Cant stand Rogen. But the film does sound like fun. Though if they do cut anything then im not going to watch it. I just think the cuts they make will be the best parts of the movie.
Because war is fun and games... *rolls his eyes*Scarim Coral said:Honestly right now I would like for this film get release in its truest form (no edit or censor) just to see if Kim Jong would really have an all wage out war over a film!
No (duh I was kidding), I just find the idea itself to be ridiculous as in if he was that up tight over it.Demagogue said:Because war is fun and games... *rolls his eyes*Scarim Coral said:Honestly right now I would like for this film get release in its truest form (no edit or censor) just to see if Kim Jong would really have an all wage out war over a film!
I really don't see what this has to do with anything. Are are we not allowed to make a statement if foreigners do not like it?Demagogue said:To all the people claiming freedom of speech... first off, that is an American right, not a world right. Rogen wants to spew that kind of stuff, then go nuts. Limited to the US or other nations with Free Speech (Canada, UK, etc)
Secondly, I'm sure a good chunk of the people claiming freedom of speech for Rogen are opposed to freedom of speech for things like this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/robin-williams-dead-westboro-baptist-church-could-picket-actors-funeral-after-saying-he-was-hated-by-god-and-is-in-hell-9665392.html Where the infamous Westboro church spreads it cries of god hating gays, and divorce and other things.
Just because you agree something should be said doesn't make it right, it makes your opinion inline with the speakers. There is a huge difference.
captcha: Sound of Sirens - Hopefully not
It looks as though one of you is arguing the movie should not exist, and one of you is arguing the movie should be ABLE to exist. You guys aren't necessarily disagreeing.Nikolaz72 said:Sony are also within their rights to change the movie. Which they likely will.Cowabungaa said:snip.
I'm reminded of this one Christian dude that decided to burn Korans in his garden and make a big fuss of it resulting in the deaths of a dozen or so people.
People are crazy, you have free speech. There is no need to needlessly provoke crazy people into violent actions just because you 'can'.
Firs of all posting from phone so excuse the formatting.Demagogue said:To all the people claiming freedom of speech... first off, that is an American right, not a world right. Rogen wants to spew that kind of stuff, then go nuts. Limited to the US or other nations with Free Speech (Canada, UK, etc)
Secondly, I'm sure a good chunk of the people claiming freedom of speech for Rogen are opposed to freedom of speech for things like this: http://w
ww.independent.co.uk/news/people/robin-williams-dead-westboro-baptist-church-could-picket-actors-funeral-after-saying-he-was-hated-by-god-and-is-in-hell-9665392.html Where the infamous Westboro church spreads it cries of god hating gays, and divorce and other things.
okay your phone made that fun to read... lol, but I got the gist of it.Strazdas said:Freedom of speech is actually recognized human right by UN. The american first amendment that is often refered as freedom of speech is actually only covdring part of the whole freedom of speech.
Secondly, as you could find in my posting history, i have repeatedly defended peoples right to freedom of speech even if i dont like what they say. Including, but not limited to westro baptist church, jim stelings racist remarks (no not our jim sterling, another one) and rock turtles pr guy. I support it so much as to not buy products from people who want to force them quiet, bdcause i believe in your right to say what you think even if i dont agree with you. After all, this is esential part of democracy, because censorship you competition leads to single-party systems.
Which I agree gives Rogen the 'right' to make the movie... HOWEVER,Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
AKA, Your rights end when they impede/destroy any of the other rights. Putting aside the fact that NK definitely doesn't follow these, they technically are a member state and are afforded the same protection from them. Which in that case...Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
(source: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/)Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
It does. precisely because its a comedy. Its the same exception as the caricature artists can paint real people (for example politicians) in variuos situations. Creating a parody is different than claiming that that person is like that. Hence the film does not impede NKs rights, thus Rogen retains his right to freedom of speech. That being said, Sony also has their right to not publish it in the form Rogen wants, and Rogen has a right to take his movie elsewhere barring contract obligation.Demagogue said:Yes, it is a parody, but it doesn't matter.