More Reading

Post navigation

153 Comments

  • Watched it, and laughed my ass off the whole time. Well worth $6 if you don’t use torrents. Uh, not that I ever would though… 🙂

  • It’s just a movie and todays audience are very much mature then they were 5 years back. It’s Just a movie like a romantic or action movie. Why people has to take it so seriously…. No body took lord of the rings or Jurassic park seriously !! cmmon people..

  • Thought DL’ers were smarter then this…. Everyone seems to think that national pride makes it okay to depict the assassination of a living head of state. You don’t make a movie about assassinating a head of state, regardless of who it is. If someone made a movie and it showed the killing of a current american president, British PM, or any other “Western” country…. could you imagine the outrage? It’s just not something you do period.

          • Contradicts what? You feel it is okay to depict the murder of a head of state in a manner that is degrading and offensive?

            The movie you listed made bush out to be a martyr, it was done in a “respectful” manner in a sense. It also was a limited release, with limited screen time. If this movie was made and released in a similar manner, fine… But it still doesn’t make it right to depict the killing of a head of state

          • It contradicts your statement that “If someone made a movie and it showed the killing of a current american president, British PM, or any other “Western” country…. could you imagine the outrage?” Such a film WAS made (citation above) and the amount of outrage generated didn’t even merit your notice. Hence your statement is false.

            Whether I “feel it is okay” or not is kind of beside the point, which is that the First Amendment gives filmmakers in this country the right to create a satire. Now, when it comes to my personal opinion, it would depend on the film and the context. In this case, given the crimes perpetrated by the Kims in North Korea, I think the satire is richly deserved.

          • 2007 was also a different time politically and culturally, very dynamic forces indeed. Current political and cultural dynamics will cause a negative response, ie outrage over this film.

            Entertain a thought for a moment, they decide to make a movie depicting how the people of North Korea live, bring light on the plight of millions and help to raise awareness as to the conditions those people live under. Or make a movie about killing the current leader of a country in a satirical manner and anger a lot of people in the process.

            Freedom of speech is all well and good, though when your going to insult millions, and cause increased tensions between countries it might be a good idea to use some tact.

    • This has been done multiple times before, and no one should ever be told what they can or can’t make, or what we can or can’t watch.

      You sound like you have no clue about free speech.

  • I bought this as soon as I read this article. Seth and James together seem to not be able to make a bad movie, and I love that we are able to see it on time despite the temper tantrum that North Korea decided to throw. Good on Sony and Google for doing this.

  • After reading the reviews on this movie I’m not sure it’s worth $6 I’ll add it to the wishlist and think long and hard about it.

  • I’ve read the web reviews and I’m not going to see the movie…

    A dumb movie isn’t going to get any smarter just because some hackers got involved.

    It’d be dumb too, to spend time rubbernecking it just because of the hoopla. There are way too many better stuff to watch.

  • I got $68 play credit from a LG G watch and Chromecast. I assume I’m golden to buy for $15 right?

  • North Korea had nothing to do with the hack, neither did Sony. It was likely an ex employee. The original contact between the hackers and Sony had no mention of The Interview. It was only after the media started speculating about NK that Sony and the hackers (or someone from 4chan) started to act as if it was NK that did it. It benefits both parties. For Sony, they seem less foolish if a foreign government is attacking them. For the hackers, it throws the authorities off their trail. Also, if this was a Sony publicity stunt, they would have never released the social security numbers or the torrented movies. Disgruntled ex employee/soon to be ex employee with a couple skilled hackers most likely.

    • More Like Viral Marketing.

      Security Experts are saying the Hack was an Inside Job done by people who have been fired or disgruntle employees

  • Isn’t this now just Sony capitalizing on the negative publicity. They should have stuck with original release plans.

  • Terrorist hackers? False flag set up by Sony and the MPAA so the MPAA can gain support in their fight against piracy. They want to be able to remove sites from the internet without having to go through the legal process.

    • AppleInsider is known to be the most pro-Apple/anti-Google site on the net. Every single one of their articles is nothing but countless praise by fanboy authors for fanboy commentors.

      Just try and post anything even remotely good about Google in one of their articles. You’ll get slaughtered.

  • Some amount of proceeds from this should be used as aid to the unfortunate souls unlucky enough to be stuck living in North Korea…

    • I’d be for this if there was any conceivable way of getting the funds to the NK people. However they live in a prison state so any attempt would be confiscated by the Kims.

  • For the acting talent… 6 bucks is probably the right price. Though I’m still not interested. It’ll be worth it when it’s on Red Box and I can get it for 50cents with a coupon.

  • So PlayStation owners can’t rent it but Microsoft and Google can. Hmmmmmm. Why not make it available to them PlayStation owners as well.

  • North Korea had nothing to do with this whole hack thing. When the original leak first happened around Thanksgiving, there was NO mention of The Interview or North Korea. That all started later, through the media.

    I believe this was 100% a marketing stunt. Sony knew it was going to be a flop. Now people that wouldn’t have seen it, will go see it purposely.

    • Stop making claims that you have no way of verifying. It’s one thing to be skeptical, but saying “North Korea had nothing to do with this” when you don’t know any more than the rest of us is just silly.

    • Why would Sony know this was going to be a flop? Seth Rogens movies make money, that’s been proven by the leaked documents. He makes them for 40mil and they make 100mil almost every time.

      His only flop was the Green Hornet, which was a big budget film that he and his writing partner lost control over.

      There was no reason to think this would be a flop, it was a low budget comedy with 2 of the most popular actors in their demographics starring in the film.

  • i think they are actually making more money this way since everyone would want to see it and pay the 6 dollar

    • 6 dollars is less than a theater ticket. Releasing it this way makes Sony miss out on all those theater purchases. After the theater run, the next step would have been rent or buy anyway.

      • would sony make money off the pop corn and soda though? they can still buy anyway after watching it at google

      • but due to all the media promotion, it would be a good bet there would a lot more people watching it online than otherwise in the theaters. I wasn’t even going to see this one but changed my mind because how such big news coverage it got

        • and lets not kid ourselves, after the movie theater releases is done, most would just pirate the movie instead of renting or purchasing

          • I don’t think that Most would pirate it. I believe that those who pirate movies are in the minority. I think that if people are given what they would consider a reasonable price to pay, they will choose that over hunting down a pirated version. Plus the risk of less than optimal movie quality and possible viruses make it easier to just pay for the movie from a trusted source.

          • I agree. In this case when the movie is released right away and for only 6 dollar. So everyone would be OK with paying and just watch it legally. If however. You have to pay theater price from 12 to 20 per person. The ones pirating the movie would for sure increase.

        • With everyone with that mentality, if they did release it in theaters, everyone would be going to see it because of all the promotion it got. Everyone that is dying to see it now would go to the theaters to pay 9 bucks or more rather than paying 6 bucks now. And even people that pirate movies will probably still pirate this rather than paying the 6 bucks. I’m sure it will be available soon on those sites.

          • but the thing is, it is was still playing in theaters, it would never have gotten such new coverage to begin with.

          • Well I’m talking about if they continued with a theater release after all the hype. If it had been a normal release and the controversy never happened then maybe they would have made the same amount of money than they will with this? I don’t know. I guess we will have to see how much money they make now. Im sure there will be some kind of report over the weekend.

    • An interview with Sony ceo said that the FBI reported that the malware would have broken through 90% businesses’ security systems. I wonder if Google could handle this kind of attack

  • This is interesting. There had been times in the past where movies tried to release in theaters and VOD at the same time (usually for like $50 or something rental) and the theater chains raised a huge stink about it and refused to show it if that happened. Here we have a situation where the major chains already passed on the film so they can’t say anything. This could set an interesting precendent if Sony and the platforms see good profits from it.

    Edit : Tower Heist is the movie I am referring to.

    • I think Comcast does a “same day as theater” thing with their OnDemand service. I don’t think it’s with every movie. I haven’t really looked through it but it’s there. And releasing this movie this way is kinda like doing a direct-to-video release. They are missing out on theater purchases so I think Sony is still going to take a bit of a loss on this.

      • Those seem to be indie movies as far as I can tell. But when a major movie (Tower Heist) tried to go VOD 3 weeks after theater release, the chains got all up in arms.

    • great point. especially since almost all of the $6 would go to Sony, minus a small fee for google for each rental of course. I would think its way better profit margin than release made in the movie theaters

  • I hope this is an example of future availability of movies. Release day includes online sources which will cause a slow declination of customers actually visiting movie theaters. I would rather watch a new movie at home vs a movie theater any day.

    • That’s an idea, but you would effectively kill the cinema infrastructure (causing lost jobs and closing businesses). I think the better idea is to do a run in theaters first, then a limited run on VOD, and then release the Blu-Ray/DVD. Pretty much what they’re doing now.

      • Wait! If you listen to Sony the theaters decided not to show it. They caused the lost of revenue.

        • You’re right in this one case. But what the OP is suggesting is changing the release structure for all future movies that will have a negative impact whether the theaters decide to show it or not.

        • That was overblown, I know many theaters around here were planning on showing it despite the threats, and were upset when Sony pulled it.

  • What’s the big deal? a mediocre movie with all this publicity does not make it any better. I will pass on this.

    • I think at this point, most of us will watch just as a “F U” to North Korea or whoever hacked Sony.

      • i get the FU to dprk, but why would you want to say FU to whoever hacked sony without knowing who, the intentions? were the hack’s consequences negative for an average consumer? the consequences of the whole situation with the interview will be rather negative for an average consumer: the whole situation will make a lot of people watch the movie even if a lot of them would have any interest normally seeing it.

        • Because whoever hacked Sony made the 911 like threats……..sounds like mal-intent to me!

          If not for that, then maybe…..

        • I think the simple answer is that I don’t want anyone thinking they can tell me what I should or shouldn’t watch…

          Don’t really need any other reason to support the film. Someone, doesn’t matter if it was NK or not, started saying they’d attack theaters if they showed the movie, which caused theaters to pull the movie.

          I don’t support that, and neither should you. Do the intentions matter if the end result is the movie being pulled from theaters and being seen less by people who intended to see it at theaters? Censorship isn’t something I’m a fan of.

  • the fact that someone broke into sony and leaked some emails is believable. at the same time it’s plausible that some marketing geniuses
    there jumped on it and promoted the interview as well? at this point even if the movie is crap it already made a ton of money. if all that’s true then i aplaud ingenius marketing staff over at sony

  • “Look at me” marketing is working pretty good for Sony. Can’t blame them for doing it either.

  • Make sure you get a virtual card, they might hack everyone who buys it. I mean Sony is notorious for getting hacked.

      • I’m sure it will be because of all these people saying “Now I’m definitely going to watch it” just because of all that happened. Which I don’t get

      • Oh it’s gonna lose money still. Even if this one movie makes profit, the other leaks are gonna severely hinder any of those profits. In the end Sony is still going to lose a few hundred million dollars on this.

        • I disagree with that calculation. 99,99% of people doesn’t know and isn’t even interested in getting to those leaks. and those who are, are familiar with what pirate bay is, so there’s no loss no gain there.
          the interview profit will be real though. seeing the limited trailers it looks mediocre.

          • Annie already opened up below the original projected earnings, on a strong holiday weekend. Not a good sign for Sony. This film, being a family film, is probably the least likely to be affected also.

          • It’s a black rendition of Annie produced by Jay-Z & Will Smith. Sorry, but this wouldn’t sell any better during the month of Feb. It was going to tank regardless. Personally as a black man, I’m boycotting that movie out of principle.

          • “As a black man I’m boycotting that movie out of principle” and what principle is that if I may ask?

          • As a black man I agree as well. I wonder what would happen if they remade different strokes with all the races reversed. A white Arnold and Willis with a black father and daughter. Not sure if I want my childhood memories corrupted. So I can relate to how a white person would feel if they grew up with a white Annie. It’s not about being prejudice but more about original memories.
            What if they remade Annie with a Chinese, Pakistani or Indian girl? Sometimes we got to leave classics alone.

  • I hope this is true… I was dying to see this. Unfortunately I’m no where near any of the small movie chains that decided to go ahead and air this tomorrow, only the large movie chains that all backed out of the airing.

  • Oh I’m renting it for sure just for spite. As a veteran and first hand knowledge of NK I aim to spit in their face at every chance I get.

  • I don’t have strong feelings one way or the other about whether people should or shouldn’t watch this movie (it doesn’t sound like it’ll be especially good, but screw the guys (possibly/probably North Korea?) who hacked Sony), but wouldn’t paying to watch it kind of be saying to Sony that we approve of the way they handled this whole thing?

  • Obama said referred that the mistake was pulling the movie based on the threat, not the movie itself.

  • I personally think it was all one big PR stunt. And I don’t think the NK government had anything to do with the hacking. But I do want to see this and that American Sniper movie, that Sniper movie will be bad a**. Reminds me of the days I used to want to be a Sniper.

    • I don’t know enough about it to say NK did it for sure, but based off all the legal ramifications Sony has been facing, it was definitely not a PR stunt.

    • yeah great marketing and PR move….Sony spent almost a 100 million to make, produce, promote a movie, then released private information about themselves, wrote death threats to movie theaters, got the media to buy into everything, got the media to sensationalize everything, blamed everything on a sovereign country, just to fullfill it’s master plan of releasing it on youtube and google play

      • Well knowing how the American media likes to hype everything out of control yes I can see how most of this can be made it. “NK promises a 9/11 type attack if the movie is released”, “NK says it’s an act of war if movie is released” and yes a PR Stunt, Sony most likely made more selling it this way than they would have if they released it in theatres without the hype.

      • Don’t forget they released several other upcoming blockbusters to the internet for free bittorrenting too.

    • Well, personally, you’re an idiot.

      Sony was hacked, whether that was done by ex-employees or not, they’ve been under a cyber attack which has cost them 10s of millions of dollars.

      Anyone who thinks this is a PR stunt is a fking moron, you included. People’s SS#’s are being sold online, emails showing racist jokes about the President between Sony execs have been released.

      This is not a joke, this is not a PR stunt. The film would have easily made back its 44 million dollar budget and most likely made a solid profit, but now it had to be released online and will most likely cost Sony at least 75 million due to its budget + advertising budget. That’s not counting the hundreds of millions that it’s costing them to fix the thousands of problems that the cyber attack has caused them.

      But I’m glad you’re excited for that “badass sniper movie,” you sound like a great patriot. Fking moron.

      • Awww did I hurt your feelings you little sensitive prick. The movie sucked I’m mad I wasted my time downloading (didn’t pay for it) that trash. No wonder they wanted to hype it up, they knew it was trash. Get a life.

    • dprk denied, would it be unheard of if it was just a marketing stunt by sony? they sure got ton of free advertising

        • agreed. but if it was dprk, why not leak the movie too? they know it would have been released sooner or later, why not hit sony financially.

          • Part of the reason they do not want it released is they do not want it to be shown to their citizens. There people view Kim Jong Un like a god. South Korean activisits sends stuff across the border all the time with balloons.

          • Apparently you don’t understand NK. They don’t want anyone seeing their supreme leader being killed or made fun of…. If they were responsible, why would they release the movie when their intention was specifically to keep Sony from releasing the film?

        • But this is the internet where everything is an extravagant conspiracy, no matter how poor the logic.

      • The same US Govt that called the movie a mistake? Obama doesn’t have the balls to do something like this.

        • I believe they said canceling it was a mistake. They had OKs from the State Department, etc.

          Obama doesn’t have the balls nor does Sony…

        • You clearly didn’t follow the story. The government (Obama) publicly stated that pulling the movie was a mistake and set a terrible precedent for future attacks. They did not say “making” the movie was a mistake at any point.

    • Nothing more american than buying “the interview” using Google play credit I kept for myself from a Chromecast gift.

    • All Heil Kim Jon-Un

      You Corrupted Capitalist Pigs will pay with incontinence for watching this. All Infidel Dogs who watch this movie will Pay… 5.99

      • I highly doubt they made themselves look like complete idiots by releasing their employees social security numbers and making racial comments about the president in order to promote a B rated comedy.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts

back to top