I feel like I should have an opinion about this Sony-The Interview
ridiculousness. My thoughts on it are a contradictory jumble that shifts every time a new bit of information is released.
First -- and I say this without having seen the film, and I know I'm making a big assumption here (based on the Rogen/Franco movies I've seen) -- I wish this controversy were about a better film.
I've been home with the flu for several days and I've been rewatching some episodes of Freaks and Geeks. Rogen and Franco are brilliant on that show; both so clearly talented. They were given excellent writing and sure direction, neither of which they seem to have had much of in the intervening years -- which is not to say I think they are bad writers or directors, I'm just not sure anyone is requiring them to try very hard. It seems like they've been allowed to run amok and improv to their hearts' content and spend millions of dollars making ok entertainment when I know full well that they're capable of being amazing. So I resent them a little bit. I'll be open about that. They're contributing to the mediocrity of film, and no one is stopping them. Except maybe now they are being stopped, by the wrong people and for the wrong reasons.
First -- and I say this without having seen the film, and I know I'm making a big assumption here (based on the Rogen/Franco movies I've seen) -- I wish this controversy were about a better film.
I've been home with the flu for several days and I've been rewatching some episodes of Freaks and Geeks. Rogen and Franco are brilliant on that show; both so clearly talented. They were given excellent writing and sure direction, neither of which they seem to have had much of in the intervening years -- which is not to say I think they are bad writers or directors, I'm just not sure anyone is requiring them to try very hard. It seems like they've been allowed to run amok and improv to their hearts' content and spend millions of dollars making ok entertainment when I know full well that they're capable of being amazing. So I resent them a little bit. I'll be open about that. They're contributing to the mediocrity of film, and no one is stopping them. Except maybe now they are being stopped, by the wrong people and for the wrong reasons.
Second: The Interview is going to do just fine when they figure out how
to get it into the hands of the public. Way more people will go see it
now because of this international "incident." It's the best marketing strategy since The Blair Witch Project (even if
it's unintentional).
*I'm hearing now that Sony has no intention of releasing the film in any form, partially because they've been fighting the streaming of films prior to theatrical release. Is this true? To not release the film in any fashion is incredibly stupid, and cowardly, and bad business. It makes me wonder what sort of dirt the hackers seized.
Third: Of course they had to pull the film from theatrical release. Films play in malls, and it's the holiday season. And people need to feel safe going to malls to shop. It doesn't matter if there's a credible terrorist threat or not, if people think there might be a credible threat it will affect the economy and no one's going to let that happen. Even if someone comes out with proof that the North Koreans (or whomever) have no way of actually carrying out their threats, many people will still be afraid. America has a culture that thrives on fear. (A culture that Hollywood helps cultivate, by the way.) Most Americans would rather be afraid and stay home than be principled and leave the house. Then people don't shop and the economy suffers. The terrorists really do win if they hurt the economy. So I do understand why, at this point, canceling the theatrical release makes sense.
Fourth: So this is the part about freedom of speech. And art. Except I fear we're not talking about art, we're talking about two rich white guys goofing around. And I'm not yet convinced that they're really being silenced. I suspect people will still see this film. Because people now want to see this film. So is it about caving to the terrorists? Are we letting them win? That depends a bit on what Sony does next.
Will this keep studios from making, buying, or promoting a serious film about North Korea? That's possible. That would be a shame. Is it a bad precedent to cave completely to cyber terrorists? Yes, it seems like a bad precedent to not release the film in any form.
I don't know if there's a real threat, or if Sony just doesn't want their personal information and their scripts available for public consumption. Are there North Koreans who have infiltrated the US and will bomb our movie theatres? Would anyone who came to infiltrate the US from North Korea not see within days how fucked up North Korea is? Is the North Korean government really like al Qaeda? I don't know the answers to these questions. So it's hard to know how to feel about it.
What I do know is that if the film industry actually made, bought, and marketed films for grown-ups the way they did back in the 90s -- if they acknowledged that it's an art form instead of constantly trying to prove it's not -- I might care a lot more.
*I'm hearing now that Sony has no intention of releasing the film in any form, partially because they've been fighting the streaming of films prior to theatrical release. Is this true? To not release the film in any fashion is incredibly stupid, and cowardly, and bad business. It makes me wonder what sort of dirt the hackers seized.
Third: Of course they had to pull the film from theatrical release. Films play in malls, and it's the holiday season. And people need to feel safe going to malls to shop. It doesn't matter if there's a credible terrorist threat or not, if people think there might be a credible threat it will affect the economy and no one's going to let that happen. Even if someone comes out with proof that the North Koreans (or whomever) have no way of actually carrying out their threats, many people will still be afraid. America has a culture that thrives on fear. (A culture that Hollywood helps cultivate, by the way.) Most Americans would rather be afraid and stay home than be principled and leave the house. Then people don't shop and the economy suffers. The terrorists really do win if they hurt the economy. So I do understand why, at this point, canceling the theatrical release makes sense.
Fourth: So this is the part about freedom of speech. And art. Except I fear we're not talking about art, we're talking about two rich white guys goofing around. And I'm not yet convinced that they're really being silenced. I suspect people will still see this film. Because people now want to see this film. So is it about caving to the terrorists? Are we letting them win? That depends a bit on what Sony does next.
Will this keep studios from making, buying, or promoting a serious film about North Korea? That's possible. That would be a shame. Is it a bad precedent to cave completely to cyber terrorists? Yes, it seems like a bad precedent to not release the film in any form.
I don't know if there's a real threat, or if Sony just doesn't want their personal information and their scripts available for public consumption. Are there North Koreans who have infiltrated the US and will bomb our movie theatres? Would anyone who came to infiltrate the US from North Korea not see within days how fucked up North Korea is? Is the North Korean government really like al Qaeda? I don't know the answers to these questions. So it's hard to know how to feel about it.
What I do know is that if the film industry actually made, bought, and marketed films for grown-ups the way they did back in the 90s -- if they acknowledged that it's an art form instead of constantly trying to prove it's not -- I might care a lot more.
No comments:
Post a Comment