By 
After weeks of controversy, Sony pulled a “Christmas miracle” and released The Interview. It was available to watch at select theaters, but more importantly it was available to stream online the very same day. This was a big deal for the future of movie releases. How did it do?
Currently The Interview is the top video on YouTube’s “Popular Right Now” chart. YouTube was one of a few places that had the movie available for purchase ($15) or rental ($6). At the time of writing this article it has over 110,000 likes and 20,000 dislikes. YouTube doesn’t show view counts for movies.
Have you seen The Interview? What did you think? If you still haven’t seen the movie you can get it from YouTube, Google Play, SeeTheInterview.com, and Xbox Video.
[via The Verge]
Really not the ‘most popular video on YouTube’; the official Gangnam Style video has 8 million likes and 1 million dislikes. Maybe the most popular right now, but not ‘most popular [ever]’ by a *very* long stretch.
He wasn’t trying to say it was the most popular video of all time. I think we all understood exactly what he was trying to write.
Read
Well, since his quote is from the title, we know he did read that much and his assessment of the info in the title is probably correct.
Edit to add, I just clicked through to the Verge article and they got their title right.
I find it odd that people assume “most popular ever” when the title doesn’t say that. It just says most popular, which to me means at this point in time.
Which is merely an assumption on your part, the same as the assumption you find odd that other people are making. Which it why this writer’s title sucks and the others don’t. A matter of good writing versus bad.
I would say it is a matter of good reading comprehension and bad.
Yeah, guessing you failed pretty hard in your English classes or just like to defend poor “journalism:”.
I don’t see the word ever, I don’t jump to the conclusion that the sentence means “of all time.”
Reading comprehension is more than just knowing the language.
The title says, “most popular video on YouTube”. Reading comprehension of the word most with no other qualifier attached to it would mean that the writer means no other video is more popular. Joshua was pointing out that this is not true, there are more popular videos out there. If the writer of the title did not mean it to be the most popular, they should put a qualifier on it such as “at the moment of writing” or something like that. Yes, reading comprehension is more than just knowing the language. Maybe you should ask your English teacher to teach you about why this title is a fail.
And indeed, it is the most popular… right now. Notice the lack of a qualifier word indicating it includes the past, as well?
Maybe you should ask your English teacher how to comprehend the language.
So they should have used “currently trending” or something like that. But they didn’t and you’re essentially telling my I’m right. So thank you. Dispute over. You really have no leg to stand on in this.
Sure, a qualifier one way or the other could have helped negate potential confusion. But that doesn’t make it a terrible title, just not a great one.
But adding in a qualifier mentally to assume it includes things it does not specify is bad reading comprehension.
Uh, you make zero sense. The reader getting the idea that Joshua exampled has absolutely ZERO to do with reading comprehension and everything to do with bad writing. You just don’t have a leg to stand on in this at all, accept it.
I cannot agree with you. I read it and comprehended it perfectly without reading the article. It has everything to do with reading comprehension.
Reading comprehension is the ability to read text, process it and comprehend its meaning. I did it successfully, others did not.
I don’t think you have a leg to stand on, frankly. I think you need to accept it.
Seriously, go find an English teacher and show them the title here and the title from the other people who wrote up this article and see what they say. I dare you.
I happen to know a few teachers, actually. I did ask.
They agreed with me.
Your comment is dubious at best. Prove it.
Yeah, because I am going to be able to post something you will take as proof without either personally identifying myself or the people I am speaking of.
Since I have no intention of doing either, we are at a bit of an impasse. I, however, don’t care in the slightest whether you consider my reply dubious or not. I know the truth of it and, really, that is all that matters to me.
So you can’t prove squat. Just another internet wannabe know it all. Enough said. (The fact that you reply tells me that you do care but since you can’t actually give a reply that backs you… well, yeah. Good luck. Don’t ever enter into a debate with someone who knows better than you in the future again.)
I can back it, but I have no interest in revealing any personal data about me or my friends. Sorry if that upsets you, but I don’t really care about your opinion.
Think what you want. It matters not to me. Nothing I could have posted would have swayed your biased position anyway.
I didn’t enter into a debate with someone who knows better than me, so I don’t have to worry about that in the future. Enjoy your superiority complex.
Oh, and I reply because it is rude to ignore people. Not because I care what you think. Man, you make a whole lot of assumptions, don’t you? I think maybe you should graduate from high school before you start acting so grandiose.
Oh, and because I don’t see you actually doing anything but acting the way you are, all superior and high, I will go ahead and no longer reply to your replies to this thread in the future. Enjoy your false sense of accomplishment for showing a know-nothing hick on the internet what for! Even though you didn’t.
“Currently The Interview is the top video on YouTube’s “Popular Right Now” chart.”
Read before you embarrass yourself
zing.
Not really
Since all he is doing is quoting the title, he is correct in what he said. The writer might have posted the correct info in the body of the article but the title would be incorrect.
Read before you embarrass yourself. ;-)
Edit to add: A click through to the Verge article shows that their writer was able to get the title correct. ;-)
And since we never judge anything without listening or in the case reading the whole story, we don’t post comments stating one thing when it clearly was explained in the article another…. That was a headline.. it’s purpose is to get you to click and READ the article.
Don’t support the illiterate
Oh, sorry. I guess I shouldn’t have responded to your comment this time or the last time. ;-) Again, maybe you should READ his post and mine again. Like I said, the Verge was able to get their title correct and I’m sure plenty of people read their article just fine.
Agreed…what the author should have done is post the entire article as the headline…smdh
Or you know, put the proper info in the title like everyone else is capable of doing. Wasn’t really all that hard for anyone else.
Just wondering… has a paid video ever topped YouTube’s charts before?
Wife and I watched it last night. It’s definitely not the best movie in the world and certainly not a 5 star movie in my book but I really enjoyed it. The subject matter, “stupid” humor and Seth Rogen made it very enjoyable. I also am a big fan of propaganda art so that was just an extra for me.
Was the movie funny?
Isaaight
I laughed quite a bit, well worth the 6 bucks.. Even if you don’t like it a lot it is worth the 6 bucks to show Hollywood we are willing to pay for readily available movies we can watch from the comfort of our own house. I honestly hate theaters, they are cramped, over priced, the food sucks and is way overpriced and I get extremely upset when someone kicks my chair or talks throughout after I spent far too much to be there, If movies were released this way more often I would pay to see a lot more of them.
I completely agree.. except I didnt find the movie all that funny.
I would happily pay 7-8 bux to stream it from home the same day its released in theaters. They also need to think about streaming IMAX and 3D versions for those of us that have the capability. I’d never go to the theater again and pay $10 for a bag of popcorn I can make at home for $0.05 and let a dozen rude idiots ruin the experience for me on top of it.
How are you going to stream Imax at home? Imax (real imax, not the fake small screen Imax lots if theaters have now), is all about a giant screen and a super weird aspect ratio, that’s impossible at home.
Lol , yea, I giggled at streaming IMAX from home as well. Im not sure he knows what IMAX is. lol
Heck yeah! As it stands now, I got to the theater about 5 times a year because of how much it costs to take a family or just for date night. I’d pay to see a heck of a lot more movies if we could watch from home.
You don’t really think Hollywood will get that message do you? Not gonna happen for the next few decades at least.
I think seeing movies in a theater is a social even of sorts. It also teaches tolerance. Theaters and the NYC Transit System. lol
I dont like theaters much either. But for big movies, like Guardians of the Galaxy, or Transformers, or Rise of the Planet of the Apes, etc, I like to be in a crowded theater with fans that like to be there on opening weekend. For other movies, ill stay home for, which will be most.
If you think ethnic and sexist stereotypes are funny, then you’ll laugh. By the way, they are funny.
I’ll be catching it tonight at the drive in, it’s the only theater showing it.
Good on whoever is showing that movie at the theatre.
Dont care.. Android website yeah?
Google – Android – YouTube …. All in the same family. Why would YouTube news not be here. YouTube is also a major app on all Android smartphones, so people that watch videos on their Android phones may also be interested in this as Android news. Duh.
Nice try but that’s just stupid. YouTube is not Android even if it’s from the same company. Durp
It still relates. The Play Store is what actually had the movie for sale, which is Android. It was just cross-available with Youtube. Still relevant.
Dont care what anyone thinks, but this was a successful marketing ploy to generate interest and boost ticket and VOD sales for a movie that would have probably done poorly in the theaters otherwise.
Evidence please.
Yep, all of those embarrassing emails and social security numbers, just for marketing. You are an idiot.
Seen it yesterday it was okay not that funny.
No, you didn’t “seen” it, you saw it.
Yeah, I agree, funny in parts, and enjoyable partly because of the pleasure gleaned from thinking how “well” the movie will go down in North Korea… but purely as a movie, 5/10.
Not that funny? You’re just peanut butter and jealous.
Those 20,000 that disliked it are probably all North Koreans…