Nork-ribbing flick The Interview AXED: Sony caves under hack terror 'menace' Sony Pictures has confirmed the inevitable and cancelled the December 25 launch of The Interview after most major theater chains refused to run it. "The ability of our guests to enjoy the entertainment they choose in safety and comfort is and will continue to be a priority for theater owners," said the National Association of …
That seems far more likely. I dont see the terrorism threat at all. "Hackers" have never delivered physicle violence, they dont want to leave their bedrooms. Even if its Norks - they havent got the reach to inflict violence on NY cinema goers. If it was that other bunch of psychos.... that'd be a differrent story
"no great loss" <--- ???
Ahh, yes, nothing like professional critics with their solid, historic contributions to ... ummm... art and culture? If you base your decision to watch a film, listen to a record, or go see an art show, on a critical review by paid haters, you're missing out on a whole lot of beauty.
This could be the best-selling DVD of all time…if Sony were smart.
And if the NORKs were smart, they'd fund their own movie of the assassination of Barak Obama, staring Jackie Chan and Lucy Liu.
But neither organization is smart, which goes to show that…drum roll…two dumbs don't make a bright.
Are you being sarcastic? If so, your presentation is poor. It's a major stretch to interpret your comment as some sort of free speech claim rather than as a racist attack on President Obama.
Are you trying to say the terrorists should have come up with millions of dollars to fund their own assassination movie, or, as seems to be the case, you are saying you would approve of and presumably pay to see a movie about the assassination of Obama?
There have been movies about plots to assassinate the president before. The only difference is they didn't use the same/likeness of the current president.
Not sure why you claim it is a "racist" attack. Would it be OK if Romney was president and he suggested Sony funding a film about assassinating him? You couldn't call that racist, so what would your objection be then? You seem to be playing the race card a bit quickly here, maybe you should wait until someone actually says something racist first.
The NORKs did this, basically, last year:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/9939715/N-Korea-video-shows-Washington-under-attack.html
"another [...] depicted US soldiers and President Barack Obama burning in the flames of a nuclear blast."
This could be the best-selling DVD of all time…if Sony were smart.
Yes but since a lot of these DVDs are made in cheap factories in the far east and printed by a machine what if the North Koreans hacked the machines producing it and the DVD release of the film was made with a rootkit on the disc, so people playing it on a computer got infected!?
What this means is that EVERY future movie project will be considered in terms of the risk of a "release-killing terrorist threat". Anything that is too provocative or risky will never even be made because the studio will be afraid of losing the entire investment.
In addition, you can look forward to the terrorists pushing the line to see exactly which movies they can censor. Well, "look forward" is too soft. Rather you can count on it. The precedent has been clearly established, even if the movie itself was a muddled message.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice ≠ (Beer | Speech)
You do NOT have the freedom to choose to watch this movie, so this is a place where free speech crosses into the freedom area.
Is now? You just noticed it today? That was proven in the response to 9/11, where freedoms were taken from us and and the sheep applauded it in every poll I saw. Even now look at all the people who say Snowden is a traitor and don't see anything wrong with the government spying on everything and everyone so long as it saves one person from a terrorist attack.
If only the Soviets had known they could have beaten us not through nukes, tanks and propaganda, but by simply making us so afraid we'd willingly hand over our freedoms. I'll bet the old guard hardliners that are still alive in the Moscow nursing homes are kicking themselves to sleep every night.
Thing is, at least the Soviets were reasonably rational and wouldn't have fired the nukes unless actually threatened. That's why Mutual Assured Destruction worked with them.
With the Norks...you're not so sure. Kim Jong Un may well consider World War III preferable to the movie being released. What do you do against a madman with no regard for life and his finger pressed on a Dead Man's Switch?
This post has been deleted by its author
And if the criminals are backed by a rogue state and know where you and your family live and have threatened to blow up your house while you sleep? That's the level of the threat being posed right now: it's getting personal.
Also, don't forget that the Norks carry what's considered the ultimate trump card. Even if they don't turn nukes on America, there's always Seoul to worry about. A target that close they don't need to shoot a missile; it can just be smuggled in Sum of All Fears-style.
And if the criminals are backed by a rogue state and know where you and your family live and have threatened to blow up your house while you sleep? That's the level of the threat being posed right now: it's getting personal.
This just shows the irrational level of fear to which America has sunk.
Come ON! There is no likelihood of this threat being acted upon, the resources necessary to carry out the threat make it impossible, even for "a rogue state".
Not thinking so much the US (though if they did, think a high-altitude blast over South Dakota--just ONE EMP's bound to be murder). But what about Seoul? That alone could be enough to seriously destabilize the region, would be pretty easy for them to pull off (Seoul's within artillery range of the DMZ), and recall Kim Jong Un isn't exactly what one would call the rational sort.
"Come ON! There is no likelihood of this threat being acted upon, the resources necessary to carry out the threat make it impossible, even for "a rogue state"."
Three guys with fertilizer, diesel, and a rent-a-truck demolished a major building in Oklahoma City 20 years ago, without any state backing. A bunch of guys turned airliners into fuel bombs in 2001. The Target and Home Depot hacks and now Sony Pictures (perhaps even the mother company). Who are we to prove what's possible and what's not in today's society?
"If you change your behaviour based on the actions of criminals then the criminals have won anyway.If you change your behaviour based on the actions of criminals then the criminals have won anyway."
So the criminals win when you use a firewall or an anti-virus/anti-malware app? Sounds to me like a pretty stupid point of view.
The Norks are lucky to have electricity, let alone Internet access. No, if the West wants the Nork proles to see the movie, it'll have to be smuggled in on DVD via South Korea's North resistance groups.
As for canning the movie altogether, did they say outright that this was a permanent cancellation or just an "until further notice" postponement meant to delay the movie until after the hectic holiday period? Or it could be a bait and switch. Lie about delaying the move than release it anyway.
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
