xeni — 2014-07-10T11:36:40-04:00 — #1
bexwhitt — 2014-07-10T11:48:20-04:00 — #2
It looks so unfunny it will virtually ban itself
daemonworks — 2014-07-10T11:52:39-04:00 — #3
I wonder how much Rogen paid Kim to denounce him. That's going to help box office sales immensely.
stoicromance — 2014-07-10T11:53:39-04:00 — #4
This guy is three or four gulags past my sympathy.
daemonworks — 2014-07-10T11:54:25-04:00 — #5
I saw what he did to the Green Hornet. Getting me to watch any other Rogen film will be an uphill battle.
vonbobo — 2014-07-10T11:57:28-04:00 — #6
Hollywood is full of bad movies, why ban just this one?
Also... love the pic of the voting where everyone is voting with KJU. Is there ever a vote where someone is willing to vote against KJU? Silly dictators.
rservello — 2014-07-10T12:02:53-04:00 — #7
He should be honored. The guy they cast to play him looks kinda badass. They could have given him the Team America treatment.
walterplinge — 2014-07-10T12:21:39-04:00 — #8
This news item is literally the funniest thing that has come out of Seth Rogen's career.
seki — 2014-07-10T12:29:29-04:00 — #9
It's like NK officials are so complacent about holding their own people under their thumb that they expect the whole world to lap their crazy bullshit right up. It's sad how starving, terrorizing and torturing their own compatriots is not really what makes them so baffling; it's this other sort of random, totally out-of-touch shit they do.
ashen_victor — 2014-07-10T12:41:22-04:00 — #10
Wait! I'm the only one who found the Green Hornet funny?
chellberty — 2014-07-10T13:01:14-04:00 — #11
when i heard the plot of this movie
mister44 — 2014-07-10T13:21:18-04:00 — #12
The fact that Michael Bay is free to walk the streets means I have little hope the UN will do anything.
boundegar — 2014-07-10T14:07:01-04:00 — #13
I think it's fascinating that not only do they not allow a free press - or media - they don't even understand the concept. We object to American film - it must be Obama's doing! How would you explain to these guys that the President can't actually pick up the phone and cancel a movie?
stano — 2014-07-10T14:25:16-04:00 — #14
It is very sad to see how far from reality those guys are.
Look at the rhetoric that is flowery and rabid at the same time. No sane person would use wording like this and expect to be taken seriously.
Like previous poster said, it looks like they - DPRK writers - fail to comprehend that USA government can not stop the movie distribution, even if they really wanted to
And the Streisand effect is even more alien concept for those guys, it seems.
lemoutan — 2014-07-10T15:54:25-04:00 — #15
OK, but apart from the usual commentary on motives and mindsets, let's assume the UN is required to take this seriously.
If NK is troubling to take this to the UN they must realise that whilst it's legitimate to suggest redress, it's completely inappropriate to set penalties in advance of any decision. So what actually happens if the complaint is upheld?
bexwhitt — 2014-07-10T16:30:34-04:00 — #16
I did wonder why they did not cast a man baby look alike.
dagfooyo — 2014-07-10T17:29:57-04:00 — #17
I was thinking the last time I watched the cold war era James Bond films how interesting it was that while the USSR was often involved, and sometimes seemed at first to be the bad guys, they never actually were the bad guys. It was always some fictional independent organization. In fact, even the later Die Another Day involves North Korea, but even then they're not the bad guys, it's the general's son going rogue or something.
I always assumed this was mainly to avoid provoking an international incident. If so, I guess they were right to think so.
I can't think of any examples of other American movies, other than historical films, where the actual leader of a country or group was the bad guy. Even when the leader is unanimously considered a bad guy in real life. Curious if other mutants can chime in with examples.
catgrin — 2014-07-10T18:10:37-04:00 — #18
Sorry to get pedantic on you, but Bond is primarily a British-backed film series with American production companies handling U.S. distribution. Eon Productions (Everything or Nothing) is the company that holds copyright to Bond, and they're the ones that made the films.
dagfooyo — 2014-07-10T18:26:31-04:00 — #19
Ah. For some reason I thought it was an American franchise, despite being about British intelligence. The point applies to pretty much every action movie I can think of, though, regardless of nation of origin.
catgrin — 2014-07-10T18:37:53-04:00 — #20
Most people think the the Bond movies are strictly American. It's probably because they're released through U.S. distributors (and even different distributors for video!). I only gave you the head's up because the national origin of the movies helps to explain their tone and some of their politics.
I should say I misspoke a bit, because the company has changed hands some. Eon (a closely-held company) is a subsidiary of Danjaq (they're the copyright holders), and Danjaq was owned by the people who owned Eon. Movies made post 1975 may actually be more Americanized. That's because one of the two founders of Eon sold his shares in Danjaq to United Artists at that time. The other founder's family still retains their ownership. It's my understanding that people try to do things like that founder wanted it done "Albert Broccoli" is the man behind Bond.
next page →