The Sony Hacker Terrorists Did Not ‘Win’
That’s the general tone of the uproar surrounding the Interview brouhaha (or “Interview-haha™”), and some of that agita is understandable. The First Amendment is our most cherished freedom, and the cancellation of this film’s theatrical release is an offense against that freedom, in spirit if not in substance. According to the U.S. government, there is “linkage” between the North Korean government and the hack of Sony, and subsequent threats of violence at theaters showing The Interview. That government has openly criticized the film, which depicts a fictional plot to assassinate Kim Jong-Un.
According to federal law enforcement agencies, there’s no “credible” information to indicate a plot to attack theaters, and in an interview with ABC News’ David Muir, President Obama said that we should absolutely take the hack seriously, but otherwise just calm the f*ck down…READ MORE
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Tommy Christopher
Tommy Christopher is The Daily Banter's White House Correspondent and Political Analyst. He's been a political reporter and liberal commentator since 2007, and has covered the White House since the beginning of the Obama administration, first for PoliticsDaily, and then for Mediaite. Christopher is a frequent guest on a variety of television, radio, and online programs, and was the villain in the documentaries The Audacity of Democracy and Hating Breitbart. He's also That Guy Who Live-Tweeted His Own Heart Attack, and the only person to have ever received public apologies from both Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
Red Eye Robot December 18th, 2014 at 15:22
Liberal Hollywood buckles to “No Credible Threat” sounds even braver
Red Eye Robot December 18th, 2014 at 16:22
Liberal Hollywood buckles to “No Credible Threat” sounds even braver
roscoboxer December 18th, 2014 at 15:25
I wasn’t interested at all in seeing the movie. But now I absolutely would go to a theater and watch it. That may not be logical, but the idea that another country can have a movie cancelled …really steams my buns!
neworleans878 December 18th, 2014 at 16:42
I’m with you…saw the Last Temptation of Christ back in ’88 only because so many “Christians” were picketing it and calling for theaters not to show it. Movie made a lot more money than it otherwise would have because the hullabaloo surrounding it…with out it, the movie probably would have died quickly.
s…I thought the move stunk. Just like this one probably does, but Kim jong Brat is giving it life it never would have had.
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 16:46
Barbara Hershey was worth the price of admission, though.
R.J. Carter December 18th, 2014 at 17:26
It’s this year’s “Last Temptation of Christ.”
roscoboxer December 18th, 2014 at 16:25
I wasn’t interested at all in seeing the movie. But now I absolutely would go to a theater and watch it. That may not be logical, but the idea that another country can have a movie cancelled …really steams my buns!
nola878 December 18th, 2014 at 17:42
I’m with you…saw the Last Temptation of Christ back in ’88 only because so many “Christians” were picketing it and calling for theaters not to show it. Movie made a lot more money than it otherwise would have because the hullabaloo surrounding it…with out it, the movie probably would have died quickly.
s…I thought the move stunk. Just like this one probably does, but Kim jong Brat is giving it life it never would have had.
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 17:46
Barbara Hershey was worth the price of admission, though.
R.J. Carter December 18th, 2014 at 18:26
It’s this year’s “Last Temptation of Christ.”
Carla Akins December 18th, 2014 at 15:32
FFS, the movie should never be released because it’s another Appatow et al puerile re-do. But to let North Korea call the shots? I don’t think so.
ChrisVosburg December 18th, 2014 at 16:17
Agreed, from the handfull of trailers and reviews I’ve seen, it seems to be a stunningly unfunny turd of a movie, and I note that before this hacking fuss broke out, they weren’t giving it much of a promotion– not so much “releasing” it as “throwing it out the back door in disgust”– and that may be part of why Sony gave it up so easily.
Me, I’ll never understand the appeal of the Seth Rogen brand of humor, I guess (or Adam Sandler for that matter).
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 16:20
Add in Will Ferrell to that group, too.
Carla Akins December 18th, 2014 at 16:32
FFS, the movie should never be released because it’s another Appatow et al puerile re-do. But to let North Korea call the shots? I don’t think so.
ChrisVosburg December 18th, 2014 at 17:17
Agreed, from the handfull of trailers and reviews I’ve seen, it seems to be a stunningly unfunny turd of a movie, and I note that before this hacking fuss broke out, they weren’t giving it much of a promotion– not so much “releasing” it as “throwing it out the back door in disgust”– and that may be part of why Sony gave it up so easily.
Me, I’ll never understand the appeal of the Seth Rogen brand of humor, I guess (or Adam Sandler for that matter).
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 17:20
Add in Will Ferrell to that group, too.
AnthonyLook December 18th, 2014 at 15:55
The South Park crew never retreated, at least willingly. A tradition of despot satire is forever impacted. Directors, producers, actors… will be twice shy hence forth. Terrible precedence has been set.
AnthonyLook December 18th, 2014 at 16:55
The South Park crew never retreated, at least willingly. A tradition of despot satire is forever impacted. Directors, producers, actors… will be twice shy hence forth. Terrible precedence has been set.
edmeyer_able December 18th, 2014 at 15:57
Considering the fact that the theater that was shot up by james holmes is being sued by some of those injured, Sony would have been held liable or at least sued by any patron who suffered the slightest injury in a theater or complex where this “bomb” would have been viewed.
IMO it is the state of litigation in the US that has made showing this film a “risky business”.
————————————————————————————————————-
This opinion was just stated by MSM …………HA @9:30 Monday morning.
edmeyer_able December 18th, 2014 at 16:57
Considering the fact that the theater that was shot up by james holmes is being sued by some of those injured, Sony would have been held liable or at least sued by any patron who suffered the slightest injury in a theater or complex where this “bomb” would have been viewed.
IMO it is the state of litigation in the US that has made showing this film a “risky business”.
————————————————————————————————————-
This opinion was just stated by MSM …………HA @9:30 Monday morning.
ChrisVosburg December 18th, 2014 at 16:05
Greetings from Hollywood.
Sadly, the industry has a long and storied history of losing their shit when vaguely threatened, as with the shameful name-naming of the red-scare fifties or the aftermath of the 9-11 attack.
In the latter incident, Warner Brothers gets special marks for inspired lunacy. They were convinced that as the center of the civilized world, terrorists would of course turn their bomb laden trucks toward them, and so they took steps to fortify the WB Burbank lot.
In retrospect it seems completely crazy, but believe it or not, all gates but the main gate were closed, and the entire lot was barricaded behind concrete road barriers, as was the corporate office building across the street. You had to stand for a frisk when entering, which made it a complete pain in the ass to get on and off the lot.
As you might guess, the whole town was laughing about it for months.
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 16:18
Yeah, and let’s remember that Sony is a Japanese company that will knuckle under if Abe and other leaders decide that pulling the movie is in their national interests.
BillTheCat45 December 18th, 2014 at 17:15
The movie chains, based in America, are the main cowards. We own that.
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 18:24
True enough. But, this lets them escape from the low seat revenue they would otherwise get from this likely stinker and run something else in those theaters!
ChrisVosburg December 18th, 2014 at 17:05
Greetings from Hollywood.
Sadly, the industry has a long and storied history of losing their shit when vaguely threatened, as with the shameful name-naming of the red-scare fifties or the aftermath of the 9-11 attack.
In the latter incident, Warner Brothers gets special marks for inspired lunacy. They were convinced that as the center of the civilized world, terrorists would of course turn their bomb laden trucks toward them, and so they took steps to fortify the WB Burbank lot.
In retrospect it seems completely crazy, but believe it or not, all gates but the main gate were closed, and the entire lot was barricaded behind concrete road barriers, as was the corporate office building across the street. You had to stand for a frisk when entering, which made it a complete pain in the ass to get on and off the lot.
As you might guess, the whole town was laughing about it for months.
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 17:18
Yeah, and let’s remember that Sony is a Japanese company that will knuckle under if Abe and other leaders decide that pulling the movie is in their national interests.
BillTheCat45 December 18th, 2014 at 18:15
The movie chains, based in America, are the main cowards. We own that.
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 19:24
True enough. But, this lets them escape from the low seat revenue they would otherwise get from this likely stinker and run something else in those theaters!
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 16:43
Sorry, Tommy. But, this is commercial speech and Sony, or any other company can make business decisions for whatever reasons they choose. Including knuckling under to North Korea and the BoD in Japan without it being a First Amendment issue.
R.J. Carter December 18th, 2014 at 17:28
Viking Press might have given them some pointers on how to find one’s testicles. (They published “The Satanic Verses.”)
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 18:24
There’s a good point!
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 17:43
Sorry, Tommy. But, this is commercial speech and Sony, or any other company can make business decisions for whatever reasons they choose. Including knuckling under to North Korea and the BoD in Japan without it being a First Amendment issue.
R.J. Carter December 18th, 2014 at 18:28
Viking Press might have given them some pointers on how to find one’s testicles. (They published “The Satanic Verses.”)
tiredoftea December 18th, 2014 at 19:24
There’s a good point!
BillTheCat45 December 18th, 2014 at 17:14
Really, they didn’t win? Tommy, do you have a different word that means the opposite of losing? Because last I checked, the COWARDS at the movie chains and Sony folded like cheap suits.
AND GET THIS: News is now that Paramount has dis-allowed ANYONE from showing “Team America” in it’s place. THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS DEAD, Grats you coward losers.
Critical Blast December 18th, 2014 at 17:18
It’s time for South Park to step up.
How about some community park screenings of Team America?
BillTheCat45 December 18th, 2014 at 18:14
Really, they didn’t win? Tommy, do you have a different word that means the opposite of losing? Because last I checked, the COWARDS at the movie chains and Sony folded like cheap suits.
AND GET THIS: News is now that Paramount has dis-allowed ANYONE from showing “Team America” in it’s place. THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS DEAD, Grats you coward losers.
Critical Blast December 18th, 2014 at 18:18
It’s time for South Park to step up.
How about some community park screenings of Team America?
R.J. Carter December 18th, 2014 at 17:43
Overall, Sony got:
(a) an excuse NOT to release a ‘bomb’ (no pun intended) of a film
(b) free advertising for upcoming films that hadn’t been marketed
(c) feedback from a worldwide focus group on film ideas
Maybe we should ask how much Sony paid Kim Jong Il to get upset?
R.J. Carter December 18th, 2014 at 18:43
Overall, Sony got:
(a) an excuse NOT to release a ‘bomb’ (no pun intended) of a film
(b) free advertising for upcoming films that hadn’t been marketed
(c) feedback from a worldwide focus group on film ideas
Maybe we should ask how much Sony paid Kim Jong Il to get upset?
Jack E Raynbeau December 18th, 2014 at 20:15
Not a 1st Amendment issue.
Jack E Raynbeau December 18th, 2014 at 21:15
Not a 1st Amendment issue.