Hacker News Reader

Comment by kolev | Hacker News Reader

Honestly, I think Sony did take a big risk with that movie. First, the movie is total crap, and, now, because of all the noise, more people will watch than it deserves when it gets released on DVDs, cable, and so on!

We know CIA and NSA do sabotages as well and have hacked the whole world already - why do we think this right is reserved only for America and North Korea and other countries are not allowed to do this when it serves their interest?

View on HN

how do you know the movie is crap? it's probably at least as good as any seth rogen movie. and seth rogen movies were good enough to get this one made.

for my money, it had a great trailer. the movie could be okay. it's easy to pile on to the notion that the movie is crap, as it makes the proceedings even more absurd. if the movie was good, then sony is somewhat vindicated, but we can't imagine that to be the case, because sony has bungled every moment of their response.

There are no good comedies these days. If you put a price tag on your life's worth and then calculate the dollar value of an hour of it, will you invest all that money into watching a crappy comedy, really? Although the time spent watching may have some health benefits from the laughter, I think meeting friends and having a social conversation, which is often accompanied with even healthier laughter is time much better spent. I personally want to "invest" in a movie only if it enriches me in some way. Unfortunately, these movies are so rare nowadays.

> the movie is total crap

That's quite the statement to make despite not watching it

I was forced to watch the previews at Edwards - it's crap according to my moderately high standards. I know it's good for the demographic that watches movies with farts, vampires, zombies, and the horror crap that sums up what comes out of the rear end of Hollywood these days.

Seth Rogan movies are a reasonable product. He got paid a bit more than $10m for this film. James Franco got a bit less than $10m. It cost something like $45m to make. There are very many much worse films being made, especially in the comedy genre which is pretty poor overall. (Does anyo e have recommendations for great comedy films from the last ten years?)

While not great comedy they're better than the Adam Sandler shovelware being churned out by Sony -- films that were given pretty heavy criticism from Sony employees in the leaked emails.

Well, I totally agree about Adam Sandler, but we need to demand quality. If we keep watching (i.e. paying for) subpar movies, movie studios will keep making them - cha-ching! I'd rather watch one quality comedy than 10 crappy ones. And the humor these days is getting very primitive - nothing sophisticated like in the British flicks or, let's say, Louis de Funes. These are comedies, the rest is idiotware made for people who're brain-dead to enjoy them as well (wider markets). I recently started to show my kids Charlie Chaplin movies and they love them. We need to keep raising the bar, not constantly lower it.

Not everyone has the same taste in humor as you.

By definition, most people lack taste, intelligence, manners, beauty, etc. I know my taste isn't popular, because I'm blessed not part be of the gray mass of the majority.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com