The Interview: When White Privilege & American Arrogance Isn’t Enough

82533
28
Share:

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, by now you’ve heard that Sony has canceled the release of its film The Interview starring Seth Rogen and James Franco:

[quote]The_Interview_2014_poster“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.”[/quote]

Sony’s been reeling from a massive hack that has seen a lot of internal emails, personal information and company strategy and plans released. It's been huge. The US government is now saying that North Korea is behind these attacks. This all seems to have stemmed from Sony's plan to release The Interview despite repeated warnings from North Korea. The synopsis for The Interview is as follows:

[quote]Dave Skylark and producer Aaron Rapoport run the celebrity tabloid show "Skylark Tonight." When they land an interview with a surprise fan, North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, they are recruited by the CIA to turn their trip to Pyongyang into an assassination mission.[/quote]

People (People in Hollywood, fans, political pundits, politicians, etc) are upset that Sony “caved to the hackers”. They think Sony should have stood by this movie and released it anyway. To them this is a huge attack on freedom of expression, art and comedy. “It’s setting a horrible precedent”. To them I say:

Are you fucking stupid?

World: This issue is important America: Does it involve us? World: Not yet America: Well....don't call us, we'll call you when we care

This isn’t a win for the hackers or a defeat of freedom. It’s not setting a “dangerous precedence” (because it’s been done before). No, instead this is very simply a defeat of white privilege and punch in the gut to American arrogance. Americans (particularly white Americans) like to stand on their moral soapbox while at the same time repeatedly stepping over it themselves. It’s like how white America didn’t want to acknowledge the violence of police to black America until THEY deemed the Eric Garner case to be “worthy” enough (And even then there are plenty of them who still don't). American arrogance is known around the world. We (this country as a whole) sometimes think we’re the moral authority of the planet earth and the rest of the world is constantly giving us the Gary Coleman “Are you serious face?” Concerns and problems are only worth addressing if Americans care about them and even then, our ego will not allow us to care unless we then make the problem about us. The most recent example of this was the Ebola concern. Thousands of Africans died and it was nothing more than a punchline joke to Americans…until a doctor traveling back from Africa contracted it. Then all the sudden it was the “Ebola outbreak in America” or “US Must Deal with Ebola Crisis”. Because a single digit number of American citizens had Ebola NOW we as Americans could acknowledge it as an issue. I’ll be honest. I love being an American, I love my country but….we’re pretty much a country of douchebags. As a nation we’re horrible, arrogant, self centered and egotistical people.

"You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could that you didn't stop to think if you should"

"You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could that you didn't stop to think if you should"

Look, let me get this out of the way. I don’t condone these North Korean hackers exposing personal information and threatening violence. However, much like the “looting” in Ferguson, as a black man in America I fully understand that in order to get white America to address concerns of non-whites, something you have to literally or figuratively “burn a motherfucker down”. So while I don’t condone their methods, I fully understand why it had to go this far. Up until the hacking, Sony, Franco, Rogen and others were basically laughing at how offended North Koreans were that they were going forward with this movie. They continued mocking and laughing instead of acknowledging that North Korea had every right to be offended. Hell, Rogen wanted the death of Kim Jong-Un to be even MORE gruesome than it is in the current cut of the film. White privilege allowed him the comfort of believing he could do whatever he wanted and have the final laugh. Well, looks like they aren’t laughing anymore. And regardless of methods, every time white privilege and American arrogance gets chin checked, I have to tip my hat and smile a bit.

“But Kriss, it’s just a comedy, anything can be funny right?”

I don't even know the context of this scene but I can tell it reeks of unfunny dude bro

I don't even know the context of this scene but I can tell it reeks of unfunny dude bro

Glad you brought up that point. Let’ me explain somethings to you. First off, while I subscribe to the idea that anything can be funny, I also repeatedly point out the caveat that just because anything is up for grabs in the world of comedy, that does not come without consequences. Just because anything can be funny doesn’t mean it will be. Some of my favorite comedy is edgy, borderline (or down right) offensive comedy. I watch Adult Swim Shows like Squidbillies and Rick & Morty or things like South Park and American Dad. All those shows routinely cross the boundaries into offensive. But as crude as they can be, they’re also done in very clever and smart ways. Good satire and parody is actually very hard to do despite the fact that everyone tries to do it. People treat the words "comedy" and "satire" like they're the Contra Code of entertainment media; that if they just say "It's satire" that's all that needs to be said and they're absolved of responsibility for being offensive. Sorry, that's just not true. Let’s be honest here, there’s nothing clever or smart about the comedy of James Franco & Seth Rogen. I’ve seen enough films with the Franco & Rogen to know it’s about one step up from your typical dumb white frat house dude bro. On Twitter the other day I likened it to “James Franco & Seth Rogen spend an entire film talking about how not gay for each other they are as they physically hold each other’s dicks”. Maybe The Interview is different and they shock the world with something smart & clever but judging from the trailers (and the emails of Sony Execs themselves)…it’s typical Franco & Rogen. That means while it probably has some laughs, it’s also going to lean more heavily towards the offensive side than the funny. When you do edgy comedy or satire, you run the risk of it falling flat, being taken the wrong way or just flat out offending people. There are plenty of times that Trey Parker & Matt Stone fell flat with an episode of South Park. Do they complain and whine about how people want to silence them or do they just use that as motivation for their next attempt? Sometimes your offensive comedy just isn’t going to be a hit. That’s the risk you sign up for when you go through with it. Here’s the truth: James Franco & Seth Rogen aren’t funny enough to do a clever satirical comedy using a sitting head of state. If you’re going to use a sitting head of state in a movie like this, you need to use a scalpel not a hammer. That’s not The Interview. It reeks of white privilege that Rogen and Franco thought this was acceptable. As offensive as South Park can be, they’re very very good at using satire to actually make a point. When have you ever seen James Franco or Seth Rogen make a smart, clever comedy with a real point?

And before you claim that I’m just making assumptions, read what Sony Execs themselves say about this film. They all but admit that James Franco is the wrong person for this film. They admit the script falls apart. One of them even admits it's really only good for selling Katy Perry records. Normally I would say that I would need to see the film first to agree with these assessments except: These perfectly describe what we have seen from Franco and Rogen in the past. I’ll be honest, you might be able to convince me that Rogen teamed up with another actor (perhaps a real comedian) would have been able to pull off this movie. Because then Rogen would be forced to act instead of falling back into his typical dude bro banter Franco. But with the “Dude Bro Dynamic Duo”? No. I feel like Dennis Green: They are who we thought they were.

Now let’s also take a second and point out how Sony brought this on themselves by violating a well known but undocumented rule in movies:

No Active Heads of State.

They didn't even have enough respect to change his name to a fake name.  smh

They didn't even have enough respect to change his name to a fake name. smh

Let me explain this. There are movies where the current President or head of state of a country is mentioned. Sometimes they even show news reel footage from a real event. For instance, if you’re doing a zombie movie, you might see the film open up with news clips of various heads of states talking about some unspecified disaster. But almost never is an active head of state put into a movie in a fictional situation as an actual character in a movie and certainly not one where the plot of the movie is to assassinate them in a gruesome way. Doing so is just a violation of an unspoken rule and is going to cause problems. Again, Sony KNEW this. Read the email exchanges between Sony Execs from different parts of the world. They openly discuss how this movie would play in different parts of the world. South Korea flatly says they would have to pass on this (understandably). China says they’re not sure how it would go but they’d definitely have to change some parts for it to work. It’s almost unanimous that they all think its not that funny and could be a very hard sell. Still not getting it? Fine...watch the death scene yourself then. Watch that, then replace Kim Jong-un with your favorite American President or politician and tell me it's not cringe worthy. Personally? With President Obama already getting ridiculous amounts of threats, the White House already being breached and shot up...yeah, I wouldn't be able to find the humor in this.

“But Kriss, it’s just a movie"

When I first wrote this draft I was going to agree with that above statement but after thinking and writing, I have to say "No it's more than JUST a movie."  If it was "just a movie" Sony would have used a FICTIONAL head of state just like every other movie normally does. They didn't and didn't on purpose.  So now they clearly were trying to make a statement.  By putting Kim Jong-Un in this film, they were purposely trying to make the film more about the shock value than the quality of the film.  When you make a live action film and start putting in actors to play real sitting heads of state, you run the risk of dabbling in real world foreign policy and most film makers who are making a good film don't want to do that. Let’s not be naive. Hollywood is known for making political statements both domestic and foreign with its movies. Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of history knows that Hollywood has dabbled in propaganda for the United States Government on several occasions. There have been plenty of articles and books about the the relationship of Hollywood and the Government. We’ve had celebrities act as spies for this country. As citizens of this country we have the luxury (and privilege) to look at it as “just a movie”, but outside of this country, these things are viewed very differently and for good reason. So I completely understand why North Korea isn’t happy. While we see it as “just a movie”, North Korea, a country where everything is under government control, just sees this movie as an extension of the United States government. And while in this time that’s not the case, history tells us there's enough examples of it being true that it could easily be viewed as such. So no...it's not "just a movie".

While the film might not be direct “American propaganda” it reeks of American greed and opportunism. Why do you think they pick North Korea instead of some other country? The United States and North Korea are not on very good terms. And Hollywood has been taking advantage of that for the last several years. While the tensions between North Korea and the United States are very real, Hollywood sees an opportunity to cash in on fear and controversy. When they remade Red Dawn they made the enemy North Korea. Same with Olympus Has Fallen. I know the North Koreans also weren’t happy with the Red Dawn remake. I’m not sure about Olympus but its clear that Hollywood has been repeatedly poking a hornet’s nest with North Korea and this time they got stung. And I’m not shedding a tear.

Don't remember a lot of "It's just a movie" talk back in 2006

Don't remember a lot of "It's just a movie" talk back in 2006

Remember how I mentioned American arrogance won’t let this country admit a problem or being at fault unless we can claim victim hood as well? Well this is no different. Once again America is crying foul because something we’ve done before is being done to us. In 2006, an independent “mockumentary” called Death of a President was set to be release. The film was a fake documentary about solving the assassination of President George W. Bush. Yes, it was about the theoretical killing of our then President. Citizens of this country were PISSED. Folks who know me and remember The Insanity Report and my writings there know I was no fan of George W. Bush but even this was in bad taste to me. Gretchen Esell "I find this shocking, I find it disturbing. I don't know if there are many people in America who would want to watch something like that.” Hillary Clinton commented "I think it's despicable. I think it's absolutely outrageous. That anyone would even attempt to profit on such a horrible scenario makes me sick.” Fun fact: Cinemark & Regal theaters refused to show the movie. Because this was back before Twitter, I’m willing to bet if Twitter was the social media powerhouse it is today, every major theater chain in America would have dropped the film.  Mind you, this was an independent film that wasn't made or distributed by any major studio.  Yet the way we reacted you would have thought Disney was distributing it world wide.

‘But Kriss, we didn’t hack anyone or threaten violence’
Ehhhh. Maybe not in that instance but the film is a French film and I remember all of this country’s pettiness with France because France didn’t support our invasion of Iraq. I remember changing french fries to ‘freedom fries’ and french toast to ‘freedom toast’. I remember seeing politicians gleefully pour out good French wine all in the name of “standing by our president” and “Go America!!!”. See, not only are we arrogant but when it comes to the rest of the world not agreeing with us, we turn into petty spoiled children whenever we feel slighted.

Need more examples? Remember the outrage when the History Channel during its miniseries The Bible had the devil portrayed by an actor that people thought looked to much like Obama?

Nope...wasn't liberals either guys

Once Conservatives started saying the Devil looked like Obama, then the outrage and complaints poured in

It was such a big deal the makers of the mini-series ended up cutting the devil out of the related movie Son of God.

Remember when Joe Scarborough went on an angry rant cause Rams players expressed solidarity with black protesters?

Remember when Joe Scarborough went on an angry rant cause Rams players expressed solidarity with black protesters?

Oh but why stop there my fellow Americans? See, as we chastise North Koreans for being mad at a bad film for gruesomely killing their current leader, we here in this country actually get mad at FICTIONAL characters whenever their race is changed. Remember when Rue (who apparently IS black in the books) was cast as a little black girl in The Hunger Games? Or how about those upset that Quvenzhané Wallis is playing little orphan Annie now? And to flip it, Hollywood and a lot of white Americans (and a lot of people in this country) are stunningly silent when real injustice and inconsistencies are present. It’s funny how the leaked Sony emails reveal a lot of questionable statements from Sony execs on race, our current president, children and their own stars yet that’s not what got people up in an uproar. I’ve seen more comment from Hollywood on this stupid little movie having its release canceled than about the #BlackLivesMatter protests going on around the country. And while I hate doing a “You don’t care about x but you care about y”, I feel it’s appropriate here because people only care about the The Interview because it’s a blow to their privilege. It’s easy to say “America would never react this way” when it’s a fact America would never be put in a position where we’d have to react at all. Death of a President was a small, independent film that got a extremely small release and didn’t even make HALF of its budget back. Even on that small scale, America did NOT take that well. You’d never see Sony or any other major studio back a project like Death of a President or The Interview about a sitting US President. Again, the privilege of being American means we’d never be put in that position to begin with. So when it comes to The Interview being canceled, sorry…but not sorry it happened.

As I stated at the beginning of this,  this is a defeat of white privilege and American arrogance. The privilege and arrogance are the same “Do as I want you to do not as I do myself” that I see daily as a black man living in America. So no, while I do not condone the threats of violence or the invasion of privacy of of people…I have to smile a little bit at karma coming back to bite Franco, Rogen and Sony in the ass. I don’t have to kill them for it, but I don’t have to save them either.

NOPE....not caping for Sony, Franco or Rogen on this one.

And no...I'm not worried that this will happen again to a popular and anticipated filme like Avengers Age of Ultron or Star Wars.  See good movies don't have to rely on gimmicks and cheap laughs.  This wouldn't happen with an actual quality film because everyone from the stars to the studio would have stood behind it to make sure it was well received and that includes avoiding the obvious mistakes Sony did here.  I'm not going to lose sleep over The Interview and you shouldn't either.

 

*Edit*

Sony has released The Interview after all on VOD and in participating theaters.  The reviews are what I expected.  Most say the movie isn't that good but are giving it higher than normal grades for  what I'm just going to chalk up to patriotism.  See the film if you must but don't expect a review here.  As I said in this article, I've seen enough of James Franco & Seth Rogen's dudebro routine to know it's not for me.

Comments

comments

Share:
Charles (Kriss)

28 comments

  1. Avatar
    Amy 20 December, 2014 at 10:46 Reply

    It’s sad how little this view is being expressed. I read through the tweets from Hollywood starts on another website and was just shocked at how little self-awareness they showed. It was such a show of American hubris and arrogance, and it makes me really sad that white people are so clueless about it. I mean if you just bothered to educate yourself on how racism and American privilege work all of this could have been avoided – and we even might get better movies out of Hollywood, but that might be too optimistic.

  2. Avatar
    Anonymous 20 December, 2014 at 18:42 Reply

    Wow, your an idiot. For someone who likely considers himself a writer I am surprised you don’t realize is satire. You should really look that up in the dictionary.

    • Avatar
      Kriss 20 December, 2014 at 22:28 Reply

      Actually the idiot is you because you clearly didn’t read. I pointed out that just because something is “satire” doesn’t mean it’s not offensive. Satire is actually hard to do correctly and doing bad satire isn’t an excuse for being offensive.

      • Avatar
        Anonymous 20 December, 2014 at 22:49 Reply

        Oh I’m sorry, I didn’t realize that you and your ridiculous website were the standard of how all satire was judged.

        Plus your right, I didn’t read your entire article because halfway through the second paragraph I realized that it was so ridiculous, a better use of my time would be hitting myself if the face with a hammer.

        What you should really find offensive is a dictator who has starved to death millions of his people and murdered countless more.

        Go ahead and mock the countries that allow you to speak your mind no matter how nonsensical it it. Maybe you should travel to North Korea and try it there. Let me know how it goes champ.

        Go ahead and pat yourself on the pack for being so progressive. Just remember everyone thinks your crazy and you have managed to reduce the creditably of a two-bit website that reviews movies if that’s even possible.

        Your a fucking joke, do a review on that asshole.

        • Avatar
          Dan 29 December, 2014 at 12:31 Reply

          And it’s “you’re” right and “you’re” a fucking joke. You should also look up the word “irony” while researching satire.

          I’m all for freedom of speech but your comments are exactly why it can also be destructive in the wrong hands.

          Please change your entire outlook on life before returning to the Internet.

  3. Avatar
    Anonymous 21 December, 2014 at 01:31 Reply

    Hey moron, I suppose your now going to watch The Great Dictator and defend Hitlers actions because of white Americas arrogance.

    Oh and after reading the tone of your article it’s pretty clear your the racist.

    • Avatar
      Anonymous 21 December, 2014 at 12:37 Reply

      As a black man I can say while this article was well written. And I respect your opinion. This is America and just because u find Franco and Rogen beneath your standards .Doesn’t mean everyone does. Furthermore North Korea makes a living threatening ppl. They are the last country That should be respected. I don’t want yo be checked by N.Korea. I don’t care how dumb the movie is

  4. Avatar
    Zach Fine 23 December, 2014 at 16:26 Reply

    I get the arguments about arrogance and privilege, yes, horrible and deserving of many articles and tweets.

    But if the chains and distributors are willing to back away from screening relatively big mainstream films due to threats of violence, imagine how that precedent might affect the indie films that relate to issues you care about and that are made with a sensibility closer to your own.

    This level of corporate cowardice is a very bad thing, will affect us all, and is also deserving of many articles and tweets, without negating the issue of privilege.

    The analogy to the British film “Death of a President” is interesting but breaks down when one considers that film premiered at a prominent festival, aired on TV in several big European countries, screened in theaters in the US, was released on DVD in the UK and the US, and is available now on Hulu Plus and other streaming services. In short, U.S. officials and others complained, and the show went on to be screened and seen. I was going to say “by millions” but I have no idea how widely it was viewed. I remember watching the trailer and being unimpressed, but at least I had the option to watch it, and would have been pissed if that option were to be taken away due to threats from a government.

    On a different note, rather than condemn filmmakers for breaking the unwritten rule that sitting world leaders should not be killed on film (i.e. “responsible” self-censorship), I’d encourage filmmakers in all countries to put that rule in the dustbin. Please make films in which the deaths of named world leaders are depicted. Let’s have a film festival dedicated to it. Get it all out. Cheaper and cleaner than war, and with any luck some of the films would be entertaining or edifying.

    • Avatar
      Kriss 23 December, 2014 at 16:33 Reply

      This doesn’t make any sense. Death of a President was screened just like The Interview was. The Interview will also have a limited release. Death of a President didn’t make make back half it’s budget. The Interview will get released and probably end up viewed more than Death of a President. Doesn’t make it right. We self censor stuff all the time. What happened with The Interview isn’t new. It’s laughable and speaks a lot about privilege that all the sudden now people are THIS outrage that theater chains decided it wasn’t worth it. If you want to make an argument about a good film, I’ll hear it, but the Interview isn’t worth it.

      • Avatar
        Zach Fine 23 December, 2014 at 16:58 Reply

        The principle is the same for a good film as it is for a bad film. If it’s a bad film, the only thing to stand on is principle.

        It does appear that The Interview will get a limited screening, but at the time the article was written this was not the case, and I was responding to the idea that people should not be upset that its release had been shut down simply because it was a product of bad structural elements in U.S. society. I think it’s possible to agree with the film’s problems while also thinking that it was right that people were very upset that it was to be blocked from screening at all.

        The fact is that I and many were upset not because the film is not worthy of severe criticism, but because of the reason that its screenings were cancelled. And the reason that its screenings were cancelled will apply to many future projects that each of us might care more about.

        “Death of a President” did not have its release cancelled, so while it has a few similarities it’s a very imperfect analogy. The fact that it didn’t make money is a side point — one can’t force people to throw money at a film if they don’t want to see it. It’s possible that it would have made more had two theater chains not cancelled their screenings, but it’s also possible or even likely that many of us would never have heard of it or thought to watch had that controversy not erupted.

        • Avatar
          Kriss 23 December, 2014 at 17:04 Reply

          Yeah ok. You’re dancing around the fact that privilege and arrogance is the only reason why people care. Fact is 2 theater chains refused to show Death of a President and in relationship to The Interview, that might have been a cancellation because it was already getting an extremely limited release. Fact is, plenty of films get passed over by theater chains, get banned, get canceled, etc and no one cares. No one was making an argument for Death of a President came out and if it was completely canceled the majority of people complaining about The Interview now wouldn’t have been doing the same for Death of a President. This isn’t about censorship. We’ve had plenty of things recently in the news about free speech being limited and all these people speaking out now, were silent. So the “people are upset at the principle” argument really just doesn’t fly to me. At all.

          • Avatar
            Zach Fine 23 December, 2014 at 17:47 Reply

            Not meaning to dance. I just don’t think privilege is the only reason people care, unless we’re talking about the privilege to see and make films that may offend North Korea, or the privilege to see and make films that just are not agreeable to everyone who might wield a keyboard. If Sony had said “We’re going to release the film in fewer theaters because we think it’s racist/sucks/arrogant”, that’d be a very different story than the plug getting pulled because hackers threatened violence. What’s now to stop hackers from productively threatening violence to block the release of Selma, or Finding Nemo 2 for that matter. Every film is fair game, and the list of films that matter that never made someone angry is short.

            This doesn’t count as evidence of anything, but I think I remember reading anti-censorship arguments related to Death of a President when it came out –but can’t find ’em. The net was young, and it was a small film with a smaller number of people standing up for it. Twitter barely existed. It’s interesting to me how tiny twitter was at the time — the film in total generated only a handful of tweets in its year of release, they’re all here:
            https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=%22Death%20of%20a%20President%22%20since%3A2006-03-21%20until%3A2007-10-16&src=typd

  5. Avatar
    Kriss 23 December, 2014 at 19:29 Reply

    This is going to be my last reply because it’s clear to me you’re just not getting it. But I don’t think you’re being ignorant on purpose, I just think like many with privilege, you can’t see it. It’s always the people with a privilege saying that privilege isn’t an issue. When I say “privilege” i mean an advantage over others. In the case of The Interview, the privilege comes from being able to look at this issue in a bubble and ignore all the problematic things and only focus on the censorship part. Privilege is the fact that if we’re going to be honest, this film would never have been financed, produced or distributed by a major film studio if it used a current US President. See that’s why Death of a President is actually both a bad and good example. It’s bad because it was a small independent film and so comparing it to a big film like The Interview isn’t fair. But it’s also good because when you look at the response that film got when it was made relative to the response of North Korea to The Interview, it’s pretty comparable. Overall Americans were disgusted with that film. No it wasn’t completely banned but that’s because it was already not going to get a wide release. Still 2 theater chains refused to show it, which for a small release film was a nail in the coffin. Politicians commented on how deplorable it was and it made its round on the cable news stations. Compared to a big film like The Interview, America reacted to Death of a President like shooting ants with a shotgun. Your privilege is ignoring all the details surrounding The Interview. You’re ignoring that to North Korea this isn’t just a movie and the fact that we can’t even imagine the shoe being on the other foot because no studio would every green light a film to do to a sitting American president what The Interview does to Kim Jong Un. And that’s privilege.

    As far as it setting a precedence for other films. Doubtful. Could hackers try to threaten the release of Selma or Finding Nemo 2? of course. They always could and still can. It’s foolish to think if terrorist really made legit threats of violence, a studio wouldn’t comply. Seeing a movie isn’t real life deaths and the inevitable lawsuits to follow. But there’s also no reason to believe any threats like this would happen to any of those films because there’s no reason to want those films not to be shown. Those films don’t enter into current foreign policy territory by graphically blowing up a sitting head of state. In North Korea’s mind, this is nothing more than propaganda, which if you take a step back and look at it objectively, is exactly what it is.

    And for the record, films/books/shows have been banned here in the US for years for a lot less than threats from hackers. Again, this is nothing new, America only is treating it as such because “we’re not in control”. It’s pretty absurd.

  6. Avatar
    Kriss 23 December, 2014 at 19:37 Reply

    Oh and 20+ tweets, most of them saying “going to watch Death of a President” is hardly anything. I have no doubt there were “anti-censorship” arguments about the movie but there’s always a handful of people willing to go against the crowd. I’m pretty sure though in today’s climate, there would more tweets denouncing the movie than supporting it.

  7. Avatar
    Zach Fine 23 December, 2014 at 20:41 Reply

    I’m going to back away because I don’t mean to hijack the comment section, and because I think I need to sit back and listen. Thanks for the thoughtful replies. This will be my last post on the matter.

    “if we’re going to be honest, this film would never have been financed, produced or distributed by a major film studio if it used a current US President” — this is an excellent point, and I think I get what you’re saying now. I’d argue that people should be able to create and watch films that explore storylines that would be branded as treasonous, but commerce would undoubtedly not get behind it.

    With the twitter info, I didn’t mean that it supported anything, I just thought it was amusing how quaint twitter was back then. Back then it was just so much “I’m drinking coffee”, and the number of high profile accounts was incredibly low. That search was neither here nor there, just thought it funny.

  8. Avatar
    Will 27 December, 2014 at 23:59 Reply

    Please tell me this article is meant to be some kind of a weird crappy joke. I’m going to pretend that this is a joke because the alternative is too painful to acknowledge. If this is not a joke then the author of this article is a massively ignorant fuck. The Interview has nothing to do with white privilege, the events in Ferguson, the Eric Garner case, or Ebola. There is no connection to the film with any of those things. Zero! Zilch! Nothing! No relation! The Interview is just a goddamn movie. It is something Seth Rogen made to try and make people laugh. Whether its a good movie or not is another matter. And if you think that North Koreans are offended by the movie then, again, you are incredibly misinformed. North Koreans as a whole don’t know anything about the rest of the world or what’s going on in it because they don’t have freedom of press over there. They have concentration camps and no food and a totalitarian state completely controlling every aspect of their lives. So the author of this article needs to shut his stupid fucking mouth because he’s just some moronic, conspiracy theory fucking dipshit. Next thing this stupid fuck is going to say is that illuminati was behind it all. Just shut the fuck up dude.

    • Avatar
      Kriss 28 December, 2014 at 09:06 Reply

      lmao. I’m always aware of how bad the reading comprehension skills here in the US are but leave it to the comment section of any article to prove that it’s way worse than I could ever imagine. You completely missed the point and I’m not gonna waste my time explaining something to an idiot that is completely over their head. The fact that you think this is some conspiracy theory is hilarious to me. lmao. What a moron.

      • Avatar
        Dan 29 December, 2014 at 12:47 Reply

        Although your article also had one million typos in it and extremely poor grammar, I agree with some of the things in it. We censor stuff all the time (Muhammad on South Park) and we’ve put people in jail for making movies about Muhammad (the movie that “caused” Benghazi.) And although I do believe there is a ton of white privilege in this country, I think this movie has nothing to do with it. If Chris Rock made this film would you have the same opinion? The point should be, if innocent people might die from something you create, whether it’s a bomb or art, it should be stopped.

        And we should stop the atrocities in North Korea as well. But a dick-joke movie isn’t going to do that. It’s only going to cause tension. So who cares. Rogen, Franco, and Sony will all continue to sleep well at night. Let’s talk about shit that matters.

        • Avatar
          Kriss 30 December, 2014 at 12:31 Reply

          I love the backhanded “even though it has extremely poor grammar” comments. Dude…get off your own dick. Seriously I really hate people like you who come in with that pretentious ass grammar shit.

  9. Avatar
    Will 28 December, 2014 at 00:13 Reply

    And to elaborate on my point about North Korea, so that I’m not misunderstood, the people in North Korea who were offended were those in control, a select few who are subjugating an entire population, depriving them of food and instead filling their bellies with ridiculous propaganda. So, you know, who the fuck cares about those assholes or what they think?

Leave a reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.