As The Interview developed into a center of national controversy, the question of whether or not the movie was actually any good almost became incidental.
First, the comedy about a plot to assassinate North Korean leader Kim Jong-un was the supposed reason for hackers attacking Sony Pictures. When national theater chains pulled the movie from their screens in light of terrorist threats, a Seth Rogen-James Franco farce became a symbol of artistic expression versus cold corporate considerations.
So is this a movie really worth planting a flag over? Is it even possible to judge The Interview purely on its merits as a comedy, without factoring in the other considerations that were piled onto its release? Would looking for anything that likely pissed off North Korea hackers be too much of a distraction while watching the film?
Of course, that’s assuming most of the people who downloaded or rented The Interview online during the past week care all that much about the surrounding circumstances. Viewers were surely aware of what made the movie available to be watched at home (or on mobile devices), but maybe they just relished the opportunity to see a first-run movie starring Rogen and Franco at their own convenience, rather than at a theater.
The Interview did get a small theatrical release, thanks to several independent chains who not only saw an opportunity to seize a part of the market that otherwise wouldn’t have been available, but also to make a statement for artistic freedom in film.
But looking at the numbers, far more people took in The Interview online, rather than seeing it in a theater (where offerings were admittedly limited, especially if you live in a region where the movie simply wasn’t available). That presents an interesting scenario for simultaneous on-demand and theatrical releases, something the industry will surely have to confront in the future and warrants an entirely different post.
What about the actual movie? Does The Interview deserve all the attention it’s been getting, based on its own merits as a piece of entertainment? Unfortunately, no it doesn’t. As I’m sure many of you do with friends and family, I often make a snap judgment on a movie as to whether it’s worth seeing in a theater versus renting to watch at home (for half or one quarter of the price). The Interview is a rental.
I didn’t necessarily feel that way originally. I’ve seen many people say on social media that they knew this was going to be a terrible film just from watching the previews, and thus didn’t plan on seeing it anyway. Maybe I was in denial, but I anticipated seeing The Interview during the Christmas holiday. It looked like a refreshing alternative to the dramatic Oscar bait being offered at the same time, like Unbroken or The Imitation Game.
I’m a fan of Rogen and Franco. I loved Pineapple Express and This is the End, with the meta-world it created, was a pleasant surprise. But those films were smart and well-written, both in terms of character and story. They didn’t depend entirely on easy jokes, goofy gags and fart humor. Yet that’s exactly where The Interview works from. Worst of all, it goes to a handful of jokes repeatedly throughout the movie, becoming less funny each time. As the movie progresses, it just becomes apparent that there is really nowhere else for the story go beyond its initial premise.
Is it funny to see Kim Jong-un enjoying Katy Perry songs, blowing stuff up with a tank and partying with booze and ladies? I’d say so, because the idea not only seems ridiculous based on what little we’ve seen of North Korea’s ruler, but it’s also not a stretch to imagine those sorts of hijinks from someone so young, imbued with such power. Great comedy can fill in the blanks with absurdity over reality. Yet there’s not much more to this conceit than what would’ve filled a skit on SNL, other than having the budget to actually use a tank and explosive shells.
Maybe Rogen, co-director Evan Goldberg and Franco aimed a bit too high this time, reaching too far out of their comfort zone. Of course, you could argue that The Interview dials it back after tackling The Apocalypse in This is the End, but the scope of that movie is still quite small and focused.
I feel like there’s a smarter movie in here somewhere, especially in spoofing the media and celebrity culture. Franco’s Dave Skylark is quite an intriguing take on interviewers like Graham Norton and Tavis Smiley, who try to be substantial when talking to less than serious people. I would honestly be interested in seeing him and Rogen’s producer character, Aaron Rapaport, again in a different movie. But can you really tell a smaller story with them after going so big with an international assassination plot? Probably not. And that’s kind of a shame.
