The Spirited Back Nine ...

PhotoDave219

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
Bairstow said:
But that's the beauty part.
"North Korea" didn't do anything; the "Guardians of Peace" did.
Doing all of this through an officially unaffiliated hacker group gives North Korea complete plausible deniability. Well, deniability, at least.
Because Interpol isn't allowed to act on North Korean soil and the entire world is too afraid to ruffle Pyongyang's feathers, North Korea's disavowed hacker attack groups get to act worldwide with complete impunity. Sony's capitulation proves their invincibility, at least in the current geopolitical climate, and you can bet we're going to see many similar hacks, threats, and attacks in the near future.
Click to expand...

Yes, I read the wired article… I have my doubts as to whether North Korea actually get it.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
thehowiet said:
LOL. So because it was a terrible movie it's ok to give in? What if it was a REALLY good movie?

Also, your first and second sentences appear to be in slight conflict... So you believe in freedom of speech, but only when it's convenient?
Click to expand...
I'll have to interject here that the freedom of speech does not allow someone to yell FIRE in a crowded theater. Things that can cause harm to others that have no control over it, are not covered under freedom of speech. All that entitles us to do is criticize our government and it's leaders. Freedom of Speech is a vague concept in a dictatorship and a highly misunderstood one in our democracy.
 
the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
Goofyernmost said:
I'll have to interject here that the freedom of speech does not allow someone to yell FIRE in a crowded theater. Things that can cause harm to others that have no control over it, are not covered under freedom of speech. All that entitles us to do is criticize our government and it's leaders. Freedom of Speech is a vague concept in a dictatorship and a highly misunderstood one in our democracy.
Click to expand...
It's not that Freedom of Speech is misunderstood, it's that any speech that attacks the head of a dictatorship is a threat. For a dictator or despot to remain in power, he or she must be willing to use absolute force to ensure they maintain their high, but incredibly fragile position. North Korea, through the "Guardians of Peace" has done this.

I linked to the Frontline documentary for a reason. Kim Jung Un does not have the grip on the dictatorship that his father Il had. The DPRK's inability to feed its people has allowed for a black market to emerge. This black market in addition to selling food and clothing also deals in foriegn media. Activists from the South have been smuggling flash drives, DVDs, CDs and other electronics into the country. These materials allow northern state to see what the outside is really like, not what central leadership and the dictators want them to see. Seth Rogen wondered what North Koreans would have thought of the film, had it been released, he would know. There has also been a desire in some of the higher ranks to open up the country, which would lead to the collapse of the dictatorship. Un, through his secret police, has been aggressively purging the ranks for anyone who may harbor such views.

The Interview very well could have been the last straw that broke the regime by embarrassing Un so thoroughly, but unless things change, we will not know.
 
Last edited:
thehowiet

thehowiet

Wilson King of Prussia
Goofyernmost said:
I'll have to interject here that the freedom of speech does not allow someone to yell FIRE in a crowded theater. Things that can cause harm to others that have no control over it, are not covered under freedom of speech. All that entitles us to do is criticize our government and it's leaders. Freedom of Speech is a vague concept in a dictatorship and a highly misunderstood one in our democracy.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that this movie is akin to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater? If so, I disagree. If not, I'm not sure what your point is.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
thehowiet said:
Are you saying that this movie is akin to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater? If so, I disagree. If not, I'm not sure what your point is.
Click to expand...
In a way I am yes. If there have been threats to blow up a theater then pushing to have that film shown is the same panic inducing end result. Plus possibly deadly. I cannot speak for anyone else, but, there isn't a star in that movie that I would risk my life to see, even under the guise of "principle". It's not the hill that I choose to die on!
 
the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
If @WDW1974 makes a SPIRITED Christmas appearance, you should ask him about the time Michael Eisner overruled his underlings by releasing Martin Scorsese's film "Kundun", about the current Dalai Lama, over their objections it would harm TWDC's future business opportunities in China. Last time I checked Disney films get wide releases, they're building Shanghai Disneyland, and the Disney BRAND is very popular among the Chinese people.
 
thehowiet

thehowiet

Wilson King of Prussia
Goofyernmost said:
In a way I am yes. If there have been threats to blow up a theater then pushing to have that film shown is the same panic inducing end result. Plus possibly deadly. I cannot speak for anyone else, but, there isn't a star in that movie that I would risk my life to see, even under the guise of "principle". It's not the hill that I choose to die on!
Click to expand...

Like I said before, I disagree. I just choose not to live my life in fear. I don't believe that we as Americans should have to change the way we live because somebody else doesn't approve, but that's just me.

You and I will clearly never see eye to eye on this so I'm going to excuse myself from this conversation, but you're more than welcome to have the last word, if you so choose. After all, that is your right.
 
Bairstow

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
the.dreamfinder said:
If @WDW1974 makes a SPIRITED Christmas appearance, you should ask him about the time Michael Eisner overruled his underlings by releasing Martin Scorsese's film "Kundun", about the current Dalai Lama, over their objections it would harm TWDC's future business opportunities in China. Last time I checked Disney films get wide releases, they're building Shanghai Disneyland, and the Disney BRAND is very popular among the Chinese people.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing, but Kundun is ancient history; that was a very different era when the economic throwing weight of China and the influence of Beijing was very different.
Today, the Chinese movie market for western releases is so lucrative that the Chinese government regularly gets to make script review changes to US blockbusters and most US studios happily oblige them.
Disney included.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...d11e08-b62e-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html

 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
thehowiet said:
Like I said before, I disagree. I just choose not to live my life in fear. I don't believe that we as Americans should have to change the way we live because somebody else doesn't approve, but that's just me.

You and I will clearly never see eye to eye on this so I'm going to excuse myself from this conversation, but you're more than welcome to have the last word, if you so choose. After all, that is your right.
Click to expand...
Not a problem, I really said what I thought and wasn't going to argue it anyway, but, but I am a little confused. You asked me a question, I answered it and that was the only back and forth that we had, that I remember. You make it sound like we were having a massive argument. We weren't and still aren't.

But as a last word, if you are willing to risk your life over a movie, that's your choice. I prefer to risk it for something more important.
 
thehowiet

thehowiet

Wilson King of Prussia
the.dreamfinder said:
If @WDW1974 makes a SPIRITED Christmas appearance, you should ask him about the time Michael Eisner overruled his underlings by releasing Martin Scorsese's film "Kundun", about the current Dalai Lama, over their objections it would harm TWDC's future business opportunities in China. Last time I checked Disney films get wide releases, they're building Shanghai Disneyland, and the Disney BRAND is very popular among the Chinese people.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a SPIRITED Christmas post on Magic is going to be his gift to TWDC execs this season ;)
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
SJN1279 said:
Sony should have never greenlighted this terrible premise for a movie anyway. Would a major studio back a comedy about the assassination of Obama? From all the accounts the movie was a lemon, and not worth the hassle.
Click to expand...
That's 100% irrelevant.

This is a 1st amendment issue and Americans all have the right to choose whether or not they want to see the movie. Sony and effectively our country has given up the 1st amendment for fear of retaliation from a country led by a murderer. Sony should have released this movie for free online. It would have eliminated the safety concern while showing kim jong un that he can't dictate our freedoms.
 
DisDan

DisDan

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
That's 100% irrelevant.

This is a 1st amendment issue and Americans all have the right to choose whether or not they want to see the movie. Sony and effectively our country has given up the 1st amendment for fear of retaliation from a country led by a murderer. Sony should have released this movie for free online. It would have eliminated the safety concern while showing kim jong un that he can't dictate our freedoms.
Click to expand...

Well, Sony is a business first and foremost. Pulling the movie from the theaters was out of their control as the individual Theater companies forced their hand by succumbing to the fear of terror attacks based on the threats which were made. Sony will more than likely still release this movie at some point, either in the theaters or direct to DVD/BR and streaming. What does Sony gain from forcing the issue with showing the movie? If in fact terror attacks do happen as a result of them forcing the issue with the movie that is probably worse than not releasing the movie for the time being.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
DisDan said:
Well, Sony is a business first and foremost. Pulling the movie from the theaters was out of their control as the individual Theater companies forced their hand by succumbing to the fear of terror attacks based on the threats which were made. Sony will more than likely still release this movie at some point, either in the theaters or direct to DVD/BR and streaming. What does Sony gain from forcing the issue with showing the movie? If in fact terror attacks do happen as a result of them forcing the issue with the movie that is probably worse than not releasing the movie for the time being.
Click to expand...
Sony could use some good PR right now... Publicly succumbing to a threat regarding the release of one of your movies doesn't improve that PR issue.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom