So, yes, "a stoopid Hangover 6 movie about "2 American Cornholios" (Thank you, PCIntern!)" is "really worth risking poking the bear."

Yes it is.

and BTW, it's a foreign corporation which doesn't value YOUR rights as a human being. They hide behind the first amendment to make blatantly exploitative pieces of trash in order to prey on your tastes. carefully engineered consumer tastes.

So, are you enlisting? Or maybe you already served.

I find the idea that a Dictator of some other country can commit acts that successfully take our right of freedom of expression, even to express something as stupid as "the Interview," to be worth fighting for.

I am retired navy, and cannot rejoin at my age. I have encouraged my children to join, if they determine that is what they want to do with their lives.

But the question here is not going to war to defend Sony or freedom of expression. Nobody is even considering that. The discussion is what would be a "proportional response."

We can discus retaliation without resorting to hyperbole.

They are dictating to Sony. not the US. Except the US and Foreign Corporate Mega Monopolies are one and the same now. They'vve got us all upset about our rights and our patriotism when it has absolutely nothing to do with us.

Sony can go fuck themselves--it's all a grotesque and phony trade dance between Asian elites. Too bad we have to getting involved, but artists can't do what they do in Hollywood without selling their souls to big corps.

Make an independent movie NOBODY can censor. That's courage.

I wasn't sure I was going to see it and now I am going to do so and buy the DVD.

The reaction may not even be real (we don't know what's happening inside NK, or China for that matter), but the result is the same: a diplomatic incident and a renewed focus on NK.

Who knows what kind of delicate negotiations may be going on in secret that could be affected by what amounts to a death threat in their eyes?

How hilarious would it be if they did start a war or something with us over this?

Not very.

would not enjoy ridiculous "cinemoid" fantasy. Frankly, it's got to be better the Bullock/Heigel/Roberts/Anniston crap that's been marketed to my socio-economic group for past 15 years.

The forefathers intended to protect speech that offended. That's the whole fucking point of the 1st Amendment.

Jesus Christ on a trailer hitch....

Now there's a movie that should have been suppressed.

Supporting of speech doesn't mean I can't tell you to shut up voluntarily, it just means that I don't want you to be forced to shut up coercively.

If you say foolish things (like this), people will call you a fool.

But they *shouldn't* be allowed to do more than that; I can call you a fool without risking any consequence more serious than you calling me names in return, but if I throw a custard pie at you I should be punished.

How I value your well thought out opinion. Constructive criticism from a stance of authority is always convincing.

do I need to smilie sarcasm?

You are wrong. There. Done.

the fuck?

at all, your use of 'mansplaining' is so inaccurate that it invalidates your entire reply.

Tough shit.

The movie is stupid and unfunny, but censoring the movie was a cowardly movie. I'm not for letting some fascist monster dictate what I can and can't see.

The threat was total bs too. North Korea is going to shoot a theater up?

Each to his own.

They got exactly what they want. They'll try this again at some later point because they know it works.

When you're dealing with someone like Kim Jong Un, there is no such thing as safety. Even rolling over and practicing complete appeasement is no guarantee.

but I think we're making virtually the same point.

The Interview is a buddy comedy movie with a ridiculous premise that gave way to making fun of a megalomaniacal murdering piece of shit.

North Korea wasn't going to do anything but bluster about the movie. Any act of war against the US or Japan would have been suicidal, and the leadership knows that.

North Korea and fundamentalist Islam aren't the same thing.

Doesn't it count if it's against Asian dictators? I laugh at that stuff too. They just don't seem to know about it. It's just a joke to them.

I fear The Innocence of Muslims was a black op engineered to provoke., not a harmless flick.

I'm pretty sure Seth and James don't have a clue.

Even utterly racist films can be produced and distributed (and protested against, and ridiculed).

To correct you on a minor point. So I imagine the founders weren't too horrified.

Scatological humor goes back further than I thought, lol. Thanks for the links!

Sorry, no sympathy for a movie making fun of the leader of a poor, powerless country that perceives the US as an enemy.

I don't approve of North Korea's response, but I think we need to look at this pragmatically. What has N. Korea done in the past to perceived threats? They have to react because their government is built around a cult of personality. I think the producers thought that since N. Korea hadn't been making threats or sending terrorists to US, that they could say anything.

What did this movie do for us world wide? Look like a bully who picks on the weaker. . .

What would be the response to a foreign country making a movie that makes fun of assassinating our president? Even from a friendly country, it would be unacceptable. From an enemy of the US, it would be considered practically an act of aggression.

Sure, we can say anything want in America, but in this case, it shows our lack of understanding of other cultures.

America has the ability and power to do and say anything it wants: let's look at how that power affects our morality.

'The Great Dictator' did not involve the death of Hitler, but it did make him look like a complete imbecile:

?w=300&h=168

Every work of art or piece of sacred writing is deeply offensive to some.
And what of other rights? Should we be careful about having equality for women when so many cultures are very offended by that? What if they say they will harm us if we keep letting the women vote and run companies and such? What about LGBT rights? Some countries stone gay people to death, what if they asked us to do the same with threats of cyber attacks or worse?
Are you willing to kill to protect the rights of insane bullies and despots? Are you willing to give up rights that belong to you, not just the rights of others?