Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
THE INTERVIEW
Posts
pianotm
View playlists
Closeauthor=karins_soulkeeper
Err.. Must've over-reacted a bit. Sorry :3
But my point is that: it is not a very smart move to provoke someone that is unpredictable. Might as well just stop making fun of him before he does something rash..
Like behead a relative?
Yes, Max, this is the kind of guy we're talking about. Still, censoring TWO movies over it is some lame duck bullshit. Kim Jong-il never cared. Kim Jong-un is spoiled brat. Show the Interview, dammit. Let's see that crappy comedy.
But my point is that: it is not a very smart move to provoke someone that is unpredictable. Might as well just stop making fun of him before he does something rash..
I'm sorry but fuck this cowardly bullshit. There is a word for this kind of thinking and that word is appeasement. Just because someone is a tyrannical asshole dictator is no good reason not to make fun of them. In fact, it's quite the opposite. I hope the entire might of the US military apparatus is awakened to punch North Korea very very hard right in its collective micropenis.
Fear of what Hitler might do didn't stop Charlie Chaplin from taking the piss out of Hitler. Movie people used to have fucking guts. And integrity.
It's a business decision; there's no principle here.
Theater networks dropped their deals to screen the movie, something like 19,700 different theaters, in response to terror threats. Some officials within those theater networks complained that they had even been corralled into making such a decision by the obstinacy of Sony, who fully planned to release the movie. It was only then, with the revelation of next to no screening revenue, that the movie was withdrawn. Sony wouldn't have made any money off of a release, and, in addition, would have accrued negative publicity for such a brazen move.
Theater networks dropped their deals to screen the movie, something like 19,700 different theaters, in response to terror threats. Some officials within those theater networks complained that they had even been corralled into making such a decision by the obstinacy of Sony, who fully planned to release the movie. It was only then, with the revelation of next to no screening revenue, that the movie was withdrawn. Sony wouldn't have made any money off of a release, and, in addition, would have accrued negative publicity for such a brazen move.
author=karin
Might as well just stop making fun of him before he does something rash..
No sorry this is dumb. You can make an argument that a company reserves the right to make a busines decision for whatever reason they want, but on a principle level, no one will, or should stop creative expression for the sake of a nutjob getting a temper tantrum. That's not the kind of behavior the international community should abide or abet.
Sorry for wanting to avoid unnecessary and pointless conflict.
Anyways, just because it's off the theaters doesn't mean it's off the planet. Sooner or later, that film'll pop up in TPB or somewhere else; and blocking its theater screening won't make much of a difference by then.
Anyways, just because it's off the theaters doesn't mean it's off the planet. Sooner or later, that film'll pop up in TPB or somewhere else; and blocking its theater screening won't make much of a difference by then.
author=Karin
Sorry for wanting to avoid unnecessary and pointless conflict.
Nobody wants that, but appeasing dictators isn't the way to go.
Housekeeping
3571
If this ends up being a marketing ploy, I'm going to be more pissed than if the threat was real.
There is also the line of thought that since a lot of authorities are saying the risk of an actual attack is negligible, Sony may instead of afraid of more of their data being leaked out, possible shady shit.
It seems obvious to me that the risk of an actual attack is negligible...that theory, Feld, makes a lot more sense than what it looks like on the outside, which is that the entire world has just forgotten over night the difference between a threat and a CREDIBLE threat.
Dyhalto
7536
@Folks regarding WW3
Just to be clear, I never said Seth Rogen's movie would start WW3.
Not matter of factly, anyway.
Chancellor Otto von Bismarck said "Europe today is a powder keg and the leaders are like men smoking in an arsenal … A single spark will set off an explosion that will consume us all … I cannot tell you when that explosion will occur, but I can tell you where … Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans will set it off."
Sure enough, WW1 was set off by some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.
Case scenario : North Korea bombs US theaters, kills hundreds, and claims responsibility. This is a pretty blatant act of war, so the US has to respond in some way. Retaliation will only exacerbate the situation, so logic decrees it be rectified diplomatically with help from China (whispering into Kim Jong-Un's ear).
What if it goes another way? What if A) The US wants blood, or B) China wants to defend North Korea to protect their own interests? Suddenly, the Korea issue is back on the table and there you have it: Two nuclear superpowers glaring at each other in open hostility. We'll only have a cold war if we're lucky.
Anyway, my point was : Why poke an already angry tiger? Is your childish defiance really worth people's lives? It might've been you or someone you know in one of those theaters.
Also a missed point, Sony was persuaded by theater networks (thanks Zachary_Braun) to drop the film. It's well within their right to be self-defensive, especially when they won't actually lose anything (moviegoers will just go see other films).
All this hubbub about artistic suppression is just people blowing a simple thing out of proportion.
It would be pretty awesome of history books pointed to Seth Rogen's The Interview as the cause of WW3 though. Especially if the movie sucks.
Comments like this make me wish I weren't Max's ignore list.
Could somebody do me a small favor and quote my next sentence so Max can see it?
Because this has absolutely nothing to do with Free Speech in any way whatsoever.
Comments like this make me glad I'm on Max's ignore list.
What a complete and total buffoon. Relishing in the idea of a catastrophic war that will destroy civilization in parts of the world and kill literally millions, just for your own selfish pleasure to see IRL Joffrey given the gears? I've never met anybody with such a perfect mixture of sheer ignorance, officiousness, and reckless abandon. You're such a fucking stooge.
Just to be clear, I never said Seth Rogen's movie would start WW3.
Not matter of factly, anyway.
Chancellor Otto von Bismarck said "Europe today is a powder keg and the leaders are like men smoking in an arsenal … A single spark will set off an explosion that will consume us all … I cannot tell you when that explosion will occur, but I can tell you where … Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans will set it off."
Sure enough, WW1 was set off by some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.
Case scenario : North Korea bombs US theaters, kills hundreds, and claims responsibility. This is a pretty blatant act of war, so the US has to respond in some way. Retaliation will only exacerbate the situation, so logic decrees it be rectified diplomatically with help from China (whispering into Kim Jong-Un's ear).
What if it goes another way? What if A) The US wants blood, or B) China wants to defend North Korea to protect their own interests? Suddenly, the Korea issue is back on the table and there you have it: Two nuclear superpowers glaring at each other in open hostility. We'll only have a cold war if we're lucky.
Anyway, my point was : Why poke an already angry tiger? Is your childish defiance really worth people's lives? It might've been you or someone you know in one of those theaters.
Also a missed point, Sony was persuaded by theater networks (thanks Zachary_Braun) to drop the film. It's well within their right to be self-defensive, especially when they won't actually lose anything (moviegoers will just go see other films).
All this hubbub about artistic suppression is just people blowing a simple thing out of proportion.
It would be pretty awesome of history books pointed to Seth Rogen's The Interview as the cause of WW3 though. Especially if the movie sucks.
author=Max McGee
What the fuck why does no one care about Freedom of Speech?
Comments like this make me wish I weren't Max's ignore list.
Could somebody do me a small favor and quote my next sentence so Max can see it?
Because this has absolutely nothing to do with Free Speech in any way whatsoever.
author=Max McGee
Anyway I would LOVE IT if the US actually went to war with North Korea.
Comments like this make me glad I'm on Max's ignore list.
What a complete and total buffoon. Relishing in the idea of a catastrophic war that will destroy civilization in parts of the world and kill literally millions, just for your own selfish pleasure to see IRL Joffrey given the gears? I've never met anybody with such a perfect mixture of sheer ignorance, officiousness, and reckless abandon. You're such a fucking stooge.
author=Dyhalto
Case scenario : North Korea bombs US theaters, kills hundreds, and claims responsibility.
Wow ok.
Why would NK ever do this? North Korea is a weird crazy country with a lot of shit they do off the chain, but their self preservation so far has been good enough to keep them from open war. You could argue from the basis of their back and forth with South Korea, but why would North Korea blatantly commit an act of aggression that would certainly end their existence?
Not even China would have a pretext for tolerating that shit; they value their closest trading partner (the US) and they'd have no reason to support North Korea when they just committed an act of war vs. the US (and by all extension, NATO). There is no scenario where NK bombing a bunch of theaters and claiming responsibility for it would end well for them. None. Zero. Zilch. Every end game in that scenario points to North Korea losing out. So let's take that off the front of the table, yes?
The likelier reason is that instead of unverified, unreliable, vague death threats, the hackers still have 99 TB left of the data they hacked from Sony to leverage with, most of which that's already been released is chock full of personal information, shit talking from produces about actors, shady shit, etc, so it stands the reason that Sony is very reluctant for whatever is in the 99 terabytes of unreleased hacked to be released by the hackers.
Oh look Sony is considering releasing the movie anyway so fuck terrorists.
https://fnews.com/sony-says-no-online-service-has-stepped-forward-to-distribute-the-interview-889f
Dyhalto
7536
Whoa, simmer down. When did I ever say that North Korea absolutely would go through with the theater threats?
At first we were talking about reasons why theaters/Sony would withdraw The Interview. They might have decided against showing the film (originally) due to the threats of a close-minded, spiteful child in charge of a militaristic nation acting on a whim, and his followers being loyal enough to go through with it.
Then you guys sidetracked me with the WW3 topic. The possibility of Pyongyang starting WW3 is very real. Deal with it.
You're right. Odds are, if Kim Jong-Un really was hellbent on triggering an international incident, one of his generals would shoot him in the back of the head and succession would move on to his next relative.
At first we were talking about reasons why theaters/Sony would withdraw The Interview. They might have decided against showing the film (originally) due to the threats of a close-minded, spiteful child in charge of a militaristic nation acting on a whim, and his followers being loyal enough to go through with it.
Then you guys sidetracked me with the WW3 topic. The possibility of Pyongyang starting WW3 is very real. Deal with it.
You're right. Odds are, if Kim Jong-Un really was hellbent on triggering an international incident, one of his generals would shoot him in the back of the head and succession would move on to his next relative.
If we're exploring 'what ifs' in terms of a worst case scenario, sure, I can dig that. Hell, it's pretty much what people in charge have to do. I get that.
But basically you were implying that some people were terrible people for wanting to start WWIII over a movie. I am just saying that's a pointless argument because North Korea pushing the 'bomb the US over a movie' button is slim to none. Even the possibility of Pyongyang starting WW3 is just that; a possibility. A pretty slim one.
Chances are any war with North Korea would just be 'someone vs. North Korea' and not 'someone vs. North Korea vs. China vs. everyone else.' People have this mistaken impression that China's backing of North Korea is absolute and that any North Korean conflict involves China by default. China's 'support' of NK is very tenuous at best currently and they're definitely not going to help NK start WW3.
This is still a very real free speech/creative expression argument, because the possibility of someone getting hurt over free speech has always existed and we can't start talking about getting scared now. That's what this is about. But WW3? Come on. Let's step back from that if we want to talk about this seriously.
But basically you were implying that some people were terrible people for wanting to start WWIII over a movie. I am just saying that's a pointless argument because North Korea pushing the 'bomb the US over a movie' button is slim to none. Even the possibility of Pyongyang starting WW3 is just that; a possibility. A pretty slim one.
Chances are any war with North Korea would just be 'someone vs. North Korea' and not 'someone vs. North Korea vs. China vs. everyone else.' People have this mistaken impression that China's backing of North Korea is absolute and that any North Korean conflict involves China by default. China's 'support' of NK is very tenuous at best currently and they're definitely not going to help NK start WW3.
This is still a very real free speech/creative expression argument, because the possibility of someone getting hurt over free speech has always existed and we can't start talking about getting scared now. That's what this is about. But WW3? Come on. Let's step back from that if we want to talk about this seriously.
The FBI (I think it was the FBI) released a report that North Korea WAS behind the Sony hacks
I knew Sony probably still had shit security since that PS3 crap happened a while back, but so bad that North Korea could get their stuff?
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
author=Dyhalto
Chancellor Otto von Bismarck said "Europe today is a powder keg and the leaders are like men smoking in an arsenal … A single spark will set off an explosion that will consume us all … I cannot tell you when that explosion will occur, but I can tell you where … Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans will set it off."
Sure enough, WW1 was set off by some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.
I thought Extra History's videos concerning the actions leading up to World War 1 was a pretty gripping series.
Dyhalto
7536
I repeat, Free Speech is not an issue here. Free Speech clauses are there to protect you from persecution by your government. They don't apply to a company that stops it's own product from reaching market.
The case for artistic expression is tenuous at best too.
Regardless of the various artists who worked on the film, the end result belongs to Sony. Maybe they changed their opinion of Kim Jong-Un and don't want to humiliate him, or maybe they were scared of reprisal for their artistically free depiction of him. Who knows? All we can ask is, is it really being suppressed if it's their own choice to not go through with it? This is their own inhibition making the decision. Artists will always have critics and philistines to deal with, and it becomes a personal choice to let them deter you from your passion/project.
Okay. I'll throw my last thoughts on the subject in a spoiler box in case you want to stop believing North Korea is a non-entity.
The case for artistic expression is tenuous at best too.
Regardless of the various artists who worked on the film, the end result belongs to Sony. Maybe they changed their opinion of Kim Jong-Un and don't want to humiliate him, or maybe they were scared of reprisal for their artistically free depiction of him. Who knows? All we can ask is, is it really being suppressed if it's their own choice to not go through with it? This is their own inhibition making the decision. Artists will always have critics and philistines to deal with, and it becomes a personal choice to let them deter you from your passion/project.
author=Feldschlacht IV
But WW3? Come on. Let's step back from that if we want to talk about this seriously.
Okay. I'll throw my last thoughts on the subject in a spoiler box in case you want to stop believing North Korea is a non-entity.
If North Korea goes to war with anybody, they'll lose. We all know that. Their economy can barely sustain peacetime, let alone wartime. Problem is, Kim Jong-Il stated multiple times that if he went down, South Korea would go down with him. The same probably holds true for his son. So any kind of armed conflict vs North Korea, regardless of there being allies or not, will result in Seoul's destruction. In other words, it doesn't need to be WW3 to be catastrophic in scope.
As China goes, they like North Korea the way it is. Since the Politburo maintains authority by compartmentalizing the populace (Great firewall of China, travel restrictions, etc), North Korea is a boon because it serves as an "example" of the world abroad.
As it stands now, they're having a hard enough time bringing Hong Kong's autonomous nature under their thumb. If the Pyongyang government is toppled by Western-backed powers, that'll bring South Korean democracy right to their border. Nevermind China's national interest, it's in the Politburo's personal interest to make sure NK remains the failed state that it is.
So yeah, the Korean standoff is far from being a "slim" possibility for starting WW3. It's more potent than anything in the middle east and likely moreso than Ukraine, where we actually are going toe-to-toe with another nuclear superpower.
As China goes, they like North Korea the way it is. Since the Politburo maintains authority by compartmentalizing the populace (Great firewall of China, travel restrictions, etc), North Korea is a boon because it serves as an "example" of the world abroad.
As it stands now, they're having a hard enough time bringing Hong Kong's autonomous nature under their thumb. If the Pyongyang government is toppled by Western-backed powers, that'll bring South Korean democracy right to their border. Nevermind China's national interest, it's in the Politburo's personal interest to make sure NK remains the failed state that it is.
So yeah, the Korean standoff is far from being a "slim" possibility for starting WW3. It's more potent than anything in the middle east and likely moreso than Ukraine, where we actually are going toe-to-toe with another nuclear superpower.
Ah, that's correct though. If someone pulls their own product or story or anything because they don't want it out there for whatever reason, it's part of their freedom to do so. So... Sony is free to do as they will with their product.
I guess it's the same as someone making a controversial game and then deciding to scrap it because they feel the fuss and bother over it is too much. Add in possible death threats and I can see why anyone wouldn't want their shit out there.
It sucks for those who were looking forward to the game, and it sucks majorly that there are people who are issuing those death threats, but it isn't the creators' fault. The fault lies solely on those who are making the threats.
Thus, let's not lambast Sony. They aren't the issue and it's their product so they have the freedom to do with it as they wish. The real problem are assholes who step on others' freedom - in this case those who issued the threats in question.
I guess it's the same as someone making a controversial game and then deciding to scrap it because they feel the fuss and bother over it is too much. Add in possible death threats and I can see why anyone wouldn't want their shit out there.
It sucks for those who were looking forward to the game, and it sucks majorly that there are people who are issuing those death threats, but it isn't the creators' fault. The fault lies solely on those who are making the threats.
Thus, let's not lambast Sony. They aren't the issue and it's their product so they have the freedom to do with it as they wish. The real problem are assholes who step on others' freedom - in this case those who issued the threats in question.
Oh, for the love of...
President Obama says that Sony should have consulted with him before cancelling the Interview. Read it here.
President Obama says that Sony should have consulted with him before cancelling the Interview. Read it here.
Why would NK ever do this? North Korea is a weird crazy country with a lot of shit they do off the chain, but their self preservation so far has been good enough to keep them from open war. You could argue from the basis of their back and forth with South Korea, but why would North Korea blatantly commit an act of aggression that would certainly end their existence?
From everything I understand, North Korea does not even have the capability to land bombs in the US. Unless we're talking some "terrorists with suitcase bombs" shit. And in that case...yes, it's as Feld says. In the insanely unlikely event they were that stupid the US and the international community would push their collective shit in so hard they would effectively cease to exist.
Thus, let's not lambast Sony. They aren't the issue and it's their product so they have the freedom to do with it as they wish. The real problem are assholes who step on others' freedom - in this case those who issued the threats in question.
No actually fuck Sony. Assholes making threats isn't the issue. It's just a fact of life. Capitulating to the threats of said assholes in a way that compromises fundamental freedom of speech is what at's issue. Besides, Sony didn't make the decision to pull the movies. The theaters made it for them. Sony was acting out of rational economic self-interest not out of any sense of responsibility to save lives.
Plus the possibility that Feld points out is dark but plausible: that Sony scrapped the movie out of fear of sensitive data being leaked more than anything else. With that possibility floating around, multinational megacorporations like Sony have none of my sympathies.
Edit: Upon reading the above article, it seems like Sony has stepped back from their original 'full pussy out' stance substantially. "Never go full coward' so to speak.
author=pianotm
Oh, for the love of...
President Obama says that Sony should have consulted with him before cancelling the Interview. Read it here.
Obama is absolutely right but (as if often the case with Obama) didn't go quite as far as I'd have liked in some places. But it's a relief to have the President 'get it' on an issue this important.
Dyhalto
7536
author=Liberty
I guess it's the same as someone making a controversial game and then deciding to scrap it because they feel the fuss and bother over it is too much. Add in possible death threats and I can see why anyone wouldn't want their shit out there.
Closer to home, it reminds me of Acra and her game Draug's Ressurection. She claimed to have received PMs threatening rape. I still have a hard time believing it, as this community seems pretty sterile compared to, say, gamefaqs, but obviously something rattled her. Her testimony is archived somewhere in one of those "gender and gaming" threads.
Point is : Yeah, you're right. There are assholes out there who go too far beyond just not liking other people's work. They rightly need to be told to STFU. The goal should be a community where art is accepted because everyone is open minded, not because only certain art forms will be tolerated. And we probably won't get there with infighting, saying "No actually fuck ____" or "____ has none of my sympathies." That's some pretty childish and regressive thinking there.
author=Corfaisus
I thought Extra History's videos concerning the actions leading up to World War 1 was a pretty gripping series.
Right on. I didn't know they made new ones since the Punic War series. Thanks.
They left out King Edward VII creating the Triple Entente and factioning Europe though. Without him, the Prince Ferdinand assassination would have been just a local incident to Serbia and Austria. The scale to which WW1 went would have been impossible.
