ChiefsPlanet
Page 12 of 23 « First 2891011 12 1314151622 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Movies and TV The terrorists have won! (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=289253)

007 12-19-2014 12:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy! (Post 11200649)
We might be brothers. Ferrell is awful (except in Stranger Than Fiction and Everything Must Go).
:clap::clap::clap:

Nailed it

007 12-19-2014 01:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 11201125)
Sony is getting a metric ton of hate for pulling the movie. There are people talking about boycotts etc... As a corporation it was a bonehead move if their concern was violence. That is just idiotic. #1 The vast majority of people wouldn't blame Sony ... they would blame the nutjobs #2 you are saying that it is better to avoid a ridiculously unlikely catastrophe and instead choose a guaranteed public relations disaster instead. In no world is this a good idea. Ever.

Which is why this line of thinking is probably irellevent. As Dane pointed out, this is more likely about IP than it is about violence.
Don't fool yourself. Todays media would eviscerate Sony if an attack happened. I still don't think they would have attacked anything.

Just Passin' By 12-19-2014 01:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11201756)
There's no proof of Sony purchasing insurance in case the film's not released. It's just some guy speculating what *might* happen.

There's no insurance against a studio not even releasing a film. Sure, maybe if the film's prints were irrevocably lost beyond retrieval then maybe Sony might be able to collect some insurance money. But it was their decision not to release the movie. How in the world could they collect insurance in this circumstance?

If that were the case, then every film that bombed at Cannes or AFM or in test screenings could fall under this category of being unreleased, therefore qualifying for an insurance payment.

Sony will write off this film, as they've apparently closed off any other distribution avenues.
It's not just one guy speculating.

Quote:
Why did Sony scrap VOD for The Interview? Insurance, a (non-sony) source tells me. A total loss invokes full coverage, partial doesn't.
https://twitter.com/THRMattBelloni/s...20179832713218

There are articles on the subject, as well. Here's one that's skeptical of Sony's chances:

Quote:
Collecting under extortion insurance could be tricky for Sony because media reports indicate that government officials didn't consider the threats against movie theaters that were scheduled to show "The Interview" to be credible.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sony-now...the-interview/

DaneMcCloud 12-19-2014 01:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 11201782)
It's not just one guy speculating.



https://twitter.com/THRMattBelloni/s...20179832713218

There are articles on the subject, as well. Here's one that's skeptical of Sony's chances:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sony-now...the-interview/
I just have a really hard time believing that any insurance company would cover their losses in this instance. This is far from a "total loss", as Sony has other distribution options.

I'm pretty sure it would be unprecedented and would open Pandora's Box, which would make production insurance skyrocket.

DaneMcCloud 12-19-2014 01:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guru (Post 11201778)
I still don't think they would have attacked anything.
That's easy to say but hard to predict.

There are millions of Koreans in Los Angeles, not to mention Korea-town, which most certainly has its share of gangsters.

Even if the attack didn't end in a loss of life, it would certainly derail an otherwise profitable holiday season at the box office.

Baby Lee 12-19-2014 01:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11201784)
I just have a really hard time believing that any insurance company would cover their losses in this instance. This is far from a "total loss", as Sony has other distribution options.

I'm pretty sure it would be unprecedented and would open Pandora's Box, which would make production insurance skyrocket.
You don't think they developed instruments after all the scrambling to postpone/scrap/edit TV and movies after 9/11?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ber_11_attacks

007 12-19-2014 01:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Lee (Post 11201789)
You don't think they developed instruments after all the scrambling to postpone/scrap/edit TV and movies after 9/11?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ber_11_attacks
We almost lost 24 after 911 because they thought the public may be put off by it. So glad they didn't.

DaneMcCloud 12-19-2014 01:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Lee (Post 11201789)
You don't think they developed instruments after all the scrambling to postpone/scrap/edit TV and movies after 9/11?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ber_11_attacks
I don't think there's an insurance company in the world that would insure against a studio completely scrapping a release, which is what Sony has reportedly decided.

It's the entertainment business: There is always a huge amount of risk, whether it's film, TV or music and no insurance company will exist if they offer terms and payment if a studio decides to shelve a film or album release.

AustinChief 12-19-2014 02:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11201756)
There's no insurance against a studio not even releasing a film. Sure, maybe if the film's prints were irrevocably lost beyond retrieval then maybe Sony might be able to collect some insurance money.
Almost impossible for this film since it was shot on digital, written to LTO (twice actually) then one set of LTOs sent to Sony to be loaded into their ginormous storage system.

I know this because I wrote the shell scripts that were used to archive to LTO to meet Sony's standard for file structure and metadata so it could be processed into their system easily. (My buddy's company Digilabs worked this film... as a matter of fact they just finished up AntMan for Marvel/Disney a few weeks ago)

AustinChief 12-19-2014 02:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11201793)
I don't think there's an insurance company in the world that would insure against a studio completely scrapping a release, which is what Sony has reportedly decided.

It's the entertainment business: There is always a huge amount of risk, whether it's film, TV or music and no insurance company will exist if they offer terms and payment if a studio decides to shelve a film or album release.
Yeah, I can't imagine an insurance company would write a policy that insured against electing to not release a film. That makes no sense.

ChiliConCarnage 12-19-2014 07:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11200738)
1. North Korea found out about this movie and said it should not be made.
2. Sony ignored them and produced the movie.

North Korea has followed through with every threat. Do you really believe that Sony should have ignored the threat of violence, with possible loss of life, over a dopey movie?
Well, they didn't follow through on the threats to hurt SPE employees or their families. Which seems fairly relevant as it's the only other threat that was based on committing violent acts on American soil.

Quote:
Please sign your name to object the false of the company at the email address below if you don’t want to suffer damage. If you don’t, not only you but your family will be in danger.

Donger 12-19-2014 08:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11201316)
The former, not the latter.
Then why did you write this?

North Korea has followed through with every threat. Do you really believe that Sony should have ignored the threat of violence, with possible loss of life, over a dopey movie?

And this?

The risk for Sony was far too great. What if there was bloodshed over a dopey movie? That would be the end for Sony, it's employees and shareholders.

WilliamTheIrish 12-19-2014 08:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Lee (Post 11201003)
Yeah, it's just the CP loony bin. Google 'interview celebrity tweets.'

FTR - I'm no fire breather on this one, Sony made a craven corporate decision but it's not like its an actual national disgrace.
But haven't you heard? The terrorists tewwowists have won.

I just read that here.

Baby Lee 12-19-2014 08:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamTheIrish (Post 11201921)
But haven't you heard? The terrorists tewwowists have won.

I just read that here.
Did Barbara Walters read it to you?

Aries Walker 12-19-2014 09:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 11201812)
Yeah, I can't imagine an insurance company would write a policy that insured against electing to not release a film. That makes no sense.
Agreed. If they did, studios would can every Adam Sandler movie ever made and collect the free money. Also, there would be nothing preventing Sony from collecting the insurance and then releasing the film a year from now.

Yes, this is crazy, this idea.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:28 PM.
Page 12 of 23 « First 2891011 12 1314151622 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.