were poking a nutcase with Nukes finally and THEY decided not to show it.
Your lecture would have some meaning if the Government had influenced any of this.
I could not care less what happens to the movie.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)The rank and file might be utterly brainwashed, but the leadership knows doing such a thing would seal their fate.
Not that they'd have any way to deliver the weapon in the first place.
NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)who also run the state.
what's the difference, really.
listening to your spiel, as though our media were some world bastion of freedom, is to laugh. as if our media didn't pick and choose what to portray according to political and financial considerations every fucking day.
NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,736 posts)KMOD
(7,906 posts)I suppose some will find humor in it.
I find it very sophomoric, and yeah, asking for controversy. But to stifle it is wrong.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)A big WTF?
Rex
(65,616 posts)nilesobek
(1,423 posts)Just the fact that they caved shows the courage of their convictions. I saw Seth in that crappy comedy "Pineapple Express," in which he throws up when he sees a murder. Nice reaction. Tripe. Not missing a thing except crappy American agitprop.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)Where in my post did I state that the movie should be censored by the Government? Where in my post did I state that no one should have the freedom to make a shitty film? Where in my post did I advocate SONY Pictures' pulling the film out of release? Where in my post did I proffer sympathy for this dictator?
All I was trying to say was that this whole concept, in my opinion,(and apparently in the opinion of many many many others) was not a GOOD IDEA. Some here say that I was advocating censorship. Not at all...is it disallowed to simply posit that this was an idea which had real potential to fail from the beginning?
The nastiness of some here is just appalling -as a ten year veteran of this site, I am thoroughly disgusted with the attitudes of some here who have already managed to drive out dozens and dozens of veteran posters. If that is your plan, then you're succeeding. Congratulations.
Oh...and just one more thing: for whatever reason a few posters decided to bring up my opinions in re: the Ebola situation from a number of weeks ago. There was a deliberate misstatement of my position during that entire misadventure, and I stand by every single post I made during that time. DU Rules prevent me from stating exactly what I think these people are doing here and what I think of them personally for doing so.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)most innocuous seeming post gets turned way off topic and made into
a nightmare "back and forth".
I think before you post now you have to analyze all the possible angles and insert disclaimers
about every conceivable complaint. Exhausting. I don't know where all the "Contrarians" came from
but I wish they would expend their energies elsewhere.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)It's like the Monty Python skit about arguments.
I know well what their stupid game is.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Do you have something against the mentally challenged?
steve2470
(37,457 posts)If anyone thinks the RNC does not pay at least one person to troll this board heavily, I'm sorry but they are naive. Hell, if I ran the RNC, I would. What better way to wreak a bit of havoc with the left and Democrats ? The rest (99.999%) are unpaid, going for "the lulz".
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Franco? He used to be a serious actor - now it seems like he thinks he's
the new Jerry Lewis.
Blue_Adept
(6,399 posts)It looked silly and fun, had actors I liked and has been a familiar plot concept in film (especially comedies) for decades.
But I tend to like a wide range of movies and prefer to make my own judgments on what works and what doesn't.
So hopefully I'll get an opportunity. This could be a good one for Sony - and a bad one for theaters - in the end. If Sony goes and does this as VOD through various outlets, and it makes them some amount of coin, it'll give them further incentive to push past the theatrical exhibition side for other films.
But it's good to see the thought police out in full force, making sure that things they think are childish and moronically conceived should never see the light of day.
Frankly, I've spent years being fans of things that the "mainstream" hates. Only to see it change generationally and watching people now having to "suffer" through it. Growing up a fan of comic books and science fiction, it's sweet revenge. Particularly from people I knew in high school that used to bully me because I liked comic books, only to now see them spending money and time on them because their kids are so into it.
Thankfully, DU generally isn't the barometer for anything, especially when it comes to entertainment.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Who cares? Given the content of the emails leaked, the Sony people yanked the movie for fear of lawsuits if the floor of the theater was extra sticky.
It's a movie, you have a choice to see it or not - usually. I'm a bit weary of the fear mongering.
On to the next panic.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)What questions I AM PERMITTED TO ASK. thank you very much.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)You seem to be the determiner of what movies should or shouldn't be made, based on if you consider them stupid.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)I'm asking who decided that this was a good idea. Look, you wanna pick a fight over nothing you go right ahead. This seems to be what you're really interested in...right? All I did was suggest that this concept for a film wasn't in the best taste and had potential international problems post facto. What's wrong with that? It DID, DIDN'T IT?
sendero
(28,552 posts).... this picture could have been done just as well using a faux world leader as the target. Sony stepped in the hoya and man are they paying the price.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Those leaders' respective counties never resorted to blackmail and threats of violence to stop them from being distributed.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)I think it's pathetic that we would kowtow to that little cretin and not show this movie.
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Our government hasn't told Sony to pull the movie - they have made that decision on their own. It doesn't help when people keep saying "we" have capitulated to some anonymous group, either. Unless you are a Sony executive, "we" haven't done a damn thing. They have made a business decision calculating perceived risk vs. potential profit. They made a mistake in not factoring in the potential fall out that has arisen in response to their movie. Because free speech has consequences, whether the government intervenes or not.
Maeve
(42,282 posts)attributed to H. L. Mencken
Dumb and dumber is a marketing ploy. And it works
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Good thing North Korea has no problem with violent video games, otherwise we'd meekly rationalize the loss of those, too.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)I enjoy comedies.
lame54
(35,293 posts)Team America kills Kim Jong Il
Hot Shots drops a bomb on Saddam Hussein
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Overseas
(12,121 posts)DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)to get your opinion on the movie before it was made. If the movie makes people laugh and makes money then it has achieved it's purpose. It's one thing to say you don't like a movie, but another to say that you don't like the plot so the movie should have never been made. You want to deprive millions of people of a movie they might find funny because you don't like the sound of it. Reading your post made me cringe. It's not just puerile, but downright stupid, and moronically conceived from the beginning.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)That's the real issue. And your OP attempts to rationalize it by complaining about the art on a qualitative basis.
Not good.
Chalco
(1,308 posts)it is a crime to threaten the president. We could not make a film about killing a real president of this country and yet Sony felt it ok to produce a film about killing a real president of another country?
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Beaverhausen
(24,470 posts)are you aware of the concept of comedy? Satire?
Unless and until you have seen it and how the story actually plays out onscreen, I really don't think you can judge if it is puerile, stupid and moronically conceived.
Just my opinion.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)Kubrick would have made this if he weren't dead right? The TRAILER was frigging unwatchable.
Blue_Adept
(6,399 posts)Plenty of others thought it was hilarious.
It's all in the eye of the beholder. There's a whole lot of people who can't stand Kubrick's films as well. And some of those trailers are frigging unwatchable. Some of the films are for people too for a whole host of reasons.
Beaverhausen
(24,470 posts)I don't even understand that comment.
And by the way, YOU found the trailer unwatchable, which is your right. Lots of us thought it looked funny and looked forward to seeing the film. That is our right.
You don't get to decide what films the studios make, you only get to decide which ones you want to watch.
PCIntern
(25,556 posts)but then again, your concept of comedy involves someone being hit over the head with a pan. That is your perfect right. Mine was to say that I didn't think this was or even could be funny. Is that OK with you, or do I have to agree with your assessment of humor?
Chalco
(1,308 posts)It was reported that the State Department gave its approval to Sony to go forward with
the movie.