The most important movie of 2014 was supposed to open this week, but at the last minute it was cancelled. The comedy in question, The Interview, didn’t seem like it was set to be an important film, it actually looks relatively forgettable, but I have not seen it. In fact, nobody will see it for the immediate future, given that it was pulled from the schedule when theatres cancelled showings. Whatever the quality of the film or its actual potential for release, it will still wind up being the most important film of 2014.
The reason it’s important is because of the controversy surrounding it. In the months leading up to it’s planned release, a hacker group called “Guardians of Peace” did an extensive hack of Sony Pictures’ servers, releasing emails, production details, corporate financial information and all sorts of other sensitive documents to the public. They have threatened terrorist attacks against any theatres that screen the film opening weekend.
Why are they doing this? Well, the film itself is about a plot to assassinate Kim Jong-Un, current “Supreme Leader” of North Korea. While the country itself has denied responsibility for the hacks and the threats, it has also been pretty enthusiastic about them – calling them “righteous acts,” no less – and it had previously released a statement saying the release of The Interview would be considered an act of war. They might not be officially behind the hacking group, but they’re not exactly hiding their involvement well.
The Interview is now the most important movie of the year, possibly of the century, because the events surrounding its release are now going to be influencing world affairs far into the future. What it has sparked is something of an information war, and even if the information released is not ultimately that important, the fact that it has been accessed and distributed is the important thing. Right now, this is an issue confined to a major corporation, but we live in the age of information. It stands to reason that institutions significantly more important than some film studio will see attacks of this nature. If the release of a film is enough to launch such attacks, what does it say for actual diplomatic relations?
It also shows how censorship is going to be handled. Creative expression can now be blocked by a group of people with computers far beyond your borders. There can certainly be the argument that The Interview isn’t actually vital art, but it is being suppressed, and it’s being suppressed by people outside of North America and outside of areas where the film was being actually distributed. The threats have worked to push the film away from being a major release, and while governments might not negotiate with terrorists private corporations are not willing to take a risk in these instances. The Interview itself might not be an important work, but these tactics have now proven effective. It remains to be seen if they are deployed by others.
The Interview has, by accident, shown the world exactly what the extent of information-based warfare is, even if the film itself and much of the information released from the hack is largely frivolous. It’s a kind of warning shot, it’s not going to damage most of us, but imagine if the target is a bit more vital than a frivolous comedy.
