Should Sony have substituted Kim Jong Un with a fictional character in "The Interview"?

  • Sony isn't being that bright.

    Of course they should have made up a guy to assassinate. I mean I can understand freedom of speech but there is also a consequence to every action, this one may cause lives to be lost. I mean really Sony is really asking to be kicked in the ass. Okay just imagine this India comes out with a new movie about assassinating Obama, i am assuming most people would feel as though they are threatening us.

  • Yes, Sony should have used a different name for the character.

    Here in the West, our every cultural instinct moves in the direction of tearing down the lofty or hierarchical; it is truly no exaggeration to say that here, there is nothing sacred. From this perspective, it can be difficult to understand, or respect, the seemingly insane devotion paid to the North Korean leader. If the makers of the film had had a better understanding of the culture they were depicting, perhaps they wouldn't have gotten themselves into this mess to start with.

  • The film was provocative.

    There is an assumption that Kim Jong Un is a laughable figure and therefore ripe for comedy, but it surely would have been known that his depiction would have been hugely offensive for the North Korean authorities. He is also not a particularly comic figure in reality and depicting him as such degrades the experiences of the citizens of North Korea.

  • Yes, I think that Sony should have substituted Kim Jong Un with a fictional character.

    I believe that it would have been a very wise choice for Sony to replace Kim Jong Un with a very similar fictional character. It makes the movie lose a bit of its appeal, but I think in the long run it would have benefited the company a great deal.

  • Replacing him would dilute the message

    It is not hard to tell when someone has changed something to be politically correct. A newspaper once had to change "Back in black" to "Back in African-American". WTF?
    Changing the name would only have enraged the hacker group more, because instead of being obvious and out front about who they were talking about, they would be very secretive and sorta making people infer who it was. If the character was too similar, people would figure it out anyway. If the character was too different, the message would be lost.

  • Freedom of Speech

    Sony is an American company. While basing a character off of a leader often viewed as a god and killing him may not have been the smartest idea, it was a choice they made and many people would still have seen it. The movie is purely fictional and meant to be a comedy. The movie was approved by the government and by removing the movie they are cowering in fear and letting North Korea win.

  • The risk didn't pay off..

    I don't think Sony had any wrongdoing when deciding to base a character off of the North Korean leader. It was simply a risk that didn't pay off..., at least for now. I mean, it's not like there are already a number of satirical parodies made up with him... And who's to say North Korea could pull off a stunt like that in their own country?

    Posted by: S.K
  • Sony Takes a Risk

    Sony did the correct thing by keeping Kim Jong Un's name as it actually is. Studies have found that once people start to replace the names of the real people that are being portrayed, then the message that the writer wanted to capture can then be easily lost. Sony took a brave stand to do this but not everyone agrees with the owner's response in keeping the name.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.