Lizzy Caplan with James Franco and Seth Rogen in ‘The Interview.” (Columbia Pictures)

Random thoughts on the outrage surrounding The Interview, North Korea, Sony Pictures and the “Guardians of Peace”:

First, a Recap. A month or so ago Sony Pictures Entertainment began suffering for its sins, when a massive computer hack orchestrated by the anonymous “Guardians” resulted in the piecemeal public distribution of all sorts of confidential information: executives’ and stars’ salaries; embarrassing email exchanges that revealed trade secrets, exposed hidden rivalries and uncovered latent racism; and even prematurely released the film Annie, a Sony property that was suddenly available for online viewing weeks ahead of its official rollout. This was all reportedly in protest of the planned Christmas Day release of The Interview, a political satire about two American infotainers (Seth Rogen and James Franco) who are invited to meet North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, and promptly solicited by the CIA to kill him.

What Happened This Week. After weeks of headline-driven humiliation, Sony executives hadn’t wavered in their plans to release the film next week. So the “Guardians” raised the stakes, with a terror threat that invoked the September 11, 2001 attacks and promised unspecified retribution on any company involved in showing The Interview to audiences on Christmas Day. The threats couldn’t be substantiated, but Sony publicly told theater owners they would be allowed to back out of their commitments to screen the film if they so chose – and within 24 hours, nearly everyone did. Shortly thereafter, Sony officially pulled the film from release indefinitely.

Hollywood Goes Berserk: Suddenly a small army of big names took to the Internet, accusing Sony of caving to terrorists. This is after a month of sinking fortunes for the studio thanks to the dirty-laundry campaign that has shown the world more than it would have liked to see about the inner workings of Hollywood. So Sony’s not too popular right now anyway. This latest move hasn’t helped any.

But…. What’s the alternative? If the theaters don’t want to screen the film, Sony could only force them via their distribution contracts – and what if some act of terror really did occur in a movie theater on Christmas Day? What manner of outrage would be directed at Sony and those theater owners if they moved ahead with their plans and audience members were injured or killed, and the threat of that outcome had been known a week in advance?

Caveat Emptor. Yes, audiences could have decided on their own not to attend the screenings on December 25. But let’s not forget this is a moneymaking venture we’re talking about. Empty Christmas Day theaters are not a preferable outcome for these businesses. And while the groundswell of grassroots support in the last 24 hours has suddenly turned a lot of Americans into Seth Rogen fans who previously were not, that resolve would understandably turn sideways quickly if a couple of bombs went off next week during a screening or two.

Heroic? Esquire put out an essay last night calling this a Ridiculous War, and proclaiming that the only heroes involved in this mess are Rogen and Franco for making the film in the first place. I think Esquire may have forgotten how movies are made. Sony, not its stars, reportedly put up about $70 million to make the film – and while insurance and tax write-offs will cover that loss to an extent, Franco and Rogen have presumably already cashed their own checks. Sony could have rejected the pitch for the film, as studios are known to do for hundreds of non-starter ideas submitted to them every year. Instead, Sony greenlit the production – an imprudent move, maybe, but not one suggesting cowardice. Meanwhile, the first cancellations in this mess came from Franco and Rogen themselves, who suspended their national interviews in support of the film a day before the theaters and Sony began pulling out. Much as this sentiment isn’t popular these days, there are no heroes here, only victims.

That Said…. It’s outrageous that North Korea would seek to intimidate America interests, but not that outrageous, and maybe not that unexpected. (Unsurprisingly, the federal government has found links between the “Guardians of Peace” and the North Korean government.) Kim Jong Un isn’t known for his sensible responses to criticism; and after all, this is a movie that has fun with the prospect of his assassination. I was ready to see The Interview on Christmas Day, but if it had never been made – if I’d read somewhere that the script had been passed around at one point but never picked up by a studio – I’m not sure I would have been surprised. On its face, this sounds like the kind of audacious idea that isn’t often embraced by risk-averse studios.

Other Options? Yep, Sony could have released the film straight to Video On Demand instead – and it reportedly considered doing so, before suspending those plans. Mitt Romney even took to the web to suggest the studio should simply release the film online for free – which seems to fall squarely into the That’s Easy For You To Say department, coming from a fierce capitalist like Romney. I think VOD is still a reasonable choice, but from the perspective of threat assessment that might only redirect the terrorists’ ire from theater owners to companies like Time Warner and Comcast.

What’s Next? Sony’s decision doesn’t preclude other possibilities down the road – a future release for The Interview is certainly viable. In the meantime, however, I can’t say as I blame the studio or theater owners for deciding to be cautious while the FBI continues to investigate the “Guardians.” That doesn’t make any of this easier to swallow: In this incident, business and art have both been bullied into submission by shadowy foreign interests, which is equal parts tragic and infuriating.

I want to see The Interview. But I’m not dying to see it.