After
all the hoopla, Sony scrapped the release of "The Interview" anyway.
Maybe some leaked copies will get on YouTube. As expected, film
personalities boldly came out on Twitter to protest the move and
tisk-tisk Sony. But to me that exemplifies their typical out-of-touch
Hollywood elite behavior.
Sony has a legal responsibility
to its shareholders (and the safety of its workers and assets - esp.
Sony Japan that begged the company from the start not to take on the
project). Major theater chains decided not to show the film anyway due
to threats. And Sony is not a freedom fighting org with "principles" or
whatever - they are a business. It's not all about artistic absolutes.
Sure, in a perfect world, a thespian wouldn't be subjected to any
restrictions or censorship. But we self-censor all the time; we just
understandably don't like it when a foreign egomaniac jerkwad dictator
tells us what to do (and he is successful). It's a bitter pill to
swallow, but what other choice did Sony have? The hackers still have
access to their network, the company is in disarray (and many key
industry relationships are shot due to the leaks), and it's likely the
most
expensive
known hack in cyber warfare history (~$150MM or higher). They don't
want to have any deaths or int'l incidents on their hands, even if the
chances are slim.
It's one thing if Sony was going to
release a doc or serious film about human rights abuses in NK or some
other "work of value". But all art is not created equal, and this is
just some Franco-Rogen popcorn fluff like "Pineapple Express." It might
get some laughs, but it won't change the world and won't win any awards.
In fact, the
reviews
so far have been pretty ho-hum. So why sacrifice so much for such a
project? I guess Sony execs tried to take a chance, and I know hindsight
is 20/20, but you wonder what they were thinking (or not thinking).
If
another nation made a film about killing Obama, I am pretty sure the US
would call for a boycott or worse (well, maybe the GOP would like it).
OK, if another nation made a movie depicting Reagan as a homosexual
doofus, and then he gets gruesomely assassinated in the end by Zombie
Hitler - that would piss a lot of Americans off. Maybe we wouldn't
commit an act of war against that nation, but we wouldn't just accept it
as artistic license. Our actors wouldn't Tweet their support for the
right for that movie to be made. So we can't have a double standard - we
already have so little moral credibility in the world. Frankly, a film
like that makes us look like insensitive, immature pricks. In other
words, typical Americans.
I do want to protect the rights
of guys like Rogen to make whatever "art" they want. If Rogen made the
film on his dime, sure he can decide how he wants to distribute it
(assuming media agrees to show it), and suffer the consequences himself.
But Sony bankrolled the film, it's their property/problem now, and they
can do what they like. They don't owe it to anyone to release it. I do
believe in free speech, but I am not ready to give my life (or sacrifice
others) to protect that project, when there are so many other critical
free speech and civil rights issues unresolved (we still remember
Ferguson, don't we?). Maybe that is my weakness - true defenders of
freedom should be willing to give their lives to protect the freedoms of
even horrible people. I don't see the Hollywood elites lining up to put
their lives on the line for "The Interview" either though.
No comments:
Post a Comment