Movies you just saw

[SeekNDestroy]

Seriously, all three of you (Gattaca, Toronto, Seek) have bought into the red herring they fed you hook, line, and sinker. You keep repeating the same bogus points over and over without confirming anything for yourselves. Have you always just accepted what you're told rather than find the truth out for yourselves?

There. Are. No. QAnnon. Conspiracies. In. The. Movie.
This. Movie. Is. Not. About. Politics.

I don't know how those points can be said any plainer. Caviezel's personal opinions, however crazy they may be, have absolutely nothing to do with this movie. You guys are on the outside believing Chicken Little when they say the sky is falling. It just looks silly at this point. Do yourself a favor and see it for yourselves.

The. Star. Actor. Made. It. About. QAnon.

 

[GATTACA!]

And what QAnon conspiracies are part of the film?

I’m not going to keep reiterating my fairly simple point so you can continue to misconstrue what I’m saying.

 

[SeekNDestroy]

The first and last paragraph in the "QAnon" section of that article are all you need to know. The rest is unrelated drivel that has nothing to do with the film:

Somebody needs to ask Caviezel why he has connected the film with qanon then.

 

[Blazers46]

From the WaPo article:

“Sound of Freedom” doesn’t depict anything close to QAnon conspiracy fantasies, which have been linked to incidents of extremism and violence including the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The film’s villains are common criminals, not the shadowy cabal of occultists imagined by QAnoners.
But the movie has nevertheless been promoted on QAnon message boards, and some accuse it of playing into the movement, which is based on the false belief that a highly organized network of global elites are kidnapping children, having sex with them and harvesting their blood.
That’s partially because Ballard and the actor who plays him, Caviezel, have both expressed support for some of the QAnon’s movement’s wildest claims.
Ballard once entertained a viral theory that claimed the online furniture retailer Wayfair was selling children, sometimes packing them into overpriced storage cabinets. “Law enforcement’s going to flush that out and we’ll get our answers sooner than later,” he said in a July 2020 Twitter video. “But I want to tell you this: children are sold that way.” There is no evidence to support the theory, which has inspired threats against employees and impeded actual child trafficking investigations.
A month after that video, Ballard described conspiracy theorists’ support for his organization as a mixed blessing in an interview with the New York Times. “Some of these theories have allowed people to open their eyes,” he said. “So now it’s our job to flood the space with real information so the facts can be shared.”
Speaking at a QAnon-affiliated conference in Oklahoma in 2021, the actor said Ballard wanted to join him but “he’s down there saving children as we speak, because they’re pulling kids out of the darkest recesses of hell right now, in … all kinds of places, uh, the adrenochroming of children.”
The moderator asked him to elaborate. “If a child knows he’s going to die, his body will secrete this adrenaline,” Caviezel said, his voice catching. “These people that do it, there’ll be no mercy for them. This is one of the best films I’ve ever done in my life. The film is on Academy Award level.”
In reality, adrenochrome is a relatively mundane chemical compound created by oxidizing adrenaline, though the author Hunter S. Thompson portrayed it as a kind of super-drug popular with pedophiles in “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.”

Thank you for sharing your thoughts, I mean an article your read to be your own.

 

[TorontoGold]

To your first point sure you have not told anybody to not see the movie. And you claim to be answering a question about why this movie has such a large audience and such a large audience rating by posting and parroting an article about QAnon. Which is not the reason why this movie has gained so much popularity.

The Barbie and Scientology examples are not remotely close to the backlash of sound of freedom. The question posed on this board was why is this movie so popular, and that it must be directed at some niche market. Your answer was to parrot QAnon, which is insulting to many of the people that not only looked forward to watching the movie and enjoy the movie, but encourage others to see the movie because of the impact it could potentially have on persons to potentially make an impact on real life society. The movie was made with a general purpose, Barbie and Mission impossible were made to entertain. Even in the Barbie review, the reviewer is not suggesting that feminist are flocking to this movie because if it’s feminism type themes. Tom Cruise movies are not being negatively impacted by his real world beliefs. So while you sarcastically post Tom Cruise articles, these are not movie reviews.

My initial point was that there were QAnon ties because of the lead actor. I'm not parroting anything, the actor himself has made these connections long before this movie was released.

The movie doesn't have a star studded cast and isn't pushing the boundaries with new subject matter that hasn't already been done to death. The modern victimhood complex that has become popular in the circles that Jim Caviezel travels in is a huge boom to its success, when you can sell the idea that this is a controversial movie (it's not at all lol) and that your enemies (blue haired pussy hat wearers) HATE it you'll drive a ton of conservatives to the movie theaters to go see it. It's the same marketing ploy that has been used for years for classics that have been rehashed so ham fistedly, like Ghost Busters. It's just the shoe is on the other foot this time.

If the movie leads to collective action against human trafficking then that is a positive thing. I hope those that view the movie as impactful will use it to change their opinions on migration and making it safer for those people.

 

[GATTACA!]

Churches around the nation are talking about this movie and encouraging others to see it. I’ve never personally met any QAnon people… I’ve personally met Church people, I am one. my concern and it’s pretty evident that you have no clue what’s in this movie but continue to double down on its QAnon theme and credit it’s popularity to QAnon. It’s pretty insulting.

I would agree churches buying out whole theaters and paying tickets forward is also another big source of the positive review bombing.

 

[Blazers46]

I’m not going to keep reiterating my fairly simple point so you can continue to misconstrue what I’m saying.

Sex trafficking is a QAnon conspiracy, got it.

 

[SeekNDestroy]

I’ll read the article when you watch the movie. It’s pretty evident you don’t have your own thoughts and feelings you just echo what media tells you.

I don’t watch movies starring Jim Caviezel, just as I don’t watch movies starring Tom Cruise.

 

[ulukinatme]

The. Star. Actor. Made. It. About. QAnon.

No, he didn't. He said some crazy stuff about sex trafficking years after the movie was shot and made. That doesn't make it about QAnon.

 

[SeekNDestroy]

Sex trafficking is a QAnon conspiracy, got it.

14

 

[Blazers46]

I would agree churches buying out whole theaters and paying tickets forward is also another big source of the positive review bombing.

But QAnon ties of the driving force, is what you are saying

 

[ulukinatme]

I’m not going to keep reiterating my fairly simple point so you can continue to misconstrue what I’m saying.

You don't have a point. You have someone else's point that you've adopted as your own. You haven't seen the movie, so you're believing what they've fed you.

 

[SeekNDestroy]

No, he didn't. He said some crazy stuff about sex trafficking years after the movie was shot and made. That doesn't make it about QAnon.

Then why did he say it?

 

[Blazers46]

My initial point was that there were QAnon ties because of the lead actor. I'm not parroting anything, the actor himself has made these connections long before this movie was released.

The movie doesn't have a star studded cast and isn't pushing the boundaries with new subject matter that hasn't already been done to death. The modern victimhood complex that has become popular in the circles that Jim Caviezel travels in is a huge boom to its success, when you can sell the idea that this is a controversial movie (it's not at all lol) and that your enemies (blue haired pussy hat wearers) HATE it you'll drive a ton of conservatives to the movie theaters to go see it. It's the same marketing ploy that has been used for years for classics that have been rehashed so ham fistedly, like Ghost Busters. It's just the shoe is on the other foot this time.

If the movie leads to collective action against human trafficking then that is a positive thing. I hope those that view the movie as impactful will use it to change their opinions on migration and making it safer for those people.

Your initial point that they were a QAnon ties… with the initial question was asking why the movie was so popular. That was your answer, you parroting a Q, anon article.

 

[ulukinatme]

Then why did he say it?

I don't know, because he's crazy? Does it matter? It's not part of the film in any way.

 

[Blazers46]

You don't have a point. You have someone else's point that you've adopted as your own. You haven't seen the movie, so you're believing what they've fed you.

I think the running theme is if you are a conservative against sex trafficking, you are QAnon. If you were a liberal against sex trafficking, you are in good moral standing. I’m pretty sure if Tom Cruise and Barbie made a movie about sex trafficking the liberals would be chomping at the bit to watch it.

 

[Blazers46]

Nobody in this thread has said to not see the movie - not a single person. Oddly enough, many have thrown out accusations at anyone who hasn't given this movie an IE Oscar. No one has said "don't see it", I even praised the fact this has opened people's eyes to human trafficking.

The victim narrative that any criticism is from some biased liberal media! is hilarious, because movie reviews are written by the cattiest most petty people ever. So mentioning an actors ties to a whack job group of people does not discredit the movie. Woody Allen had a whole ass Netflix documentary made about him being an actual pedophile (Irish2155 maybe watch this and compare it those you think are actual pedos), and people still go see his movies. Reviews get written about his past and rinse repeat life goes on.

I posted 4 articles that include Scientology in the title of the article, in the lens of those that are taking any mention of QAnon as an afront to the movie's quality, this would be exactly the same.

You want to see a good example of a reviewer including their political bias into a movie? Here's a howler from a site with no agenda. Who cares what theatre kids who never got to be actors have to say lmao.

‘Barbie’ Review… — World of Reel

You’ve got to hand it to Greta Gerwig, her “Barbie” is one of the weirdest and most audacious big studio summer movies I’ve ever seen, and that turns out to be a good and bad thing. It’s also incredibly self-absorbed in its own virtues.

www.worldofreel.com

I just read an article where the movie Barbie uses the word patriarchy over 10 times. That would be an example of bringing social politics into a movie. So they deserve that criticism.

 

[ulukinatme]

I think the running theme is if you are a conservative against sex trafficking, you are QAnon. If you were a liberal against sex trafficking, you are in good moral standing. I’m pretty sure if Tom Cruise and Barbie made a movie about sex trafficking the liberals would be chomping at the bit to watch it.

I'm not gonna comment on all that..I just think it's funny that people that have not seen the film are trying to tell people that have seen the film...what content is in the film and what it's all about.

 

[GATTACA!]

You don't have a point. You have someone else's point that you've adopted as your own. You haven't seen the movie, so you're believing what they've fed you.

I don’t need to have seen 12 Years a Slave to know it was about slavery, I don’t need to have seen Schindler’s List to know it was about the Holocaust.

This movie is about sex trafficking. That’s the connection.

Spin all you like.

 

[ulukinatme]

I don’t need to have seen 12 Years a Slave to know it was about slavery, I don’t need to have seen Schindler’s List to know it was about the Holocaust.

This movie is about sex trafficking. That’s the connection.

Spin all you like.

Yes, it is a movie about sex trafficking.

It's not about QAnon or conspiracies.

Spin all you like, it's not part of the film.

 

[Irish#1]

No I didn't
Yes you did

No I didn't
Yes you did

Yes I did
No you didn't

See, I told you I was right.
Mommmmmm!

 

[TorontoGold]

Your initial point that they were a QAnon ties… with the initial question was asking why the movie was so popular. That was your answer, you parroting a Q, anon article.

Right, the political bent being that the lead actor has QAnon sympathies. It's not parroting when the guy spoke at a QAnon conference. The popularity in my opinion is being driven by reactionary culture war people who want to politicize it as a Left vs Right thing. At it's core it's a pretty basic story that's been told a bunch of times before by D list celebrities with a small budget.

I just read an article where the movie Barbie uses the word patriarchy over 10 times. That would be an example of bringing social politics into a movie. So they deserve that criticism.

I would rather read EJ Holland articles than any movie review.

 

[GATTACA!]

Yes, it is a movie about sex trafficking.

It's not about QAnon or conspiracies.

Spin all you like, it's not part of the film.

Show me where I said the movie was ABOUT QAnnon.

 

[GATTACA!]

So pretend for a second it all is a choice of stand against QAnon or stand against child sex trafficking,… just to play along,… now absorb that for a moment and exhale slowly.

I'm not standing against the movie. I don't care if people go see it, support it, or enjoy it. My only point from the very beginning of this discussion was that the movie was obviously being review bombed for some reason. Blazer seems to agree with me but thinks churches going to see are more responsible.

And to be clear once again, this isn't an uncommon thing. Look at early fan reviews for The Flash. You'd think it was the next Citizen Kane. Those were DC fans going to see a DC movie and wanting to make sure it received a positive buzz.

 

[ulukinatme]

Show me where I said the movie was ABOUT QAnnon.

Show me where the film has anything to do with QAnnon, because you guys won't stop beating that drum.

 

[ulukinatme]

This thread title might need to be changed to "Movies you DIDN'T see, but you read hack articles about them in Rolling Stone or WaPo."

 

[GATTACA!]

I don’t understand how it being a conspiracy deserves such pushback even if it were (it’s not, but just to play along),… the ‘conspiracy’ is ‘children and being sex trafficked, it’s monstrous, let’s try to stop it’?? That’s the big bad tin foil hat theory these media outlets are so upset over??? The only conspiracy or bullshit theory I see is the idea that this stuff isn’t happening,… legit crazy times.

The movie being a conspiracy?

 

[greyhammer90]

I'm sure one more round of comments will sort all this out and everyone's minds will be changed.

 

[NDohio]

I'm sure one more round of comments will sort all this out and everyone's minds will be changed.

You and your damn question started this whole fight!

 

[ulukinatme]

At this point I have a feeling that the other side has doubled down so hard that if they actually saw the film they'd realize they don't have a leg to stand on. They'd have to admit it's just a simple film without some ulterior agenda. For that reason they're not going to see it.