North Korea Takes Seth Rogen Complaint To The UN

[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.

 

[Craig Rigby]

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.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

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?

 

[Fasckira]

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

 

[Lightknight]

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.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

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.[footnote]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.)[/footnote]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.

 

[K12]

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!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[heroicbob]

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.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

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.

 

[The Pink Pansy]

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?

 

[hermes]

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.

 

[CriticalMiss]

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.

 

[Davey Woo]

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.

 

[josemlopes]

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...

Yeah, its not really the premise but how everything is depicted, even in a comedy. A US made movie about some guys killing Obama will obviously make them the bad guys even if they are the protagonists, in here its really a movie made by a country about them trying to kill an actual living president (not just a ficticious character as the president of NK), it is really dependant on how they show everyone to make it right, otherwise NK is kind of right to be angry.

 

[hermes]

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.

It has not been the first time (http://www.imdb.com/keyword/saddam-hussein/) and likely won't be the last. Under such circumstances, people might complain, and government officials may not be happy, but that is no grounds to ban it. Also, demanding for not being made is overdo it, calling it "an act of war" is an exaggeration, and going to the UN for it a lot more so.

 

[Lieju]

A US made movie about some guys killing Obama will obviously make them the bad guys even if they are the protagonists, in here its really a movie made by a country about them trying to kill an actual living president (not just a ficticious character as the president of NK), it is really dependant on how they show everyone to make it right, otherwise NK is kind of right to be angry.

An important distinction, though.
This is not a movie that's made by the US in any official capacity. This is a movie made by a bunch of Americans.
(And there are people in America who would want a movie where Obama is killed and beheaded for being a gay muslim abortionist or something)

If the government funded it and had oversight over it, it would be different.
But Hollywood doesn't represent the US government.

 

[Dalisclock]

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.

Team America did pretty much the same thing 10 years ago, and NK pitched a hissy fit then too.

And as usual, nobody cared because NK is your Crazy next door neighbor who likes to yell at the sun and shoot off bottle rockets in his yard. Well, and starve his kids and execute his pets, but those are all happening inside his house so nobody cares.

And because no thread about NK is complete without it....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TEvacFETvM

 

[josemlopes]

A US made movie about some guys killing Obama will obviously make them the bad guys even if they are the protagonists, in here its really a movie made by a country about them trying to kill an actual living president (not just a ficticious character as the president of NK), it is really dependant on how they show everyone to make it right, otherwise NK is kind of right to be angry.

An important distinction, though.
This is not a movie that's made by the US in any official capacity. This is a movie made by a bunch of Americans.
(And there are people in America who would want a movie where Obama is killed and beheaded for being a gay muslim abortionist or something)

If the government funded it and had oversight over it, it would be different.
But Hollywood doesn't represent the US government.

Ah yes, true. That does change a lot the perspective too.