Satire has often been an effective form of political protest used to garner attention towards raging dictatorships around the world and to provide a common ground upon which individuals can unite to creatively point out the disfunctionalities of authoritarian systems. The latest incident that has incited uproar on media outlets was the depiction of North Korea’s authoritarian regime in The Interview, a film featuring comedians Seth Rogen and James Franco, who embark on a quest to assassinate Kim Jong-Un, the regime’s leader. However, this film deviates from the function of satire as a political tool and works instead to belittle the tragic experiences of individuals suffering under the authoritarian regime.
The film generated mass attention when a cyber attack on Sony Pictures, the distributor of the film, occurred. This resulted in a cyber pledge from the North Korean hackers against Sony Pictures to incite violence in theatres that showed the film and eventually culminated in Sony’s decision to cancel the screenings of the movie in theatres.
Director Judd Apatow publicly chastised Sony for its decision to cancel the screenings, a stance supported by many others. Opinions arose claiming that the film is a defiant act against the regime of North Korea, which should be supported and not suppressed. Apparently, watching it is a testament to the United States’ and the Western world’s commitment to free speech. In fact, a screening was scheduled for this past Jan. 14 in a Montreal theatre, garnering much attention on social media. The Interview generated widespread endorsement, which creates concern for Western societies’ endorsement of a film that plays against the sufferings within a nation.
Regardless of its political context, The Interview is tasteless; brimmed with cheap sex jokes and juvenile humour. Franco and Rogen are portrayed as idiots incapable of carrying out an assassination. Taking into account the political controversy of The Interview, though, one could make the argument that the film acts as a challenge to North Korea’s regime because it ridicules its dictator. In this case, humour would be seen as a tool for expression, and satire as a means of shining light on a tragic circumstance. But alas, the plentiful degrading body jokes used in the film do not reflect the pains of the millions oppressed in North Korea. This is a movie made for Hollywood’s comedic purposes and the scale of the current reigning terror of Kim Jong-Un’s administration is not a joke. The Interview is not an act of bravery and it certainly does not portray North Korea’s regime, which starves its own people and sponsors concentration camps that imprison millions, in an appropriate light.
Moreover, The Interview focuses on Kim Jong-Un’s quirks as opposed to the evil he has inflicted. Yes, ridicule has a function in working against tyrannical regimes, seen through several cases in the Middle East where protesters used humour to bolster their movements for democracy. In Syria, for example, satirical anti-Assad graffiti and biting slogans are characteristic of street protests amidst the civil war that has consumed thousands of lives. While these acts had an impact for the civilians suffering under the regime, The Interview does not advocate for the free speech of a population that is isolated from the world. In order to truly grasp the effects of such a system, the irrationality of North Korea’s regime from a Western perspective must be simultaneously combined with deep acknowledgement of the state-sponsored scheme of indoctrination created and upheld, which The Interview does not do. In fact, the film is filled with amusing delusions that can paradoxically serve Kim Jong-Un’s regime by distracting from his dictatorship.
As citizens coming from free nations, Canadians can perceive the absurdity of Kim Jong-Un’s regime as cause for mocking it. However, Canadians must be mindful that such an act of government critique can cost a North Korean citizen his or her life and the lives of his or her families. If North Koreans are finally liberated one day from Kim Jong-Un’s administration, they will see that citizens of free nations sat idly by and laughed at their source of horror through derogatory jokes such as those in The Interview, tasteless costumes at Golden Globe Awards (like the one worn by Margaret Cho), and Buzzfeed articles titled “Who did it: Beyonce or Kim Jong-Un,” while they suffered in a constant state of repression.
The main problem concerning The Interview is the mass attention the film received and the widespread endorsement regarding the viewing of such an insensitive film. Through this debacle, one thing became clear—North Korea’s reign of terror became a source of our amusement.
