Obama: Sony 'Made a Mistake' By Pulling 'The Interview' Movie

  • Thread starter Thread starter M-Dent
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
RosslynV said:
Obama is right on. Sony has bowed down to terrorism.
Click to expand...
Should they have gone on with the movie now, and forget about any threats to bomb American theaters, killing thousands, and maiming even more?
 
And…if Obama told Sony to not show the film, the same Fox Newsers would be criticizing the President for that.
 
pensmama87 said:
Which part? 😉

I like Seth Rogen and James Franco. Guess that makes me a dumb plebeian.
Click to expand...
I’m just being obnoxious. I supposed I should have chosen the correct smilie to show that. It could be good, but it definitely looks dumb. Maybe it would be dumb fun.
 
M-Dent said:
This is what the CEO of Sony has said in a response given today,
Click to expand...
If you’ve ever wondered how studios manage to have their films released on the same date nationwide; its by contract. Theatre chains enter into a contract when they purchase the rights to air a film which includes the release date. They have to air the film on that date unless the copyright holder grants them permission to do otherwise or they will be sued for breach of contract and potentially lose their rights to air the film altogether. Sony announced days ago that they had released the theatre chains from that contractual requirement so they could make their own decision. So its disingenuous, at best, for Sony to claim that they were forced to cancel the release because they were suddenly ambushed by theatre companies violating their contracts. They authorized it. 🤷
 
Sony let the theaters choose for themselves.
Most decided not to run with the film.

I do not see where Sony had much of a decision left.
 
I wonder if Obama has already seen the movie? I am more concerned
what Obama is going to do about the cyber attack than whether he agrees with Sony’s decision. He’s going to Hawaii for 17 days so what does he care? There will probably be a big story before he comes back to move this story aside.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
If you’ve ever wondered how studios manage to have their films released on the same date nationwide; its by contract. Theatre chains enter into a contract when they purchase the rights to air a film which includes the release date. They have to air the film on that date unless the copyright holder grants them permission to do otherwise or they will be sued for breach of contract and potentially lose their rights to air the film altogether. Sony announced days ago that they had released the theatre chains from that contractual requirement so they could make their own decision. So its disingenuous, at best, for Sony to claim that they were forced to cancel the release because they were suddenly ambushed by theatre companies violating their contracts. They authorized it. 🤷
Click to expand...
Your post is the most salient here but contract law is not so simply laid out as you make it out to be. For every contract there are exceptions and it doesn’t even have to be laid out in the contract for it to protect the theatre chains. Bear in mind that the terrorist threat was directed at the theatres not at Sony headquarters.

I find it ridiculous for Romney to suggest a donation to air it online.
 
ringil said:
Obama is right, but, as usual nothing he says or does is seen positively around here.

It wouldn’t matter his words or actions.

Now if this were a GOP President. . . . . . .
Click to expand...
When was the last time you praised a Republican?
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
If you’ve ever wondered how studios manage to have their films released on the same date nationwide; its by contract. Theatre chains enter into a contract when they purchase the rights to air a film which includes the release date. They have to air the film on that date unless the copyright holder grants them permission to do otherwise or they will be sued for breach of contract and potentially lose their rights to air the film altogether. Sony announced days ago that they had released the theatre chains from that contractual requirement so they could make their own decision. So its disingenuous, at best, for Sony to claim that they were forced to cancel the release because they were suddenly ambushed by theatre companies violating their contracts. They authorized it. 🤷
Click to expand...
Suppose that there was a terrorist attack on a theatre which ran the movie. And thousands of innocent people were killed or hurt. Wouldn’t that open Sony up to huge lawsuits claiming negligence in releasing the film, knowing that there was a possibility of people being bombed and killed? And wouldn’t Sony be liable for at least the cost of defending itself against these lawsuits, and possibly for negligence, so that its liability could run into hundreds of millions of dollars?
 
I may have read wrong, but hasn’t it been determined that these threats are coming from North Korea?

It saddens me to see that we are buckling so easily on this. The movie should’ve been released as planned, allowing the public to decide whether or not they wanted to go to the theater.

Sure, one could argue “but what if there was an attack”…well, there could be. Unlikely considering the source of the threat, though. But where do we draw the line? It seems a lot of people want to keep meeting the demands of the self-proclaimed terrorists. So where does it stop? If they said they’d attack unless we stopped allowing women to vote, would we?

All that said…its North Korea. What’s Kim Jong-Un going to do? Throw water balloons at us??
 
Finite said:
I may have read wrong, but hasn’t it been determined that these threats are coming from North Korea?

It saddens me to see that we are buckling so easily on this. The movie should’ve been released as planned, allowing the public to decide whether or not they wanted to go to the theater.

Sure, one could argue “but what if there was an attack”…well, there could be. Unlikely considering the source of the threat, though. But where do we draw the line? It seems a lot of people want to keep meeting the demands of the self-proclaimed terrorists. So where does it stop? If they said they’d attack unless we stopped allowing women to vote, would we?

All that said…its North Korea. What’s Kim Jong-Un going to do? Throw water balloons at us??
Click to expand...
I believe it was the theatres themselves that did not want to take the risk so they really didn’t have a choice.
 
saintjohnxxiii said:
When was the last time you praised a Republican?
Click to expand...
I would be interested in seeing the answer to that too.

I think that Obama talked good sense when he weighed in on this movie being pulled.

I think that the weight that he used against the anti-Islamic film that was a part of his Benghazi strategy does show a different side to him, and is therefore relevant.

Another incident that has nothing to do with him would be the Mohammed cartoons, and the self-censorship involved in that, as the media caved into the pressure of threats of terrorism there as well.

Terrorism and terrorist threats are stifling to freedom A big part of the problem here was that Sony and theaters had to measure in being held liable for any deaths that occurred if a terrorist attack would have been actually carried out in one of the theaters. Maybe there is a role for lawmakers to ensure that movie theaters and the media have more protection against legal repercussions that might come about as a result of them defying the terrorists.
 
7_Sorrows said:
I believe it was the theatres themselves that did not want to take the risk so they really didn’t have a choice.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand that. It was the theaters refusing to show the film which led to Sony pulling it altogether. My statement was that it’s disappointing to see the theaters along with Sony buckling under this threat. It should be left to the people if they want to see it.

On another note, these “terrorists” have kind of shot themselves in the foot. By making it known they don’t want anyone to see the film, it’s now inevitable that more people will be seeing it than if they had never made a threat. I’m personally not the biggest fan of these types of comedies, but now many people who share my sentiment will be wanting to see the movie.

And I have zero doubt that this movie will see the light of day. My hope is that Sony goes back on their decision and all of the theaters agree to show the film, but I could just as easily see the film being released by other means (pay-per-view, iTunes, etc.). These “terrorists” just made Sony, and all those involved with the film, along with any theater that does decide to show the film, buckets of money.
 
Finite said:
Yes, I understand that. It was the theaters refusing to show the film which led to Sony pulling it altogether. My statement was that it’s disappointing to see the theaters along with Sony buckling under this threat. It should be left to the people if they want to see it.

On another note, these “terrorists” have kind of shot themselves in the foot. By making it known they don’t want anyone to see the film, it’s now inevitable that more people will be seeing it than if they had never made a threat. I’m personally not the biggest fan of these types of comedies, but now many people who share my sentiment will be wanting to see the movie.

And I have zero doubt that this movie will see the light of day. My hope is that Sony goes back on their decision and all of the theaters agree to show the film, but I could just as easily see the film being released by other means (pay-per-view, iTunes, etc.). These “terrorists” just made Sony, and all those involved with the film, along with any theater that does decide to show the film, buckets of money.
Click to expand...
I agree. It is disappointing they buckled because it was a terrorist threat. And I agree that North Korea has now increased the demand in our country as well as other parts of the world to see this movie.
I want to see it. They even pulled Team America from being shown and Franco and Rogen have round the clock protection so North Korea succeeded in striking fear.
 
ringil said:
Obama is right, but, as usual nothing he says or does is seen positively around here.

It wouldn’t matter his words or actions.

Now if this were a GOP President. . . . . . .
Click to expand...
Unfortunate but true.

He would of been attacked had he stayed quiet and got attacked because he spoke up.

People can not have it both ways
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top