• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

“The Interview” now available on Google Play and YouTube Movies [W:66]

The limited release is testing the water. If people beat the doors down at those few theaters, the rest of the theaters around the country will be begging for release to them, too.

This aint your normal movie release and you are thinking in 20th century terms just like the boneheaded movie executives are.

If Sony at all wanted to get any money out of this movie and at the same time "get back" at the hackers, then they would have released it world wide at the same time on line. This movie would never ever have been seen outside the US in the first place, because the actors are relatively unknowns (hardly block buster people) to most international audiences.

So with all the hype thanks to the hacks, Sony had a great opportunity to actually earn at least the cost back on this movie. Releasing it online, on Youtube or Google Play at a reasonable price at the same time it released it in the US, would have garnered revenues that it would never have gotten because people were curious about the movie. In a week that curiosity would be gone and people will not spend 4-5 Euros on renting the movie if it gets released.

Now the question is why Sony did not do this.. and I suspect it is because they dont want to prove once and for all, that an VOD world wide release is not only possible (any idiot can see it is) but that it might actually be more profitable than the traditional methods. Why? Because the traditional methods gives the studios more control and theoretically more money if it was not for this pesky illegal downloads situation and the studios dont want to piss off and kill of the cinema chains. Plus TV producing companies would go totally ape**** over such a release, because it would also prove that doing it with TV shows is possible.

So instead Sony and their kind will continue to complain about piracy, while being the root cause of piracy in the first place, because they dont provide the content in the manner people want.
 
In other words you did not know it was a Sony company.

If you actually grasped that out of my statements, you've got bigger issues than believing that Sony worked out how this movie would be distributed. This was a Columbia thing as they were the ones who got the call telling them to figure out how to do this without putting it in a theater.
 
Last edited:
If you actually grasped that out of my statements, you've got bigger issues than believing that Sony decided how this movie would be distributed or for that matter worked on the deals which took place for the distribution.

Listen.. normally I would agree with you.. however this is hardly "normal" situation is it now?

Columbia is the distribution arm of Sony. Normally it would do its job without any input from Sony Pictures. However this is not a "normal" situation and because Sony owns Columbia, then they can at any time order Columbia around and tell them what to do. All correspondence in this case came from Sony, not Columbia. It was Sony Pictures that was hacked, not Columbia. Sony Pictures holds the rights to the movie, not Columbia. Columbia is a Sony company.
 
Listen.. normally I would agree with you.. however this is hardly "normal" situation is it now?

I agree. It's not normal. However, I have a very serious problem believing that Sony told Columbia anything other than: "Figure out how to get this movie some money, don't put it in more than 300 theaters." It gave basic guidelines and then left the matter in Columbia's hands for the same final approval it would give to another movie with another set of guidelines for release (think arthouse or awardhogs)

Columbia is the distribution arm of Sony. Normally it would do its job without any input from Sony Pictures. However this is not a "normal" situation and because Sony owns Columbia, then they can at any time order Columbia around and tell them what to do. All correspondence in this case came from Sony, not Columbia. It was Sony Pictures that was hacked, not Columbia. Sony Pictures holds the rights to the movie, not Columbia. Columbia is a Sony company.

The fact that it's not normal doesn't change how this played out. Now before you think that it wasn't Columbia which was hacked, some of the e-mails released actually came from Columbia execs. Hannah Minghella, Andrea Giametti, these are people whose e-mails were also leaked:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/matthewzeit...-sony-execs-debate-merits-of-kim-j#.avWybpAaO

A few days later, a group of Sony executives were emailed a BBC story with the headline “North Korea threatens war on US over North Korea movie,” Pascal responded “Is this a joke.”

Hwang, the Korean executive, responded “Let me find out but it will be fine.” Hannah Minghella, the president of Columbia Pictures, said “I think it’s very real and very scary.” Andrea Giametti, the executive vice president for product at Columbia, said, “We survived opus day and Jesus freaks on davinci. Al queda on zero dark thirty. And we will on this too.”

Now, with that said, I don't think whether this is "normal" or not has much relevance. I think Sony did what it would do with any other movie. It gave execs at Columbia basic guidelines and told them to figure out the rest on their own. They did and this was the result. A movie released for US audiences first, and then eventually the rest of the world. Admittedly, it follows in the same tradition as normal movie releases and that to me is evidence that this was the work of Columbia and not Sony perse.

I think that's pretty much the most damning evidence that this was Columbia's doing. The fact that the movie's release follows a traditional release cycle. American audiences first, then the rest of the world, maybe. I think Columbia botched it but only because nobody realized that it would be pirated within 48 hours if not less. However, that's not how Sony/Columbia would have made most of their money on this anyways. So I don't think it's that much of a loss. They'll probably make the movie's budget and more from licensing deals (VOD, PPV, etc).
 
Last edited:
I agree. It's not normal. However, I have a very serious problem believing that Sony told Columbia anything other than: "Figure out how to get this movie some money, don't put it in more than 300 theaters." It gave basic guidelines and then left the matter in Columbia's hands for the same final approval it would give to another movie with another set of guidelines for release (think arthouse or awardhogs)

Considering the lawsuits already in place and the ones to come... it is Sony Pictures if not Sony HQ running the show.. believe me, this whole situation is micro-managed by the top dogs at the company and not left to a subsidiary.

The fact that it's not normal doesn't change how this played out. Now before you think that it wasn't Columbia which was hacked, some of the e-mails released actually came from Columbia execs. Hannah Minghella, Andrea Giametti, these are people whose e-mails were also leaked:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/matthewzeit...-sony-execs-debate-merits-of-kim-j#.avWybpAaO

And you in fact prove that Sony Pictures and Colombia Pictures are the same company ultimately. Why? Because emails and movies from both were hacked.. and the Bond script was taken from Sony Picture servers.

Now, with that said, I don't think whether this is "normal" or not has much relevance. I think Sony did what it would do with any other movie. It gave execs at Columbia basic guidelines and told them to figure out the rest on their own. They did and this was the result. A movie released for US audiences first, and then eventually the rest of the world. Admittedly, it follows in the same tradition as normal movie releases but that to me is evidence that this was the work of Columbia and not Sony perse.

Maybe, but it only shows how stupid the movie industry is.. even when under threat by cyber terrorists..
 
Obama did not criticize Sony for no reason. We cannot allow a third world thug to censor our information system. That won't fly.

What to do is another question. Sony has been cajoled into the role of the missing hero. That cannot be the general solution, however. Too many heroes die. So what to do?

Kid, I like you.
 
Lol what? I've work in or around media for 10+ years and have a pretty strong grasp on revenue and entertainment companies bring in their revenue. Mostly because I find it important to understand how other departments within a media conglomerate work. I did it when I worked in France, I'm doing it now that I work for a much more visible company. Hell, I predicted Glenn Beck's FOX dismissal a full month before it happened.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-...e-booted-his-radio-show-8.html#post1063455705

You don't get to do that by being in a classroom all day. It takes some workplace experience, my man!

Just ten? Thats sweet, homie. Like a georgia peach? Have a peach...
 
Obama did not criticize Sony for no reason. We cannot allow a third world thug to censor our information system. That won't fly.

What to do is another question. Sony has been cajoled into the role of the missing hero. That cannot be the general solution, however. Too many heroes die. So what to do?

U know these things! Some of us dont. They like google n stuff.
 
Considering the lawsuits already in place and the ones to come... it is Sony Pictures if not Sony HQ running the show.. believe me, this whole situation is micro-managed by the top dogs at the company and not left to a subsidiary.

And you in fact prove that Sony Pictures and Colombia Pictures are the same company ultimately. Why? Because emails and movies from both were hacked.. and the Bond script was taken from Sony Picture servers.

Maybe, but it only shows how stupid the movie industry is.. even when under threat by cyber terrorists..

We'll have to agree to disagree. You think this was Sony's doing, I think it follows the well established pattern of Columbia Pictures. The movie was released in the US first, because that's how Columbia would have done it anyways. Sony IMO told them not to have anywhere near a 3000 theater release (mostly because major theater chains wouldn't touch the movie), they went with the internet and independent theaters. This has Columbia written all over it, not Sony.
 
If you actually grasped that out of my statements, you've got bigger issues than believing that Sony worked out how this movie would be distributed. This was a Columbia thing as they were the ones who got the call telling them to figure out how to do this without putting it in a theater.

All fur coat and no trousers. Admit it-its your first day? Christ be praised!
 
We'll have to agree to disagree. You think this was Sony's doing, I think it follows the well established pattern of Columbia Pictures. The movie was released in the US first, because that's how Columbia would have done it anyways. Sony IMO told them not to have anywhere near a 3000 theater release (mostly because major theater chains wouldn't touch the movie), they went with the internet and independent theaters. This has Columbia written all over it, not Sony.

:lamo I heart your attempt at reality! :lamo
 
Just ten?

Yep! Haven't even hit 30 yet. It's part of that... being part of the future... not a relic of the past sort of mentality. I always recommend it to people. It has worked wonders for me. Stay up to date on current events, hit the books, weights, work as much as I can, fall asleep when I want. Gotta stay young, you know? Now, you got anything to contribute to the thread? Or did you give up on that "international markets" thing? :)
 
Yep! Haven't even hit 30 yet. It's part of that... being part of the future... not a relic of the past sort of mentality. I always recommend it to people. It has worked wonders for me. Stay up to date on current events, hit the books, weights, work as much as I can, fall asleep when I want. Gotta stay young, you know? Now, you got anything to contribute to the thread? Or did you give up on that "international markets" thing? :)

U and I see it...the future. U will be mugged there.
But I ask an honest interpretation of the past.

Tell me how it make u feel this night...
 
We'll have to agree to disagree. You think this was Sony's doing, I think it follows the well established pattern of Columbia Pictures. The movie was released in the US first, because that's how Columbia would have done it anyways. Sony IMO told them not to have anywhere near a 3000 theater release (mostly because major theater chains wouldn't touch the movie), they went with the internet and independent theaters. This has Columbia written all over it, not Sony.

Just fyi.. most movies now days are actually released overseas first. For example, the new Hobbit movie. Released on the 10-13th of December in almost 40 countries ...a week before the December 17th wide release in the US. Places like India, Russia, Peru, Iraq and many more got the Hobbit movie before the US.

So this "strategy" you are talking about is not exactly practised much any more. Heck even US centric movies like Guardians of the Galaxy were released overseas before the US... granted only by a day or two, but still.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Alright, some problems in this thread have been dealt with and i'd ask that everyone focus on the topic only - not each other.

It's Christmas and it sucks having to do this right now and i really don't want to be issuing anymore mod action today. Thanks for your support, i would appreciate it.
 
Just fyi.. most movies now days are actually released overseas first. For example, the new Hobbit movie. Released on the 10-13th of December in almost 40 countries ...a week before the December 17th wide release in the US. Places like India, Russia, Peru, Iraq and many more got the Hobbit movie before the US.

So this "strategy" you are talking about is not exactly practised much any more. Heck even US centric movies like Guardians of the Galaxy were released overseas before the US... granted only by a day or two, but still.

You know, saying that that is how Columbia would have done it anyways, doesn't mean that Columbia always releases every movie in the US first. Seth Rogen comedies generally get American releases first. Hell, most US comedies get an American release first.

Superbad - Superbad (2007) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first. - Columbia
Pineapple Express - Pineapple Express (2008) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first - Columbia
This is the End - This Is the End (2013) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first - Columbia
The Green Hornet - The Green Hornet (2011) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US 2 days after opening elsewhere - Columbia
Funny People - Released by Universal in the US - 1 day difference - Columbia internationally

That is the extent of Rogen's relationship with Columbia. 100% of the time they distribute his movies, the US gets first pick. :shrug: I see no reason for them to have done it differently this time. Then again, I haven't really followed the release dates of anything other than event movies (which, you're right, they do seem to get international releases first), so I wouldn't be able to tell you how they're doing with other movies that aren't event movies in any sense of the word. This was a ****ty two bit comedy by two stoner guys. I doubt they were going to aim for an international smash hit.
 
Last edited:
Yep! Haven't even hit 30 yet. It's part of that... being part of the future... not a relic of the past sort of mentality. I always recommend it to people. It has worked wonders for me. Stay up to date on current events, hit the books, weights, work as much as I can, fall asleep when I want. Gotta stay young, you know? Now, you got anything to contribute to the thread? Or did you give up on that "international markets" thing? :)

I really like this. You gotta know.
 
Just fyi.. most movies now days are actually released overseas first. For example, the new Hobbit movie. Released on the 10-13th of December in almost 40 countries ...a week before the December 17th wide release in the US. Places like India, Russia, Peru, Iraq and many more got the Hobbit movie before the US.

So this "strategy" you are talking about is not exactly practised much any more. Heck even US centric movies like Guardians of the Galaxy were released overseas before the US... granted only by a day or two, but still.

I agree, Pete. And Merry Christmas, btw! I know its close to over there!
 
Moderator's Warning:
Alright, some problems in this thread have been dealt with and i'd ask that everyone focus on the topic only - not each other.

It's Christmas and it sucks having to do this right now and i really don't want to be issuing anymore mod action today. Thanks for your support, i would appreciate it.

I appreciate this and will do my part. Merry Xmas, night!
 
You know, saying that that is how Columbia would have done it anyways, doesn't mean that Columbia always releases every movie in the US first. Seth Rogen comedies generally get American releases first. Hell, most US comedies get an American release first.

Superbad - Superbad (2007) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first. - Columbia
Pineapple Express - Pineapple Express (2008) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first - Columbia
This is the End - This Is the End (2013) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first - Columbia
The Green Hornet - The Green Hornet (2011) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US 2 days after opening elsewhere - Columbia
Funny People - Released by Universal in the US - 1 day difference - Columbia internationally

That is the extent of Rogen's relationship with Columbia. 100% of the time they distribute his movies, the US gets first pick. :shrug: I see no reason for them to have done it differently this time. Then again, I haven't really followed the release dates of anything other than event movies (which, you're right, they do seem to get international releases first), so I wouldn't be able to tell you how they're doing with other movies that aren't event movies in any sense of the word. This was a ****ty two bit comedy by two stoner guys. I doubt they were going to aim for an international smash hit.

Lets focus on this Joyous holiday, and talk shop later.
 
You know, saying that that is how Columbia would have done it anyways, doesn't mean that Columbia always releases every movie in the US first. Seth Rogen comedies generally get American releases first. Hell, most US comedies get an American release first.

Superbad - Superbad (2007) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first. - Columbia
Pineapple Express - Pineapple Express (2008) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first - Columbia
This is the End - This Is the End (2013) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US first - Columbia
The Green Hornet - The Green Hornet (2011) - Release Info - IMDb - Released in US 2 days after opening elsewhere - Columbia
Funny People - Released by Universal in the US - 1 day difference - Columbia internationally

That is the extent of Rogen's relationship with Columbia. 100% of the time they distribute his movies, the US gets first pick. :shrug: I see no reason for them to have done it differently this time. Then again, I haven't really followed the release dates of anything other than event movies (which, you're right, they do seem to get international releases first), so I wouldn't be able to tell you how they're doing with other movies that aren't event movies in any sense of the word. This was a ****ty two bit comedy by two stoner guys. I doubt they were going to aim for an international smash hit.

They release comedies in the US first because most comedies are made for the US market. There are exceptions of course... But it this aint the average comedy because of the controversy...and hence should in no way be treated as the typical "comedy" movie. That is what Sony has done and it has lost tons of money doing it... idiotic.
 
They release comedies in the US first because most comedies are made for the US market. There are exceptions of course... But it this aint the average comedy because of the controversy...and hence should in no way be treated as the typical "comedy" movie. That is what Sony has done and it has lost tons of money doing it... idiotic.

Indeed. I wish Sony had stuck to its ground.
 
They release comedies in the US first because most comedies are made for the US market. There are exceptions of course... But it this aint the average comedy because of the controversy...and hence should in no way be treated as the typical "comedy" movie. That is what Sony has done and it has lost tons of money doing it... idiotic.

How you feel it should be treated has nothing to do with how Columbia has dealt with Seth Rogen movies in the past. Again, it didn't deviate from how it has treated his movies in the past and you seem to have an issue with it. Time will tell whether it was a good economic decision or not. :shrug:
 
Back
Top Bottom