Apple is a for profit company that doesn't need anything to do with "The Interview" to continue making billions per quarter. Releasing it or not is all about dollars and cents. Why tick off a group that was able to do that kind of damage to Sony when you don't have to? It's the same reason the big theater chains backed out. The implied threat of violence had nothing to do with it. It's a business decision.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Said to Have Declined Offer From Sony to Host 'The Interview' on iTunes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Doesn't matter if you loved it or hated it. There are plenty of Oscar nominated movies I can't stand to watch but many people love them. My wife can't stand to watch anything associated with Starwars/science fiction and I don't judge her for it. Who are you to judge someones sense of humor preferences?
I personally loved the movie. It was my type of comedy. And what standards are you judging the movie on? Is it the same standards Apple uses to produce products in China? So if other companies employ cheap Chinese labor is it ok for Apple to do so? If Apple can take advantage of the situation in China is it wrong to like this comedy?
If a movie about killing the Prophet came out, it would likely be a historical piece. Don't let that get in the way of your precious hatred of a company and people that bought a phone, though.
Will theaters and Apple not release American Sniper because it shows Americans killing terrorist? Are we going to let terrorist dictate what we can watch if they don't like the subject matter?
The entire issue is not about the Interview being bad or good. It's about the freedom of watching it and not being afraid that some random group of terrorist will shut it down. What if German terrorist threatened the release of Saving Private Ryan? Or Vietnamese terrorist shutting down Full metal jacket? We cannot set a precedent of giving into terrorist. Apple showed how weak they are and the cowards here are supporting Apple. I hope you people don't have family in the military; freedom means very little to you people.
You might be right if Apple never decides to offer this movie on iTunes. So far we have no evidence of that. It could be as simple as Cook didn't feel like calling people back into the office on Christmas Eve to get this movie up on iTunes. Had this stupid hack never happened nobody would be talking about this movie; it would be a complete box office bomb.
We just try it on a coworkers iphones 6 and would not let him buy it.there was no option to buy or rent.it just said this video needs to be purchased to play
Maybe Apple should come out and say that everyone is observing the holidays. Plus you got to figure that Apple was approached days before Christmas Eve. Yes; eventually the interview will be released on iTunes at some point in time but it will have already been blown over no thanks to what Google was able to accomplish on a holiday.
What a dumb movie. I had to put it off even before they got to N. Korea. Good thing I didn't pay for this crap...
Must be nice to make things up as you go along and then grandstand, drop the word NATO in and say absolutely nothing of substance.
As for today's horrors - look no further than the Brotherhood of Islam, Al Qaida, Taliban, Iran's exporting of terrorism, ISIS/ISIL, PLO and more. Then again look at Saddam's slow starvation of an entire group of Iraqi Arabs referred to as the marsh arabs or Iran's slow destruction of the Zoroastrian people that predate Islam and even the 'culling' of Coptic people in Egypt. Before you go whining about America or NATO get a grip on what that region has done for centuries and continues to do.
When it comes to cowardice better look twice as some of us know exactly what war is about while you sit there writing from your home or school with such bravado a dolt offering of a post.
No I don't have to figure anything and Apple doesn't have to say anything. I have no idea when Apple was approached. All I know is we didn't hear about it until Christmas Eve. It's Sony's problem for choosing not to release the film and then deciding at the 11th hour to change their mind, scrambling for ways to get it distributed.
Yeah. Sony reluctantly releasing the movie at the last minute (on Christmas Eve) was simply Sony doing damage control on an ongoing public relations disaster. The frothing foaming fanatics were vocal in their criticism of Sony, which included "brilliant" people like Kanye West and similar Hollywood ilk, thus Sony was forced to release the movie.
It was the only thing Sony could do to make the haters stop.
Sony was forced to make concessions to the " freedom of speech" lobby as Sony owned this entire scandal and disaster to begin with. Apple simply made a business decision to distance themselves from all this toxic drama. Google also made a decision, and their take is that they want to profit opportunistically and come out looking like a "champion of free speech" advocacy. Theirs is also a business decision. Not so much that they will make any significant revenue from playing the movie (YouTube), but more because they will earn a little bit of PR. That's really all it is.
FWIW, I rented The Interview last night, on principle alone. There were so many lackluster reviews that I was expecting a complete stinkburger.
Because my expectation level was set at a very, very low bar, I enjoyed the film for the mindless idiocy that it was/is. It seems very likely that the screenplay was written in a haze of pot smoke, as the frequent implausible plot points have a odd common sophomoric thread to them. "Dude, what if THIS happened next?" "Naahhh! That's freakin' awesome!"
Like an Adam Sandler film--unrelentingly stupid yet still somehow funny. If viewers go into it with that level of expectation, there is an outside chance that they will finish it having been mildly entertained.
Seth Rogan's matter-of-fact sardonic quips playing off of Franco's over-the-top performance is a huge factor to this film. It's essentially a stoner buddy-pic. If you don't buy into that, it will be an excruciatingly L-O-N-G movie for you. Also, if the crassest. lowest level of bathroom/sexual hygiene/drug use banter makes you squeamish, you'll want to pass this one up for sure. If there was a lesson this movie was intending to teach its audience, it would be the definition of the VERB "honeypot." That term was woven into the entire script as pervasively as "Rosebud" was in Citizen Kane.
The strength to the film, if there is one, is the way it was shot. I loved some of the visuals. Lots of post-Matrix super-slo-mo used for comic effect, especially in the climax. Another bonus was the performance of the "North Korean" cast. The hot propaganda minister and Un himself were highlights.
Glad I watched it, if only to make a vague individual liberties statement regarding freedom of expression. Doubt I ever would view it again. Consider yourselves warned.
Because my expectation level was set at a very, very low bar, I enjoyed the film for the mindless idiocy that it was/is. It seems very likely that the screenplay was written in a haze of pot smoke, as the frequent implausible plot points have a odd common sophomoric thread to them. "Dude, what if THIS happened next?" "Naahhh! That's freakin' awesome!"
Like an Adam Sandler film--unrelentingly stupid yet still somehow funny. If viewers go into it with that level of expectation, there is an outside chance that they will finish it having been mildly entertained.
Seth Rogan's matter-of-fact sardonic quips playing off of Franco's over-the-top performance is a huge factor to this film. It's essentially a stoner buddy-pic. If you don't buy into that, it will be an excruciatingly L-O-N-G movie for you. Also, if the crassest. lowest level of bathroom/sexual hygiene/drug use banter makes you squeamish, you'll want to pass this one up for sure. If there was a lesson this movie was intending to teach its audience, it would be the definition of the VERB "honeypot." That term was woven into the entire script as pervasively as "Rosebud" was in Citizen Kane.
The strength to the film, if there is one, is the way it was shot. I loved some of the visuals. Lots of post-Matrix super-slo-mo used for comic effect, especially in the climax. Another bonus was the performance of the "North Korean" cast. The hot propaganda minister and Un himself were highlights.
Glad I watched it, if only to make a vague individual liberties statement regarding freedom of expression. Doubt I ever would view it again. Consider yourselves warned.
Last edited:
Maybe Apple should come out and say they only pretend to be a leader, and what they really want is everyone else to take the risks so they can use their vast distribution networks to shine things up and monetize it later.
Exactly. This film was a silly comedy like other Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg comedies with James Franco.
This was not a drama starring Daniel Day-Lewis or Tom Hanks... and it shouldn't have been judged as such.
Would you also characterize Tim Cook's decision to support LGBT as self interested? Can there not be an altruistic motive behind a business decision?
The fact is social and environmental stewardship exists. Google is seen as a champion because they decided to side with values that most north americans agree with (freedom of speech). Once threats to the general public where levelled, the issue became more serious. Not sure why Tim wouldn't want to be a champion again when such an important issue is at stake.
Uhhh....you mean "Americans"?
Interesting way to attempt to marginalize that particular freedom.
Last edited:
I cannot understand the negative reaction by some who have watched the film. I have now watched it through twice and am taken back by the effort put into it. It's also surprisingly portrays the Korean leader VERY favourably as misunderstood.
It is a very provocative film and well worth seeing. Americans actually know very little about North Korea so in an ironic way this is a good way to start an actual conversation about North Korea.
----------
You watched 1/3 of the movie and know all about it?
Torrents don't HAVE movies. They only SHARE links. People have the files and share them communally. Any time a movie is released on Blu-ray or online it is easily ripped and shared.
Thus, releasing the film online before it has finished running through the theaters may keep them from making a lot of money. But you can never tell how much that might have been. Also word of mouth from people who have watched the torrented version may actually help theater ticket sales. Again you can never measure it.
----------
And it was actually quite good. Hmm... I guess reviewers have agendas too.
I hate when people criticize a movie without watching the whole thing, it's your money if you want to walk out a 1/3 of the way trough then so be it and say that but don't base the whole movie on the first 1/3rd.
I didn't like parts, didn't thing the whole biting off of fingers was necessary or the NK guys being run over by the tank but over all it was worth seeing if only to be in the loop as it's probably going to be a big water cooler topic when people start going back to work next week.
I didn't like parts, didn't thing the whole biting off of fingers was necessary or the NK guys being run over by the tank but over all it was worth seeing if only to be in the loop as it's probably going to be a big water cooler topic when people start going back to work next week.
Not quite the case.
Actually that is incorrect. While technically speaking remnants of weapons were found, nothing was usable as it was largely destroyed in 1991.
Actually that is incorrect. While technically speaking remnants of weapons were found, nothing was usable as it was largely destroyed in 1991.