President Obama: Sony made a ‘mistake’ in not releasing ‘The Interview’

The Sony hackers got their wish after threatening 9/11-like attacks on theaters if they released The Interview. Sony pulled the satirical film from release after theaters refused to screen it. The FBI traced the cyberattack to North Korea. Sony CEO Michael Lynton told CNN they were considering releasing the film on VOD, but that “there has not been one major VOD or one major ecommerce site that has says they are willing to step forward and distribute this movie.” Earlier reports claimed that all VOD and DVD release plans had been scrapped for insurance purposes, so they could claim a total loss on the film.

There are several updates to this situation. Starting with a Saturday statement from North Korea, which claims no responsibility for the hacking. They reject the notion that this was a State-sponsored attack and promise “serious consequences” if the US will not enter a “joint investigation.” They had to sling some mud about how they can prove their innocence “without resorting to torture.” The US National Security Council has expressed confidence in the FBI’s ruling: “The government of North Korea has a long history of denying responsibility for destructive and provocative actions.

Anyway. President Obama held his annual end-of-year news conference on Friday. Several minutes of the discussion were devoted to the Sony hack. Barack believes pulling the movie was the wrong move. He flubbed James Franco’s name, which is awesome. Franco could stand to be taken down a notch or two. Here’s what Obama said:

“Sony’s a corporation. It suffered significant damage. There were threats against its employees. I am sympathetic to the concerns that they faced. Having said all that, yes, I think they made a mistake.
“We cannot have a society in which some dictator some place can start imposing censorship here in the United States. Because if somebody is able to intimidate folks out of releasing a satirical movie, imagine what they start doing when they see a documentary that they don’t like or news reports that they don’t like. Or even worse, imagine if producers and distributors and others start engaging in self-censorship because they don’t want to offend the sensibilities of somebody’s sensibilities who probably need to be offended. That’s not who we are. That’s not what America’s about.

“I am sympathetic that Sony, as a private company, was worried about liabilities, and this and that and the other. I wish they had spoken to me first. I would have told them, ‘Do not get into a pattern in which you’re intimidated by these kind of criminal attacks.’ Imagine if, instead of it being a cyber threat, somebody had broken into their offices and destroyed a bunch of their computers and stolen disks. Is that what it takes for suddenly you to pull the plug on something?

“So we’ll engage in not just the news industry but the film industry and the private sector around these issues. We already have. We’ll continue to do so. But I think all of us are going to have to anticipate, occasionally, there are going to be breaches like this. They’re going to be costly. They’re going to be serious. We take them with the utmost seriousness. But we can’t start changing our patterns of behavior any more than we stop going to a football game because there might be the possibility of a terrorist attack. Any more than Boston didn’t run its marathon this year because of the possibility of somebody might try to cause harm. So let’s not get into that way of doing business.”

“The FBI announced, and we can confirm, that North Korea engaged in this attack. I think it says something interesting about North Korea that they decided to have the State mount an all-out assault on a movie studio because of a satirical movie starring Seth Rogen and James Flacco. I love Seth, and I love, uh, James. But the notion that that was a threat to them? I think that tells you something about the kind of regime we’re talking about here. They caused a lot of damage. And we will respond. We will respond proportionally, and we’ll respond in a manner and place and time that we choose. It’s not something that I will announce today at a press conference.”

[From YouTube]

A journalist asked Obama if he will watch The Interview, and he answered in a diplomatic fashion: “I’ve got a long list of movies that I’m gonna be watching. I never release my full movie list.” (Ha. I understand and don’t plan on watching the movie either.) By the way, “JamesJoe Flacco” is a real person. He’s the Baltimore Ravens quarterback! Flacco got a kick out of the mixup and welcomed Franco to his family. Franco hasn’t said anything. He’s probably busy taking shirtless selfies.

Sony released a response to CNN after Obama’s speech. CEO Michael Lynton says Sony did not make a mistake in canceling the movie: “We have not given in, we have persevered.” They cite theater owners’ decisions to pull the film from their lineup: “We had no choice.” Lynton stresses that they are still exploring options to somehow release the movie.

There’s much more. The hackers released a new statement with extra demands for Sony. They praise the film’s cancellation but also demand that every trace of the film’s existence be removed: “We want you never let the movie released, distributed or leaked in any form of, for instance, DVD or piracy. We want everything related to the movie, including its trailers, as well as its full version down from any website hosting them immediately.” TMZ notes that Sony immediately obliged, and the movie no longer has a social media presence.

The MPAA Chairman and CEO (Senator Chris Dodd) issued a statement. He stresses that the situation is bigger than the release of one movie or stolen private emails: “The Internet is a powerful force for good and it is deplorable that it is being used as a weapon not just by common criminals, but also, sophisticated cyber terrorists. We cannot allow that front to be opened again on American corporations or the American people.” His concern is how criminals have threatened the livelihoods of thousands of film industry employees and the enjoyment of people who watch movies.

Here’s the clip of Obama weighing in on the Sony hackers.

Photos courtesy of Getty & WENN

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

81 Responses to “President Obama: Sony made a ‘mistake’ in not releasing ‘The Interview’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. original kay says:

    Good for Obama, and I agree with him.

    Makes me wonder what else was hacked, that Sony would so quickly oblige the latest demands. What don’t they want released from the hack?

    • Esmom says:

      Yes Sony does seem to be reacting awfully quickly. And ITA with Obama that this potentially is just the beginning of serious censorship.

    • Kiki04 says:

      It’s scary to think there’s something WORSE out there that they don’t want released, given all of the stuff that’s already out there. But I agree, there’s got to be more.

    • denisemich says:

      Sony is an Asian ( Japanese) company with a US subsidiary.

      Censorship and the US Bill of Rights is not the major concern of a corporation. The major concern of a corporation is maximizing shareholder value. Sony will write off this movie.

      • Bridget says:

        “Freedom” and “freedom of speech” are obviously intangible concepts, but I think that there would have been a long term financial upside to Sony trumpeting them – Sony is in a free fall right now. They are swimming in an ocean of bad press and embarrassment, and this could have been a huge opportunity to change the conversation in their favor. Andy burying it *after* all this stuff has come out, it implies that there’s still more and worse out there, which probably isn’t inspiring confidence in their shareholders.

      • Esmom says:

        That’s a rather chilling comment. Even if they are a corporation whose main concern is the bottom line, the fact that they were the victims of terrorist threats makes it seem odd to me that they’d act unilaterally without any input from the govt.

  2. Serahhh says:

    Makes me wonder too

  3. Penelope says:

    The Ravens quarterback is JOE Flacco, not James.

  4. Dref22 says:

    It’s obvious Sony is worried about other things, I wonder what their dirty secret is.

    And really, nobody can really blame Sony for what they’re doing about this. There are so many disturbed people in the world who might get inspired by all this and they wouldn’t be able to handle even a random attack in theaters.

    • lisa2 says:


      It is not just about the Hacker threatening harm. But the psychos that will do something pretending to be with this organization. That is where the fear for me comes. Crazies don’t need much of an excuse to do something. And there really is nothing that could actually be done to protect the public. And all the people screaming SHOW THE FILM.. what would they say after some fool hurts someone. The fingers would turn to Sony..

      I don’t know what the right decision is. NOBODY does.

    • Kim1 says:

      Well I blame Sony for greenlighting this film.Would they produce a film that joked about killing any other world leader? Obama? The Pope?
      This film will be leaked so it will be seen.BTW there were theaters willing to show it so that is a BS excuse. I also bet there will be a Christmas gift from Guardians of Peace
      TMZ claim Sony has hired the real Olivia Pope to clean up this mess.

      • lisa2 says:

        In a way that makes it worse…

        Hiring the “real Olivia Pope”that is the headline right..makes it all seem so “entertaining” and less serious; when this is all very very serious.

        .. just ugh.

      • Dolce crema says:

        Since there were barely any theatres showing it writing it off may be more profitable

      • Lahdidahbaby says:

        Thank you. I’ve wondered if anyone would say that. To make a comedy about the assassination of a sitting head of state – even a nut-job despot like Kim Jong Un – is puerile, irresponsible, and morally bankrupt. We as a country have been through several assassinations–JFK, MLK, RFK. For my money anyway, Sony was irresponsible to have green-lighted such a film.

        Of COURSE censorship is an abomination – that goes without saying. But why is almost no one weighing in on what a jackass idea it was to make a comedy about assassinating a real-life head of state? No matter who that head of state might be.

      • anne says:

        Yep. that aspects of the film (don’t know much about it) certainly seemed – strangely unfunny at best.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I agree, Kim1. Who makes a movie about assassinating a real, living person? Stupid, horrible taste, dangerous and not funny. Idiots.

  5. Kiddo says:

    I read a recent article, (sorry didn’t save a link), that “they’ now say that the film could be released as long as Kim wasn’t killed in it.

    I don’t know if I am permitted to post this particular link here, but radaronline, found emails and also reported meetings between a top CIA agent, government reps and Sony execs:

    “a high-ranking CIA agent visited the Los Angeles headquarters of Sony Pictures Entertainment weeks ago, before the company realized its entire computer system had been compromised… did confirm the CIA official sat with Sony Senior Vice President for Corporate Security Stevan Bernard in the company’s floor-side seats in the Staples Center to watch the Lakers and Clippers play on October 31, 2014 — less than one month before the major security breach….Radar also found e-mails between Under Secretary of State Richard Stengel and Sony Pictures Entertainment Chairman Michael Lynton concerning the recruitment of filmmakers and musicians in efforts to fight the ISIS terror group in the Middle East. Other emails showed government agents asking Sony to recruit studio heads to combat terrorism.”.

    There’s more to this story than meets the eye, folks.

    • Kiddo says:

      Oh, and also: THE FLACCO. I personally pronounce it Flake-oh.

    • Kiddo says:

      And as a footnote: “Zero Dark Thirty” was put out by Sony. A film that makes the argument that torture yields accurate answers, while the latest torture report argues against same.

      • Bridget says:

        I don’t agree that Zero Dark Thirty was giving the message that torture is indeed the way to produce accurate information – especially considering that the movie was initially conceived to be about Bin Laden getting away, but had to be re-written after his death. Personally, I thought it said a lot that they even portrayed the torture scenes in that movie for what they were (and not “enhanced interrogation”) considering that 1) the American viewing public has resoundingly rejected the subject matter of the Iraq war being portrayed in movies, and 2) the Bush government wasn’t particularly forthcoming on the scandal. I don’t think we can use one this one particular instance as a pro-torture argument.

      • Kiddo says:

        Others would disagree:

        “Bigelow and Boal have denied that they meant to show that torture produces the desired information. No viewer of the film, without being primed by that evasion, would suppose the film has a complex attitude here. It suggests that torture is regrettable but necessary — the agent who says he will break his victim also says he needs a rest after months and “100 naked bodies” — and it guides us to the conclusion that torture works. Zero Dark Thirty portrays the torture-agents as essentially good people: technicians working at a grim but unavoidable job. Nowhere do we catch a whiff of sadism or racism or, with the exception of Maya, strong feeling of any kind.”

      • Bridget says:

        You know what they say, opinions are like @ssholes, everyone’s got one.

      • Bridget says:

        Personally, I have a hard time separating the criticism of the torture scenes in that movie considering that it was also a backdoor attempt at torpedoing the movie as an Oscar contender (which sounds so silly, but did happen). And in the hunt for Bin Laden, for better or for worse some information was produced this way, and it would have been a whole other movie to portray the epic cluster @#$! that was the aftermath of 9/11 and the Iraq War. Perhaps I’m just overly simplifying. And I really do wonder what the movie about Tora Bora and Bin Laden getting away would have been like, because I think it’s entirely possible it would have had a very different tone considering the ultimately failed outcome at that point in time.

      • Kiddo says:

        I posted a link that hasn’t shown up, maybe it won’t, but it’s an excellent article written by Glenn Greenwald who is a civil rights attorney and provocateur. He makes a decent point that NO TORTURE victims are ever given a voice, and that their narrative is ignored in MSM. Keep in mind that victims of torture can also be innocent of ANY crimes and/or they may hold no intelligence of the same .

      • Bridget says:

        I’m not saying that torture isn’t inherently wrong – good grief. I simply disagree that ZDT was a torture propaganda piece. I personally think that Bigelow’s works are technically excellent but that any nuance in them comes not from Bigelow’s herself but the choices that the actors themselves make. Its possible that I’m misremembering ZDT and the Hurt Locker, but I remembee them being very unsentimental amd uninterested in the larger controversies involved in the wartime conflicts that both movies portrayed. While the subject matter itself is inherently controversial, I felt that Bigelow strove more for realism than a moral standpoint.

      • Kiddo says:

        “Realism” of film is open to artistic interpretation. I never said that you were advocating for torture. I simply posted an article that I felt added to the overall discussion.

      • Bridget says:

        Just making sure there!

        Ultimately we’re talking about a conflict that was very much characterized by an ‘ends justifying the means’ attitude, where those viewed as the enemy were viewed as being sub-human. Should we be surprised that it was portrayed that way? And while realism in a movie is always on a sliding scale rather than absolute, I felt that Bigelow did a pretty good job. Its just that the real life events are completely flawed and questionable.

      • Kiddo says:

        Since the site is off limits in linkage, the name is the Interc— Just look up Greenwald and that partial word and you’ll find the article.

    • Sarah123 says:

      Kiddo, this is a really interesting twist in the story, but I’m not clear what it could mean. Would you say more about there being “more to the story”?

      • Kiddo says:

        I don’t know what that answer is. But the government spy agency is meeting with Sony. Maybe they did so because of prior hacks, maybe they were baiting and setting a trap for would-be hackers, maybe they hacked Sony to drive some political position home, I really have no idea. Maybe those guys just happen to be friends, hmmm. But the fact that they (gov’t) were looking for participants in propaganda pieces makes this relationship more complicated than if Sony merely had individual donors/supporters to campaigns. And if Sony is actually onboard with international propaganda, are they somehow influenced to do the same in this country, under pressure of the government toward the tone of movies here? I have no idea. But if there is a connection, then it isn’t just some artist putting their vision out, it being censored, if the US has a part in it. Maybe the CIA had nothing to do with any movies, but this connection is intriguing on a variety of levels.

  6. bettyrose says:

    So we wrap Franco in a bow and send him to North Korea. If they keep hm, it’s an admission of guilt. If they send him back, I say we give them a little credit and accept their offer of a joint investigation.

  7. jwoolman says:

    Not sure I really believe the North Korean connection for many reasons. But nobody seems to focus on the fact that Sony is actually a Japanese company, the head office is in Japan. The orders may be coming from there. So the dynamics may be more complicated.

    But also pulling it for now isn’t the same as never releasing it. If theaters don’t want to run it because it will reduce their ticket sales for other films, that’s a reasonable decision. There are other ways to release it these days or they could just wait until the whole thing is sorted out. (Just shouting “North Korea!” Is not really sorting it out.) The movie seems like a dumb choice for the Christmas season anyway.

    • original kay says:

      I did not realize Sony is a Japanese company! Stupid of me, in hindsight.

      That being said, why would a Japanese company talk to Obama about decisions it makes about it’s business?

      This whole story is strange, all the way around.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “why would a Japanese company talk to Obama about decisions it makes about it’s business? ”

        They were threatening “another 9/11”. They were threatening terrorist attacks on US citizens. They said that Americans who live near theaters shouldn’t be at their homes. The base location of the company doesn’t really seem relevant when they are threatening American lives.

  8. Bridget says:

    First off, its Joe Flacco not James.

    This is so much bigger than a crappy movie. This was an act of cyber terrorism, and Sony is giving in to terrorists. This sets a pretty dangerous precedent.

    • wolfpup says:

      It astonishes me that they went to the press rather than the president about such a serious threat. Why did they go to the press – doesn’t that seem an odd thing to do?

      What were they thinking? Their excuses do not factor in this very odd decision – especially made by top executives who would/should have known better to go to the president. NOT the press! The press gave North Korea all sorts of publicity – geez!

  9. TX says:

    The quarterbacks name is Joe Flacco. Just FYI 🙂

  10. Brittney B says:

    At this same press conference, President Obama made history by calling exclusively on female reporters. It may only be a gesture, but it was so refreshing, and maybe someday it won’t even be necessary to *deliberately* include more women. Here’s hoping for a more equal and peaceful year ahead.

    Happy Winter Solstice, Celebitchies!

    • Sarah123 says:

      Nice! Thanks for pointing that out! I love the shift in power. No one bats an eye when all men are called on. Inviting women ask to all the questions means their influence and power are more likely to be respected by the industry. It’s a good step. Thanks, Obama!

      • wolfpup says:

        It’s a hoot that there is anyone who believes that women are not capable of asking newsworthy questions. I’ve taught quite a few young people, and young girls who were completely focused on being sweet and pleasing to the boys. They really do begin to take on the characteristics of the oppressed. I tell them to remember when they were in 4th grade, to look around and then tell me if they are less than any of the boys there. It’s kind of a shock to them. And fun for me. The principle goes all the way up – it’s easiest to judge a man when one pretends they are back in our childhood schemata; and a woman never need be afraid of a man, if she can imagine him as a youngster. Refocus. My son told me that he couldn’t figure out what a man was – the only thing that had changed about who he was, was his junk, and his new hobby. Men are no mystery.

      • Brittney B says:

        That was the goal! His press secretary later clarified:

        “The fact is, there are many women from a variety of news organizations who day-in and day-out do the hard work of covering the president of the United States. As the questioner list started to come together, we realized that we had a unique opportunity to highlight the fact at the president’s closely watched, end-of-the-year news conference.”

        2014 was full of tragedy, but it was also an important year for progress toward equal rights. I’m hopeful for the years ahead!

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I didn’t even know that he did that! That is WONDERFUL!

      I am so tired of female reporters being treated like they can only handle certain stories.

  11. Nicole says:

    Hahaha Thank you for listening to me, Mr President. I’m with you on Cuba and introducing Health Care as well. Good job. lol

    • Brittney B says:

      +1. “Obamacare” is the reason I’m working from home and pursuing my writing dreams right now, instead of working through Christmas and New Year’s at a thankless corporate job. President Obama isn’t my favorite person right now (drone strikes, etc.)… but he’s done more for American families than any other president in my lifetime. I’m on board with everything he said in this press conference, too.

      Happy holidays, Nicole!

      • Nicole says:

        Ah! Yay! Happy Holidays Brittney! 🙂

      • wolfpup says:

        I think that our President is so darling!

        Sony should have consulted with the State department before caving to North Korea. This was a terrorist threat – who doesn’t get advice in that situation?

        Sony opened a can of worms trying to hide the contents of leaked email. I think that they are flagrant in their disregard of the protections of American citizens – by opening up the possibility of blackmail and extortion for hosts of other countries. Dunderhead theater people (!!!), making decisions that affect all Americans! Don’t people go to the police for cases of blackmail and extortion? Sony only thunk. They were clever in their own minds – bait and switch the conversation from being an email hack, into an international brouhaha.

    • Kim1 says:

      That’s funny I just paid my $39.60 premium to Blue Cross/ Blue Shield
      Insurance I obtained thru the Marketplace. I consider helping close to 9M get healthcare is his greatest accomplishment.

  12. Gina says:

    I remember after 911 when everyone stood together for a couple of months…ah. All we heard was if we do this or do that the terrorists win. I agree with Obama, Sony caved into fear. But, we that said, our country and the world is full of lunatics. If some deranged individual made a threat or hurt or God forbid killed someone at a theater where this film was being played, it would have been blood on the hands of Sony for some of the right wing. I don’t understand the humor or satire about an assassination (or anything James Franco does or has ever done) so I’m quite sure I wouldn’t have seen the film anyway. Our world is a very sad place to be in. God bless the souls of the policeman assassinated in my city. Merry Christmas indeed.

  13. Belle Epoch says:

    For what it’s worth, I don’t agree with Obama, and I really don’t appreciate his making this statement after the decision was already made. (I voted for him.) This way he gets credit for being tough on terrorists without actually contributing to the decision or having to face the alternative answer, which was exposing American citizens to harm over a sh*t movie. (And it’s not a “satire,” it’s just stupid.) So Obama seriously favored having movie theaters threatened by bomb attacks, or poison gas, or lunatic shooters? Was he planning to engage the Army to keep everyone safe so they could watch a fourth rate movie? American lives are worth sacrificing for SONY and James Franco and Seth Rogan to make more money? How does that make sense?

    • H says:

      The threats of attacks were not credible.

      • Belle Epoch says:

        H – we can’t prove the attacks were not “credible.” It’s easy to imagine that they could persuade one nutjob to bring a gun into a theater. And we have a LOT to fear from home grown terrorists. Anyone could have jumped on these threats in any town in the country. We have US citizens trying to join ISIS!

    • Jessica says:

      Thank you. The potential threats are the one thing most people seem to be ignoring. We don’t know for sure how credible those threats were, but Sony really had no choice. It’ been driving me crazy how all the celebrities keep going on and on about not letting these people take away their artistic freedom ( which normally I would agree with), but at what cost? There is no way in hell any of them would’ve gone to see it if there was even a slight chance of a terrorist attack, but they expected the public to?

      And if there was absolutely nothing to be afraid of, why were Franco and Rogen walking around with bodyguards?

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I completely agree, Belle. What if they released it and people were killed. Wish Obama (and I voted for him, too) was so decisive about ISIS and other terrorist threats, Mr.”we don’t have a plan.”

  14. Tippy says:

    Of course N. Korea wants to enter into a joint investigation with the United States and gain even more insight into our classified monitoring systems.

    Maybe a “proportional response” is to much of a slap on the wrist.

    Maybe we shut down their entire power grid for a day or two and maybe they become a little less belligerent.

    • Kiddo says:

      You are presuming that N Korea is actually behind the hack, when the full truth has not emerged. Secondly, you are reacting in the anticipated manner by emotional triggers intentionally pushed. The fact that the CIA was recruiting Sony for distribution of international propaganda should give pause to making any knee jerk decisions. Remember, we were led to the war in Iraq because of WMDs, when there were none. The push for the war was propelled by arguments from the NYT, when it was found out later that the reporter was in the pocket of the same politicians pushing for this.

      It might be N Korea, it might not be. It might be that this little crap movie was a vehicle for the government, will we ever really know?
      Don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of Kim and his human rights offenses, but there is a secretive nature/shadow government that politicians say they aren’t even fully aware of. Or that is their claim, anyway.

      • H says:

        The UN has verified that this was the work of North Korea. There’s no “it might not be”. They have a history of doing stuff like this.

      • Kiddo says:

        Was the UN given access to Sony computers as well? That seems weird. It may be N Korea, but I think it has some counterpart here.

      • Bridget says:

        The big question is, was it N Korea alone? There was a lot of evidence that whomever hacked Sony was familiar with the internal workings of the Sony system, so either they had been lurking in the system for months prior, or there was additional internal help (Sony had apparently laid off a lot of IT staff for what its worth).

      • Kcarp says:

        I agree with you. I have never felt that the story we are being told is accurate. I find that by having the UN confirm it is North Korea surely it is a lie. Hearing about the CIA/Sony connection makes me wonder if something about the deal went wrong.

        The media decides what we know. If the media decides we do not hear certain details being given by the hackers we won’t hear about it. Think about how you know what has been hacked, a North Korean hacker is not emailing you or whispering in your ear. Our media is telling us what they want us to know.

  15. Miss Gloss says:

    I’ll be honest, Bedhead. All of the stories published today are last week’s news with the exception of that little gem that Kim Kardashian spells Amish Omish instead. You guys usually have the scoop. I’m a little disappointed. I only usually get disappointed when you guys run a shit ton of Cumby stories.

  16. Miss Gloss says:

    P.S. Wow, Obama looks old.

    • lisa2 says:

      That happens when you carry the weight of a Nation on your shoulders.

      When his term is over; he is going to be looking fine as hell.

    • Esmom says:

      I’ve noticed lately how much he’s aged, too, seems he not immune to the accelerating aging process that seems to afflict US presidents while they’re in office.

  17. Rhiley says:

    This is almost as golden as when he called Kanye West “a jackass.”

  18. Amy says:

    I like that in the same press conference covering so many serious issues, he only called on female reporters for questions. I was reading some of the Twitter comments by the women who were in the press corps in the room and how some of the guys were chafing a bit because no men were called on.

    As for the cancellation of the interview, I think it’s a lose-lose situation. Cancel the movie and yank away any trace of it and you will get criticized for caving in to terrorist demands and for setting a precedent for cyber attacks. Proceed with the movie release as planned and press junket tours and you will get criticized for putting the safety of movie goers at risk for a silly satirical movie. We all know that’s what would have happened had movie theaters decided to screen the movie. And if something had happened, like an attack? Then everybody would be saying the movie should never have been made or released. I’m okay with them canceling the movie, even if that means we are censoring ourselves. Better safe than sorry IMO.

    Plus the world does not need anymore Seth Rogen movies. I like to joke it’s a Christmas blessing in disguise (even though I do realize this is a serious situation and lots of personal info about Sony employees were leaked which is NOT okay).

  19. Kelly says:

    Is it possible that this North Korea/threat of first amendment/america bowing to terrorists thing is just a smokescreen to distract people in case more emails/info comes out?

    I think it might be. Sony was stupid in this regard – you cannot show a prominent leader (no matter your feelings) with his or her face melting and then exploding. That’s too far/poor taste. Imagine people doing that with Obama. We can critique them, say we hate them, disagree, etc..but a head melting and exploding??? Come on. You can’t insult a group and not expect ANYTHING, I knew this was going to have repurcussions when the very first trailer came out earlier this year.

  20. LAK says:

    All this over a film starring James Franco and Seth Rogan????!!!!

    • Kiki04 says:

      That’s got to be the funniest part of the whole thing. In honestly it’s probably not even that good of a movie…….(this coming from someone that now will probably go and see it, so oh well).

  21. jane16 says:


    Time Magazine: The Interview Will Still Be Distributed Sony Lawyer Says

  22. Star says:

    Obama talks tough but doesn’t do anything. This cyberattack isn’t going away anytime soon, sadly.

    • supposedtobeworking says:

      I’m not American, but I sure feel for your president. “He hasn’t done anything” … like deport more illegal immigrants than any other president (but he’s soft on immigration), killed Osama bin Laden (but hasn’t wiped out every single terrorist cell), use drones to pointedly target terrorists (and yes, this method has many unintentional tragedies, as does war and neither is okay), (with the help of Biden) take a positive stance on marriage equality, bring national insight (not enough, but it never would be) into some of the challenges encountered by being a person of colour in the U.S, and bring health care options to those who otherwise could not afford it (and yes, I know some people pay more, but the arguments are myopic and self serving. Those who complain loudest are not the people who need it the most). I do not agree with all his decisions, or his communication about his those decisions, but I would disagree with the statement that he ‘doesn’t do anything’.

  23. anne says:

    aside – wow, great quality images.

  24. jane16 says:

    The news today is that North Korea’s internet is under cyber attack and appears to be non functional. This has been confirmed by three cyber security firms. No word yet on if it was us or another country or entity.