As I said yesterday, now that North Korea dictates Hollywood, we can finally lay to rest that whole "Jews Run Hollywood" stereotype!
The cyber-terrorists or whoever it was, their stupid "threat" letter was so poorly worded, just because they said September 11, people freaked out. The terrorists won... yeah they won so a stupid movie won't come out. They also won every time you take off your shoes at the airport and walk through that naked machine.
ABQ 93, Las Cruces 95, ABQ 98, Bridge School 10/30/99, Lubbock 00, ABQ 00, Denver 03, State College 03, San Diego 03, Vegas 03, PHX 03, D.C. 03, Camden 7/5/03, NYC 7/8/03 + 7/9/03, Vegas 06, San Francisco 7/15/06 + 7/16/06 + 7/18/06, Kansas City 10, EV:ABQ 11/6/12, Chicago 13, PHX 13, Denver 14--PJ24!, Telluride 16, Chicago 8/20/16, Chicago 8/18/18, Denver 20, Phoenix 20
New Mexico Pearl Jam Fans (New Mexico, USA) on Facebook!
I was reading the latest Rolling Stone last night with Seth Rogan on the cover. He and the other guy (don't remember his name) actually wrote the film, and why? Because he didn't want to just write another stoner comedy, he wanted to write about something involving current events. I hope he's happy with the turnout.
What an idiot.
You want to criticize a guy who wants to move past his typecasting and write a satirical commentary on a serious issue? I 100% disagree with you on this one, and admire him for doing something bold, as well as Sony for taking a gamble on something some clearly see as controversial.
This is hardly the first satirical document on a public figurehead with a known history of violence - South Park does it all the time. And I'd never call Matt Stone and Trey Parker idiots for it.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
And since when did freedom of speech include making threats to assassinate world leaders? Why isn't that considered terrorism but the other party giving their response is?
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
And since when did freedom of speech include making threats to assassinate world leaders? Why isn't that considered terrorism but the other party giving their response is?
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
Key word: COMEDY. Since when did a fictional movie that's recognized as satire by all involved in its production have any bearing on reality?
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Remember when a crazy nutjob killed 12 people in a Colorado theater?... do you think the Batman movie would have been released if the production company had any prior knowledge of that guy?
Now a nutjob world leader is threatening to blow up a theater and has already successfully hacked a major company... and you think Sony is just using that to their advantage to sell more? Wow
Ya i do rusty rails. We're talking about Hollywood here. They don't have morals or anything. It's all about the almighty $$$$. You'll see, they'll release this and it'll make a shitload of $$$$.
And since when did freedom of speech include making threats to assassinate world leaders? Why isn't that considered terrorism but the other party giving their response is?
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
Key word: COMEDY. Since when did a fictional movie that's recognized as satire by all involved in its production have any bearing on reality?
Since the object of the movie's premise has no clue what a satire is. Really, I'm beside myself that just because this country knows it's a joke, everyone in the world should, particularly the guy who's supposedly getting assassinated in the movie. We live in a bubble and they were playing with fire from the get-go of production. We KNOW that Kim Jong-un is a dangerous man, so why taunt him?
Well count me as one of the people who thinks that it is a legitimate threat... that some idiot whether they are from North Korea or elsewhere would try to pull something. Sony has already lost their asses because of the hack and they'll barely recover any money once it's released on DVD.
How Do We Know that Iraq Tried to Assassinate President George H.W. Bush?
1 0 0
by FBI Study This is an excerpt from Part II of Section D of the report 'The FBI Laboratory: An Investigation into Laboratory Practices and Alleged Misconduct in Explosives-Related and Other Cases', published by the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Justice, in April, 1997.
Former President George Bush visited Kuwait between April 14 and April 16, 1993, to commemorate the allied victory in the Persian Gulf War. Accompanying Bush were his wife, two of his sons, former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, former Chief of Staff John Sununu, and former Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady. In late-April 1993, the United States learned that terrorists had attempted to assassinate Bush during his visit to Kuwait. The Kuwaiti authorities arrested 17 persons suspected in the plot to kill Bush using explosives hidden in a Toyota Landcruiser. The Kuwaitis recovered the Landcruiser, which contained between 80 and 90 kilograms of plastic explosives connected to a detonator ( the Bush device or Bush explosive device ). The Kuwaitis also recovered ten cube-shaped plastic explosive devices with detonators (the cube-bombs ) from the Landcruiser. Some of the suspects reportedly confessed that the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS ) was behind the assassination attempt.
On April 29, 1993, CIA bomb technicians compared the Bush explosive device to two known Iraqi explosive devices found in different Middle-Eastern countries in 1990 and 1991 (the Middle-East devices ) . The technicians reported that the remote control firing mechanism in the Bush device was identical to those in the Middle-East devices. Additionally, the technicians reported that blasting caps from the Bush device appeared to be identical to those found in one of the Middle-East devices. The technicians later concluded that the circuit board from the Bush device also closely resembled circuit boards from the Middle-East devices.
In early-May 1993, the FBI sent personnel to Kuwait to interview the suspects and examine the physical evidence. FBI Special Agents, along with representatives of the Secret Service and State Department, interviewed 16 suspects, some more than once. Two of the suspects, Wali 'Abd Al-Hadi 'Abd Al-Hasan Al-Ghazali ( Al-Ghazali ) and Ra'd 'Abd Al-Amir 'Abbud Al-Asadi ( Al-Asadi ), admitted during the FBI interviews that they had participated in the plot at the direction of the IIS.
Explosives examiner Jordan also traveled to Kuwait in May 1993 to examine the Bush device. Jordan examined the main charge, which was hidden in three panels in the Landcruiser and was capable of being detonated by remote control, a timing device, or a push-pull suicide switch. Jordan compared the Bush device to photographs of the Middle-East devices, as well as other devices, and concluded that the same person or persons manufactured the Bush device and one of the Middle-East devices, and that a connection existed between persons responsible for the Bush device and several other devices, including the other Middle-East device. Jordan reported these conclusions in a May 11, 1993 Laboratory report.
Jordan then returned to Washington, D.C., and delivered samples of the explosives from the Bush device to Whitehurst. Whitehurst analyzed the explosive from the main charge and concluded that the substance was approximately 96% RDX, 3% polyvinyl-isobutyl ether binder, and 1% hydrocarbon oil. As for samples from the cube-bombs, Whitehurst concluded that the explosive was consistent with an explosive containing RDX bound with a cross-linked phenoxy or epoxy binder containing Sudan I dye. Whitehurst reported these findings in his June 7, 1993, dictation.
Shortly thereafter, Jordan returned to the Middle-East to conduct further examinations of the Bush device and the Middle-East devices. Based on these examinations, Jordan reported significant consistencies in the selection of individual components and alterations to manufactured items in all of the devices. Jordan concluded that the similarities represented signature characteristics. He further reported that the same person or persons of close association constructed the remote control fuzing systems and electronic timing mechanisms used in all of these devices. Jordan also reported that a second person or persons of close association were responsible for adding wiring and components to the Bush device and one of the Middle-East devices, enabling those devices to be incorporated in vehicles. Jordan reported these conclusions in his June 18, 1993, Laboratory report, in which he also summarized parts of Whitehurst's June 7, 1993, dictation.
On June 2, 1993, representatives of the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and others in the Department of Justice (DOJ) discussed the results of their investigations with representatives of the Clinton Administration. Three weeks later, the DOJ and CIA reported their conclusions. The DOJ and CIA reported that it was highly likely that the Iraqi Government originated the plot and more than likely that Bush was the target. Additionally, based on past Iraqi methods and other sources of intelligence, the CIA independently reported that there was a strong case that Saddam Hussein directed the plot against Bush.
On June 26, 1993, the United States launched a cruise missile attack against a building housing the IIS in Baghdad in retaliation for the assassination attempt on former President Bush. According to news reports, the attack killed between six and eight persons and injured approximately 12 others. On June 27, 1993, Madeleine Albright, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, addressed an emergency session of the Security Council and provided evidence to support the attack on the IIS facility. - See more at: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1000#sthash.JC3Z5gOy.dpuf
Ya i do rusty rails. We're talking about Hollywood here. They don't have morals or anything. It's all about the almighty $$$$. You'll see, they'll release this and it'll make a shitload of $$$$.
I don't think they'll release this in theatres, for the simple reason that it was the distribution channels (i.e. cinema companies) that have halted their showings, not Sony. If most cinemas aren't willing to show the film, Sony would have to release it as 'limited showings'. If that were the case, the average dollars earned per film for the year would inevitably be lower (further skewed by the controversy surrounding the situation), and that would look worse when they're discussing this at a shareholder meeting when compared to scrapping it outright, and calling it an unforeseen expense.
So Nart, I believe you're right that it's all about the almighty dollar, but I don't think there's a theatrical release pending for this. I could see straight-to-DVD/Blu-Ray for this one very easily though.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I was reading the latest Rolling Stone last night with Seth Rogan on the cover. He and the other guy (don't remember his name) actually wrote the film, and why? Because he didn't want to just write another stoner comedy, he wanted to write about something involving current events. I hope he's happy with the turnout.
What an idiot.
You want to criticize a guy who wants to move past his typecasting and write a satirical commentary on a serious issue? I 100% disagree with you on this one, and admire him for doing something bold, as well as Sony for taking a gamble on something some clearly see as controversial.
This is hardly the first satirical document on a public figurehead with a known history of violence - South Park does it all the time. And I'd never call Matt Stone and Trey Parker idiots for it.
Kudos to him for attempting something other than his typical stoner comedies, but I'm far from impressed with his supposed intelligence of knowing how far he can go with his idea of "bringing current events into his films". Messing with fire he did, with attempting to poke humor at a man who's not in his right mind, has access to nukes, and is a dictator.
So all you need to do now to shut down a movie is make an insane non-credible threat?
I'd be more worried about being attacked by roaming band of Juggalos after watching The Interview then North Koreans. The movie chains and Sony are a bunch of corporate wussies.
North Korea has threatened us dozens of times. They said they were going to bomb Honolulu a few years ago. No one has taken them seriously until now....
I'd be more concerned about them hacking our banking system.
And since when did freedom of speech include making threats to assassinate world leaders? Why isn't that considered terrorism but the other party giving their response is?
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
Key word: COMEDY. Since when did a fictional movie that's recognized as satire by all involved in its production have any bearing on reality?
Don't you remember the fallout with the Brits when King Ralph hit the theaters?
John Goodman to this day is still banned from entering England.
And since when did freedom of speech include making threats to assassinate world leaders? Why isn't that considered terrorism but the other party giving their response is?
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
Key word: COMEDY. Since when did a fictional movie that's recognized as satire by all involved in its production have any bearing on reality?
Since the object of the movie's premise has no clue what a satire is. Really, I'm beside myself that just because this country knows it's a joke, everyone in the world should, particularly the guy who's supposedly getting assassinated in the movie. We live in a bubble and they were playing with fire from the get-go of production. We KNOW that Kim Jong-un is a dangerous man, so why taunt him?
I find it nearly impossible to believe that the concept of 'satire' would be lost on Kim Jong-Un and all his advisors, and that Kim Jong-un or his advisors would be incapable of a simple Google search to teach them about Western-style satire, on the off chance they're not aware.
Also, take a look at Paramount's Sacha Baron Cohen film, The Dictator: its producers explicitly stated that Baron Cohen's character is based on actual dictators, including Kim Jong-il and Gaddafi. While both were deceased when it was released, Kim Jong-un was in power, and likely wouldn't have approved of its portrayal of dictatorships.
As a sidenote, the scene where Kim Jong-un dies in The Interview has now leaked online. I watched it, and did not spontaneously combust.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
And since when did freedom of speech include making threats to assassinate world leaders? Why isn't that considered terrorism but the other party giving their response is?
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
Key word: COMEDY. Since when did a fictional movie that's recognized as satire by all involved in its production have any bearing on reality?
Don't you remember the fallout with the Brits when King Ralph hit the theaters?
John Goodman to this day is still banned from entering England.
Unfortunately I don't - I was likely pooping in a diaper at the time, since I was one year old
Regardless, being banned from a country vs. feeling that you or your customers' lives or profitability are at risk are very different in scope.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
And since when did freedom of speech include making threats to assassinate world leaders? Why isn't that considered terrorism but the other party giving their response is?
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
Key word: COMEDY. Since when did a fictional movie that's recognized as satire by all involved in its production have any bearing on reality?
Since the object of the movie's premise has no clue what a satire is. Really, I'm beside myself that just because this country knows it's a joke, everyone in the world should, particularly the guy who's supposedly getting assassinated in the movie. We live in a bubble and they were playing with fire from the get-go of production. We KNOW that Kim Jong-un is a dangerous man, so why taunt him?
I find it nearly impossible to believe that the concept of 'satire' would be lost on Kim Jong-Un and all his advisors, and that Kim Jong-un or his advisors would be incapable of a simple Google search to teach them about Western-style satire, on the off chance they're not aware.
Also, take a look at Paramount's Sacha Baron Cohen film, The Dictator: its producers explicitly stated that Baron Cohen's character is based on actual dictators, including Kim Jong-il and Gaddafi. While both were deceased when it was released, Kim Jong-un was in power, and likely wouldn't have approved of its portrayal of dictatorships.
As a sidenote, the scene where Kim Jong-un dies in The Interview has now leaked online. I watched it, and did not spontaneously combust.
So, you know the guy now? And you know that he's a reasonable man? Because sources say otherwise. Let me reiterate that this movie is about assassinating Kim Jong-un. So relating this film to others which are not about actually killing a living dictator is like comparing apples to oranges. Is The Dictator about assassinating one of them?
The idea that Kim jong UN is a dangerous man is ludicrous. Crazy, narcissistic, self conscious yes. In my opinion, he is no more dangerous to the United states than Saddam Hussein was.
North Korea sends threats to South Korea almost daily, and you know what South Koreans do? They ignore them, because North Korea has been doing it for years and are full of shit.
Interestingly, in 2006, two US cinema chains, Regal and Cinemark, refused to screen the British mockumentary Death of a President, which depicts the fictional assassination of the then-US president, George W. Bush, on the grounds that the film was morally distasteful.
Comments
The cyber-terrorists or whoever it was, their stupid "threat" letter was so poorly worded, just because they said September 11, people freaked out. The terrorists won... yeah they won so a stupid movie won't come out. They also won every time you take off your shoes at the airport and walk through that naked machine.
New Mexico Pearl Jam Fans (New Mexico, USA) on Facebook!
You want to criticize a guy who wants to move past his typecasting and write a satirical commentary on a serious issue? I 100% disagree with you on this one, and admire him for doing something bold, as well as Sony for taking a gamble on something some clearly see as controversial.
This is hardly the first satirical document on a public figurehead with a known history of violence - South Park does it all the time. And I'd never call Matt Stone and Trey Parker idiots for it.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Imagine if someone made a comedy in some other country where Obama is threatened with assassination. I'm sure many american's jimmies would be rustled. And call that racism and terrorism.
Key word: COMEDY. Since when did a fictional movie that's recognized as satire by all involved in its production have any bearing on reality?
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Remember when a crazy nutjob killed 12 people in a Colorado theater?... do you think the Batman movie would have been released if the production company had any prior knowledge of that guy?
Now a nutjob world leader is threatening to blow up a theater and has already successfully hacked a major company... and you think Sony is just using that to their advantage to sell more? Wow
Since the object of the movie's premise has no clue what a satire is. Really, I'm beside myself that just because this country knows it's a joke, everyone in the world should, particularly the guy who's supposedly getting assassinated in the movie. We live in a bubble and they were playing with fire from the get-go of production. We KNOW that Kim Jong-un is a dangerous man, so why taunt him?
1 0 0
by FBI Study
This is an excerpt from Part II of Section D of the report 'The FBI Laboratory: An Investigation into Laboratory Practices and Alleged Misconduct in Explosives-Related and Other Cases', published by the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Justice, in April, 1997.
Former President George Bush visited Kuwait between April 14 and April 16, 1993, to commemorate the allied victory in the Persian Gulf War. Accompanying Bush were his wife, two of his sons, former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, former Chief of Staff John Sununu, and former Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady.
In late-April 1993, the United States learned that terrorists had attempted to assassinate Bush during his visit to Kuwait. The Kuwaiti authorities arrested 17 persons suspected in the plot to kill Bush using explosives hidden in a Toyota Landcruiser. The Kuwaitis recovered the Landcruiser, which contained between 80 and 90 kilograms of plastic explosives connected to a detonator ( the Bush device or Bush explosive device ). The Kuwaitis also recovered ten cube-shaped plastic explosive devices with detonators (the cube-bombs ) from the Landcruiser. Some of the suspects reportedly confessed that the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS ) was behind the assassination attempt.
On April 29, 1993, CIA bomb technicians compared the Bush explosive device to two known Iraqi explosive devices found in different Middle-Eastern countries in 1990 and 1991 (the Middle-East devices ) . The technicians reported that the remote control firing mechanism in the Bush device was identical to those in the Middle-East devices. Additionally, the technicians reported that blasting caps from the Bush device appeared to be identical to those found in one of the Middle-East devices. The technicians later concluded that the circuit board from the Bush device also closely resembled circuit boards from the Middle-East devices.
In early-May 1993, the FBI sent personnel to Kuwait to interview the suspects and examine the physical evidence. FBI Special Agents, along with representatives of the Secret Service and State Department, interviewed 16 suspects, some more than once. Two of the suspects, Wali 'Abd Al-Hadi 'Abd Al-Hasan Al-Ghazali ( Al-Ghazali ) and Ra'd 'Abd Al-Amir 'Abbud Al-Asadi ( Al-Asadi ), admitted during the FBI interviews that they had participated in the plot at the direction of the IIS.
Explosives examiner Jordan also traveled to Kuwait in May 1993 to examine the Bush device. Jordan examined the main charge, which was hidden in three panels in the Landcruiser and was capable of being detonated by remote control, a timing device, or a push-pull suicide switch. Jordan compared the Bush device to photographs of the Middle-East devices, as well as other devices, and concluded that the same person or persons manufactured the Bush device and one of the Middle-East devices, and that a connection existed between persons responsible for the Bush device and several other devices, including the other Middle-East device. Jordan reported these conclusions in a May 11, 1993 Laboratory report.
Jordan then returned to Washington, D.C., and delivered samples of the explosives from the Bush device to Whitehurst. Whitehurst analyzed the explosive from the main charge and concluded that the substance was approximately 96% RDX, 3% polyvinyl-isobutyl ether binder, and 1% hydrocarbon oil. As for samples from the cube-bombs, Whitehurst concluded that the explosive was consistent with an explosive containing RDX bound with a cross-linked phenoxy or epoxy binder containing Sudan I dye. Whitehurst reported these findings in his June 7, 1993, dictation.
Shortly thereafter, Jordan returned to the Middle-East to conduct further examinations of the Bush device and the Middle-East devices. Based on these examinations, Jordan reported significant consistencies in the selection of individual components and alterations to manufactured items in all of the devices. Jordan concluded that the similarities represented signature characteristics. He further reported that the same person or persons of close association constructed the remote control fuzing systems and electronic timing mechanisms used in all of these devices. Jordan also reported that a second person or persons of close association were responsible for adding wiring and components to the Bush device and one of the Middle-East devices, enabling those devices to be incorporated in vehicles. Jordan reported these conclusions in his June 18, 1993, Laboratory report, in which he also summarized parts of Whitehurst's June 7, 1993, dictation.
On June 2, 1993, representatives of the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and others in the Department of Justice (DOJ) discussed the results of their investigations with representatives of the Clinton Administration. Three weeks later, the DOJ and CIA reported their conclusions. The DOJ and CIA reported that it was highly likely that the Iraqi Government originated the plot and more than likely that Bush was the target. Additionally, based on past Iraqi methods and other sources of intelligence, the CIA independently reported that there was a strong case that Saddam Hussein directed the plot against Bush.
On June 26, 1993, the United States launched a cruise missile attack against a building housing the IIS in Baghdad in retaliation for the assassination attempt on former President Bush. According to news reports, the attack killed between six and eight persons and injured approximately 12 others. On June 27, 1993, Madeleine Albright, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, addressed an emergency session of the Security Council and provided evidence to support the attack on the IIS facility.
- See more at: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1000#sthash.JC3Z5gOy.dpuf
I don't think they'll release this in theatres, for the simple reason that it was the distribution channels (i.e. cinema companies) that have halted their showings, not Sony. If most cinemas aren't willing to show the film, Sony would have to release it as 'limited showings'. If that were the case, the average dollars earned per film for the year would inevitably be lower (further skewed by the controversy surrounding the situation), and that would look worse when they're discussing this at a shareholder meeting when compared to scrapping it outright, and calling it an unforeseen expense.
So Nart, I believe you're right that it's all about the almighty dollar, but I don't think there's a theatrical release pending for this. I could see straight-to-DVD/Blu-Ray for this one very easily though.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Kudos to him for attempting something other than his typical stoner comedies, but I'm far from impressed with his supposed intelligence of knowing how far he can go with his idea of "bringing current events into his films". Messing with fire he did, with attempting to poke humor at a man who's not in his right mind, has access to nukes, and is a dictator.
I'd be more worried about being attacked by roaming band of Juggalos after watching The Interview then North Koreans. The movie chains and Sony are a bunch of corporate wussies.
I'd be more concerned about them hacking our banking system.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30541990
John Goodman to this day is still banned from entering England.
I find it nearly impossible to believe that the concept of 'satire' would be lost on Kim Jong-Un and all his advisors, and that Kim Jong-un or his advisors would be incapable of a simple Google search to teach them about Western-style satire, on the off chance they're not aware.
Also, take a look at Paramount's Sacha Baron Cohen film, The Dictator: its producers explicitly stated that Baron Cohen's character is based on actual dictators, including Kim Jong-il and Gaddafi. While both were deceased when it was released, Kim Jong-un was in power, and likely wouldn't have approved of its portrayal of dictatorships.
As a sidenote, the scene where Kim Jong-un dies in The Interview has now leaked online. I watched it, and did not spontaneously combust.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Unfortunately I don't - I was likely pooping in a diaper at the time, since I was one year old
Regardless, being banned from a country vs. feeling that you or your customers' lives or profitability are at risk are very different in scope.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
So, you know the guy now? And you know that he's a reasonable man? Because sources say otherwise. Let me reiterate that this movie is about assassinating Kim Jong-un. So relating this film to others which are not about actually killing a living dictator is like comparing apples to oranges. Is The Dictator about assassinating one of them?
Did Saddam test his nukes every so often as N. Korea does? N. Korea actually has since learning of The Interview, tested them.
Do we really want to taunt him any more than we already have, just to see what he's made of?
Probably not, but he did have his son in law and I think a brother in law executed.
We found out he never had nukes to test.
gawker.com/now-u-s-theaters-cant-even-show-team-america-world-po-1672867359
I'm thinking about asking Paramount or Sony to give me $100K "or else". Gotta make hay while the sun shines ...
Dennis Rodman can play Barack.
From http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/11300820/The-Interview-why-Sonys-North-Korea-comedy-was-cancelled.html
Aint no walls that can hold this man. :ar!