North Korea Takes Seth Rogen Complaint To The UN

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

North Korea Takes Seth Rogen Complaint To The UN

It's an act of war, I tells ya! AN ACT OF WAR!

Last month an unidentified North Korean spokesman threatened swift and merciless retaliation against the US if Seth Rogen's latest, The Interview, ever gets to the big screen, but now it's official: North Korea has taken its sorrows to the United Nations, in a written complaint. It's an act of war, says North Korea's U.N. Ambassador Ja Song Nam; the movie ought never to be shown.

"To allow the production and distribution of such a film on the assassination of an incumbent head of a sovereign state should be regarded as the most undisguised sponsoring of terrorism as well as an act of war," says Ja. "The United States authorities should take immediate and appropriate actions to ban the production and distribution of the aforementioned film; otherwise, it will be fully responsible for encouraging and sponsoring terrorism."

In The Interview, for those of you who haven't been following North Korea's hissy fit, Rogen and James Franco play two journalists who land a career-making gig, to interview the North Korean dictator. Soon afterward they're recruited by the CIA in a plot to assassinate Kim Jong-Un. Hijinks ensue.

While films have been banned in the United States before, more often than not nudity or sexual content is the trigger. Perhaps that shot of Kim Jong-Un's rippling back fat will tip the scales.

Or perhaps not. Seth Rogen isn't too concerned about these developments; after all, he Tweeted back in June, "People don't usually wanna kill me for one of my movies until after they've paid 12 bucks for it."

Source: Guardian

Permalink

Wait what? North Korea has a UN Representative? I thought they had their own legion of doom that consisted of them and their stuffed animals.

fluxy100:
Wait what? North Korea has a UN Representative? I thought they had their own legion of doom that consisted of them and their stuffed animals.

Dude they are "action figures" thank you very much.

Cmon now, you defy the UN all the time.

NK: MOOOOOOM! Timmy said he was going to make a movie where I'm the bad guy.
UN: That's nice dear.
Hollywood: (sticks tongue out blows raspberry)
NK: MOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!
UN: (sigh)

As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

Edit:

One thing to realise here is that it isn't a generic 'assassinate the leader of a foreign' nation film where either the leader is purely a made up character or both the country and leader are made up, it's a film where a real leader will be represented. Usually leaders of countries are made up characters, even when nothing really happens to them.

Regardless, I am curious to see what NK do when this is released, and I certainly don't like what the people of that country are treated like. I just think it's understandable that NK would be a bit pissy about this film.

Do you think someone should pull the North Korean ambassador aside and let him know all his country is doing is giving the film an amazing amount of free publicity?

WendelI:

Dude they are "action figures" thank you very much.

Meanwhile, in North Korea...

I'm sorry, but this is laughable. Next, they're going to order that every copy of M*A*S*H be destroyed too, especially any reference to Five O'Clock Charlie.

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

I'm sure there would be people in the US who'd go crazy, but would it be banned?

If it depicted an actual death of an actual existing person maybe, but you could have a movie, even a comedy where the attempt to kill Obama was the plot.
The question is then whether it's endorsed, or if it can be considered a threat.
I highly doubt that will be the case with this movie, I'd guess they actually won't kill Kim Jong-Un.
From the synopsis, it seems the protagonists aren't on board with the plot.

It's very possible the CIA will look like the bad guys, at least to the same extent as the Kim.

But without seeing the movie...

Really? This coming from the country that makes and distributes videos like this:-

I love this double standard people are taking with this. As others have said in past threads, if someone was to make a movie like this about the USA, there would be an uproar, but because it is occuring to NK its 'fine'.

I'm not going to watch the movie regardless because I think Seth Rogan's brand of humor is idiotic. However, it is a movie that should have never been made.

Lieju:

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

I'm sure there would be people in the US who'd go crazy, but would it be banned?

If it depicted an actual death of an actual existing person maybe, but you could have a movie, even a comedy where the attempt to kill Obama was the plot.
The question is then whether it's endorsed, or if it can be considered a threat.
I highly doubt that will be the case with this movie, I'd guess they actually won't kill Kim Jong-Un.
From the synopsis, it seems the protagonists aren't on board with the plot.

It's very possible the CIA will look like the bad guys, at least to the same extent as the Kim.

But without seeing the movie...

That's true, we don't know from the film how it will play out, but given the sort of film it's likely to be, it's going to have some sort of happy ending, or the main characters will succeed somehow - I'd be extremely surprised if it ended in their failure and execution anyway.

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

Edit:

One thing to realise here is that it isn't a generic 'assassinate the leader of a foreign' nation film where either the leader is purely a made up character or both the country and leader are made up, it's a film where a real leader will be represented. Usually leaders of countries are made up characters, even when nothing really happens to them.

Regardless, I am curious to see what NK do when this is released, and I certainly don't like what the people of that country are treated like. I just think it's understandable that NK would be a bit pissy about this film.

There was a movie about assassinating GWB and it wasn't banned http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-405644/George-Bush-assassination-film-wins-award.html

Though, to be fair it wasn't a crappy comedy and more about what would happen.

Swift and merciless retaliation? lol. Yeah, whats NK going to do.......nothing thats what. They should just be glad the USA hasnt bombed them to pieces by now. Im sure the US would love it if they did attempt any kind of military action against them because they would have just cause to retaliate.

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

Edit:

One thing to realise here is that it isn't a generic 'assassinate the leader of a foreign' nation film where either the leader is purely a made up character or both the country and leader are made up, it's a film where a real leader will be represented. Usually leaders of countries are made up characters, even when nothing really happens to them.

Regardless, I am curious to see what NK do when this is released, and I certainly don't like what the people of that country are treated like. I just think it's understandable that NK would be a bit pissy about this film.

Be pissy about the film, sure, that's fair, but I doubt the US would go this far. They'd cry foul, some of the states would probably ban it, but recognizing that it was a comedy, privately produced, they would recognize the free speech and censorship issues involved. They certainly wouldn't call it an act of war, or terrorism (well, except Fox News, perhaps).

Also, there's the question of hypocrisy here. The stuff that the North Korean State produces and feeds their own people is more incendiary than this, and no one's claiming that's an act of war.

This is amusing, but it's also escalating more than I thought it would. I do hope they don't do anything crazier.

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

Edit:

One thing to realise here is that it isn't a generic 'assassinate the leader of a foreign' nation film where either the leader is purely a made up character or both the country and leader are made up, it's a film where a real leader will be represented. Usually leaders of countries are made up characters, even when nothing really happens to them.

Regardless, I am curious to see what NK do when this is released, and I certainly don't like what the people of that country are treated like. I just think it's understandable that NK would be a bit pissy about this film.

Except that this isn't anything new. Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden were both prime targets for fantasy assassinations in American pop culture over the past decade. Going back even further, Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini were the subject of similarly themed stories before we were even involved in WW2.

And you can bet your bootstraps that people who didn't like King George back around the time of the American Revolution made stories and plays about his death.

Yeah, they can be pissy about it, but that's about all they can do. There is no law prohibiting the movie from being made (well, he could probably sue for slander or unauthorized use of his likeness, but he's not likely to avail himself of the US courts).

frobalt:

Lieju:

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

I'm sure there would be people in the US who'd go crazy, but would it be banned?

If it depicted an actual death of an actual existing person maybe, but you could have a movie, even a comedy where the attempt to kill Obama was the plot.
The question is then whether it's endorsed, or if it can be considered a threat.
I highly doubt that will be the case with this movie, I'd guess they actually won't kill Kim Jong-Un.
From the synopsis, it seems the protagonists aren't on board with the plot.

It's very possible the CIA will look like the bad guys, at least to the same extent as the Kim.

But without seeing the movie...

That's true, we don't know from the film how it will play out, but given the sort of film it's likely to be, it's going to have some sort of happy ending, or the main characters will succeed somehow - I'd be extremely surprised if it ended in their failure and execution anyway.

Yes, but would killing Kim be a success from the point of view of the narrative?

This seems like the kind of movie where the protagonists are trapped between two opposing sides and just try to not die.
I'd see them befriending Kim and getting the assasination called off more of a likely thing from a story-telling perspective.
Or them deciding not to kill him but accidentally doing it anyway.

I'm kinda more worried how they will depict North Korea, actually. What goes on in that country is not fun, and depicting the leader as a wacky loon ignores the shit the normal people go through.

Now theres 2 questions which i think bear worth asking.

One, The Interview is hardly the first movie to portray NK as the antagonistic state, so why are they up in arms over this one and not the dozen or so that came before it?

Two, theyre calling out the US gov directly over this. Do they even understand how the US is run? (Porbably not, since they went and issued a threat to a country with far more resources, allies, manpower and better military tech with war.)

While North Korea are COMPLETELY FUCKING NUTS and "act of war" is kinda an exaggeration, I get where they're coming from here. You can't really have a movie about assassinating the leader of a country you're technically at peace with. Pretty sure people would go crazy if North Korea released a film about assassinating Obama.

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

Edit:

One thing to realise here is that it isn't a generic 'assassinate the leader of a foreign' nation film where either the leader is purely a made up character or both the country and leader are made up, it's a film where a real leader will be represented. Usually leaders of countries are made up characters, even when nothing really happens to them.

Regardless, I am curious to see what NK do when this is released, and I certainly don't like what the people of that country are treated like. I just think it's understandable that NK would be a bit pissy about this film.

not..... exactly?

in fact it would probably be a better movie than the bullshit that we usually get. But there was a movie during the Bush Administration that was basically a "what if...." scenario that dealt with Bush being assassinated.

Of course it was a documentary, so no one ever watched it. But it got made. Most banned films in the US, ironically, were banned for being "indecent, morally objective, or anti-religion", hell, The Profit is still considered banned because LOL, Scientology.

I do have to say that Rogen hit the nail on the head here: "People don't usually wanna kill me for one of my movies until after they've paid 12 bucks for it." Truer words.........

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

Edit:

One thing to realise here is that it isn't a generic 'assassinate the leader of a foreign' nation film where either the leader is purely a made up character or both the country and leader are made up, it's a film where a real leader will be represented. Usually leaders of countries are made up characters, even when nothing really happens to them.

Regardless, I am curious to see what NK do when this is released, and I certainly don't like what the people of that country are treated like. I just think it's understandable that NK would be a bit pissy about this film.

To be fair it is a comedy. Nothing about this is meant to be taken seriously. It's not like Katheryn Bigelow is making this or anything.

While I can't think of a comedy around assassinating a US president, there was a comedy film called Four Lions, about four dopey Islamic terrorists planning a suicide bombing in London. No one banned that one.

So they can make propaganda about nuking us but we can't make a silly Seth Rogen comedy about killing their leader. No fair North Korea. Also, I swear Team America did this years ago and nothing happened. It is a fun thought though, a Seth Rogen film being the cause of World War 3. Future historians would look back and facepalm.

to all the people who think that this movie is offensive or should not have been made, you are wrong and this is why. when you are afraid of criticising, mocking or humiliating crazy dictators, mass murderers, religions and cults...THEY FUCKING WIN! you have any idea how many people that fat asshole has had tortured and/or killed? Do you really want him having any power over you? Whether this movie is good or not, it has shown North Korea as a whining baby thinking it can bully people around with its barely World War II level technology. On top of that, it may only be a Relatively recent development, but the people of North Korea have been finding ways to contact the South as well as the rest of the free world and they do take notice. Whenever you show their governments as the backwards mess that it is, you give them power, and in time maybe they'll actually stand up for themselves.

Shanahanapp:
While North Korea are COMPLETELY FUCKING NUTS and "act of war" is kinda an exaggeration, I get where they're coming from here. You can't really have a movie about assassinating the leader of a country you're technically at peace with. Pretty sure people would go crazy if North Korea released a film about assassinating Obama.

Some people might go crazy but they wouldn't bring it to the UN...

Also what about "Hot Shots" it came out in July 1991 and there was "peace" with Iraq in January 1991?

What I find most amusing about all this is that movie is likely to be quite shit.

FancyNick:
So they can make propaganda about nuking us but we can't make a silly Seth Rogen comedy about killing their leader. No fair North Korea. Also, I swear Team America did this years ago and nothing happened. It is a fun thought though, a Seth Rogen film being the cause of World War 3. Future historians would look back and facepalm.

Well, you see, their videos were just about murdering millions of worthless normal people whereas our movie will be about assassinating a real valuable person [/sarcasm and contempt].

I understand why he's mad about this movie. I just don't care how he feels about anything. If putting a bullet in him would free the people of N. Korea from his tyranny that they don't even realize how shut off they are then I'd support it 100%. But unfortunately he is just the face of a number of powerful leaders.

Ok, a movie about killing a real life person, even as a comedy, might be pushing it. But this is North Korea we are talking about here. They routinely make death threats against the entire American population, spending way to much of their budget on propaganda and "weapons" while their own people starve. Kim Jong-Un could have at least started to turn his country around but decided to keep the family tradition of treating everyone else like ignorant, expendable cattle.[1]Maybe things like this will send the message that when daddy died he just rose up the list of hated (living) people in the world.

The only bad thing I can see coming from this movie is it for once will let The People's Department of Propaganda honestly say that someone in America wants their leader dead. Even if they made a military action, South Korea and US forces there would annihilate them. There "Air Force" is so out-dated, Stalin might have okayed the construction of some of the Soviet planes NK has right now to fight the Nazis. The soldiers are malnourished and ill trained to do more than march, dig "coal mines" and keep an eye on their side of the DMZ.

[1] He's probably a puppet for the real leaders to keep a stranglehold on the people, since they lost eternal president and dear leader. And Jong-Un could be naive enough to be manipulated. As long as they give him riches and he keeps up the public appearances, everyone is happy. (Of course, the general populous has a gun pointed at them telling them they should be happy.)

This will certainly be a funny for historians of the future when they discover that the total thermonuclear destruction of the world was first begun by Seth Rogan.

RRRRRROOOOGGGGGAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!

All this is telling me is that North Korea doesn't understand the Streisand effect I'm sure this is the exact response Seth Rogen wanted.

frobalt:
As bat shit crazy as NK are, I've gotta agree with them on this one.

I mean, could you imagine the backlash there'd be if a country released a film about assassinating the president of the USA? The Americans would go crazy. It would definitely be banned in the USA at least.

Edit:

One thing to realise here is that it isn't a generic 'assassinate the leader of a foreign' nation film where either the leader is purely a made up character or both the country and leader are made up, it's a film where a real leader will be represented. Usually leaders of countries are made up characters, even when nothing really happens to them.

Regardless, I am curious to see what NK do when this is released, and I certainly don't like what the people of that country are treated like. I just think it's understandable that NK would be a bit pissy about this film.

Do you not think it's covered as political satire to make a movie about killing an alive politician? How many people saw to it that George W. Bush was put in situations of extreme peril, harm, and death, fictionally? It's an okay thing to do because politicians aren't "private citizens," per se - they represent ideals, peoples, legislations.

Portraying Kim Jong Un as a mockable, incompetent buffoon, who people believe needs to be removed forcefully from office? That there is satire. That there is irrevocably making a point - he's a dangerous man for whom the CIA probably would be more comfortable with if he was dead. And if you're in a democracy, censoring political ideas, even if they're presented as comedy, is a bit hypocritical. North Korea is a dictatorship, they censor everything, all the time. The US does not - or at least, it shouldn't. But in the same way a film that mocks Obama would be okay, a film that mocks Kim Jung-Un is okay.

Shanahanapp:
While North Korea are COMPLETELY FUCKING NUTS and "act of war" is kinda an exaggeration, I get where they're coming from here. You can't really have a movie about assassinating the leader of a country you're technically at peace with. Pretty sure people would go crazy if North Korea released a film about assassinating Obama.

If you want to be technical, the Korean War ended with a ceasefire, not an actual peace agreement, so technically the war is still ongoing (hence the massive and heavily militarized border between North and South Korea). As for the rest of your argument, have you seen North Korea's propaganda? Has anyone in the States had their Jimmies even slightly rustled by it?

From what I understand about the movie, its not that Fanco and Rogen are trying to kill the president, but they are forced into it by the CIA. In a way it reminds me of "Spies Like Us", and other mistaken identities movies. If those movies are any reference, most likely they are going to meet the president, not kill him, con both North Korea security and the CIA, and escape under false identities.

I still find it funny that North Korea are going to the UN over it. One can picture there were a lot of times in the recent past where they were summoned to answer for something and simply refused to go; and a dumb stoners comedy will do the trick. Sometimes I wonder how low their government self-esteem is, but then I remember their leader had to create a pseudo-religion around his persona to validate his power.

J Tyran:
Really? This coming from the country that makes and distributes videos like this:-

That's the video I was looking for. I couldn't find it amongst all the other anti-U.S. videos depicting the destruction of the White House, the Capital Building, or Obama.

I suspect NK's just jelly of our production quality.

So North Korea went crying to the people they have been ignoring for who knows how long. Of course if the UN doesn't do anything NK will just stamp their feet and scream until somebody gives them a lollipop bans the film. Either that or make some more of their bullshit propaganda movies about Kim Jong Un killing Seth Rogan.

I think that the film is going a bit far, to be about the assassination of an actual named and living individual is a bit much. It could have just been "The president of North Korea" but they decided to go with Kim Jong Un. I can name loads of films where the "President of the United States" is in danger, and some of them are even blatant imitations of one president or another, but the actual name is usually not used which makes it acceptable. To actually name the president makes it worse.

That said it is funny to watch North Korea get all mad and throw idle threats around when I highly doubt they'll ever do anything about it.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here