I don't think the answer is to give in to threats.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
I'm curious why Team America didn't receive any sort of blow-back from North Korea (at least not that I remember). Did Kim Jong Il just have a better sense of humor than his son?
I think North Korea was generally more "stable" at that time. There's been so much talk of internal strife between Kim and the government officials who actually run the country- not to mention Kim's recent absence from the public eye- there's more of a need than usual to appear strong.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
I generally agree with the idea that the answer is to give in to threats, but considering what's at stake -- a possible terrorist attack, not to mention a bigger strain on our relationship with North Korea-- I just don't think it's worth releasing the film. After all, it's just some movie, is that really worth risking the lives of people and disrespecting a leader that seems rather unstable? I firmly believe in free speech, and I don't get offended by movies, but I think it'd simply be irresponsible to release it, and frankly I find it irresponsible that it was even made. Can you imagine how the US would react if North Korea made a film about assassinating Obama?
"Some people can thrive and bloom living life in a living room, that's perfect for some people of one hundred and five. But I at least gotta try, when I think of all the sights that I gotta see, all the places I gotta play, all the things that I gotta be at"
The funny thing is the film is probably a dog so all this hoopla for nothing
To the poster who mentioned a terrorist attack. Now anytime anyone does not like the content of a movie all they have to do is threaten. Books could follow and the stage would be the next logical progression . This worked so a few nutjobs will try it for their cause.
"The funny thing is the film is probably a dog so all this hoopla for nothing"
I like how you get crazy about critics disliking shows they actually see, but dismissing movies out of hand that you didn't see is OK? Just trying to figure out the contradictory Roxy rules on things...
"Can you imagine how the US would react if North Korea made a film about assassinating Obama?"
I think most Americans are smart enough not to take NK seriously. There was already a film made regarding the assassination of a sitting president before (Death of a President). We were not petty and hacked England when that was made.
They canceled more than a screening. Sony Pictures statement:
"In light of the decision by the majority of our exhibitors not to show the film The Interview, we have decided not to move forward with the planned December 25 theatrical release. We respect and understand our partners’ decision and, of course, completely share their paramount interest in the safety of employees and theater-goers.
Sony Pictures has been the victim of an unprecedented criminal assault against our employees, our customers, and our business. Those who attacked us stole our intellectual property, private emails, and sensitive and proprietary material, and sought to destroy our spirit and our morale – all apparently to thwart the release of a movie they did not like. We are deeply saddened at this brazen effort to suppress the distribution of a movie, and in the process do damage to our company, our employees, and the American public. We stand by our filmmakers and their right to free expression and are extremely disappointed by this outcome."
Sony should make it available on VOD. And if they're already taking a bath on it, I would love if they made it available for free so many more people would see it.