Sound of Freedom || Discussion of The Movie And Its Producers Should be HERE and HERE ONLY || The Report Button Is Your Friend || Keep It Civil

[von Kenni]

I saw the film yesterday in a half-full showing at 4:30pm. The audience seemed to be more than half latinos and the rest black which is close to the demographics in my neighborhood though the theater had white moviegoers too who wore pink for some reason I don't know if racial demographics have any relevance here and I feel even mentioning them wrong because that always highlights our differences in an unnecessary way IMO. The fact was that we were all there and enjoying the film. Pretty much everyone stayed to see the special message and people started to clap after it. I have to say that "God's children are not for sale" is a pretty good line.

 

The film was good with 4/5 stars. The theme elevated it a bit. The kid actors were amazing, Caviezel's eyes as well, and I liked Bill Camp's performance as the eccentric sidekick very much. There were great scenes with great music but also a few overly stretching moments. And not a tad of any conspiracy crab or hidden messages that my detectors saw.

 

It brings up how the US is the biggest consumer of child trafficking and related media, and generally sheds light on it at the beginning and the end of the film. It's not a documentary and showcases only one type of trafficking based on a true story (however loosely). I'm not a Christian but I can describe the potential impact of the movie by paraphrasing Mother Teresa "When I hear about the suffering of masses, I don't act, but when I see the suffering of one, I will".

[PatrickvD]

My problem with this movie is that it’s largely driven by conservatives that act like nobody else cares about child abuse.

 

The same conservatives that looked the other way when the Catholic Church was exposed for doing the same thing they now pretend to be outraged by.

 

It’s all selective outrage and virtue signaling. Regardless of the whole Qanon angle which I’m too exhausted to even dip into.

[Day and Date The Best]

On 7/15/2023 at 3:40 PM, von Kenni said:

 

 

 

I see valid points both ways and thought to share my take with an overseas perspective, that has lived 5 years in the States but followed its politics for decades, studied its history, and was raised by its popular culture.

 

I think we agree on the importance of films and popular culture in creating a shared story, telling what is good and what is bad, and providing shared meaning, even language that ties us together as a community, and as fellow human beings.

 

At its worst, films and popular culture have been used for heinous purposes by extreme regimes on the left such as communist Mao's China and in the Soviet Union, or on the right such as Hitler's and Mussolini's fascist regimes. In liberal democratic countries films and popular culture have always been somewhat left/progressive wing leaning by definition (art is about pushing boundaries, questioning traditions and past, trying out new things) as well as mainstream media. Although Fox News spearheaded the birth of mainstream right-wing media in the US.

 

I understand the doubts about SoF from a broader perspective given the highly polarized environment in the US (hurray for a two-party system!) but I think we are also overreacting here, especially since SoF doesn't have any overtly political content (unless you count being against child trafficking now as a right-wing cause like freedom of speech is probably associated). Even the end credit's Jim Caviezel's speech looked like a tamed virtue signaling at worst compared to typical Hollywood counterparts. Only the mention of God made it different. If that's extreme or political, then I don't know what to say.

 

Looking at Angel Studio's offerings and future projects, I haven't seen any extreme stuff or any special politics there. We could argue that current Hollywood promotes more and more extreme identity politics in its movies where you must even have quotas for different races, ethnicities, and identities in all productions in order to even be nominated for Oscars. I understand that for many here it is the right thing to do, and anything else is borderline racism, sexism, or other form of oppression, but for a big part of the country it feels like misguided, righteous lecturing that is more counterproductive and divisive in its methods than uniting.

 

Right or wrong, there's a big portion of the US that feel this way about Hollywood. They don't have many alternatives and it's wrong to paint them as QAnon supporters or otherwise extreme. It's about half of the country. Sure there is a vocal extreme part in that as is on the left too but the majority no. It feels almost funny how now people more on the left feel afraid that there might be right-leaning studio alternatives that have been more or less missing before. How do you think the people more right have felt the past 50 to 100 years? Fear of the extreme drives polarization on both sides.

 

There's a hunger for non-Hollywood-produced alternatives. Studios like Angel Studios can now exist because of new technology platforms in funding, marketing, and distribution.

 

My worry is what happens if film and TV studios are divided to left and right in the future like news media in the US today but that's not a valid argument to be against anything that studios like Angel Studio produce. It is nothing like Fox News and even if it can change, it should have the benefit of the doubt in my mind. Popular culture echo chambers in films would increase societal fragmentation and polarization even more. Already the huge supply of new content and ideological/political divided news media have eroded our common threads to the point where we start to lose our common language, label words as left or right leaning, and lose the sense of shared culture.

 

As an example, I can find shared meaning when discussing with my Mexican friend that grew up on the other side of the world because we watched a lot of the same movies and TV series when we were kids and teenagers in the 80s and 90s. They were part of creating our sense of right and wrong, values, and culture generally. How much are we going to have that in the future?

 

Top Gun Maverick is an even better example. In these divisive and polarized times, I've shared moments of meaning and excitement about it with all kinds of people across the spectrum from left to right, maga, men, women, all ages, and different races, and ethnicities. When my Latino mother-in-law who doesn't speak or understand English came out from the theater with smiling and excited, it gave me hope. There's no reason why we can't create shared stories that unite us. Even at these times.

 

 

 

Full dissagree that Hollywood should stop the diversity, that diversity has helped big budget non diverse films being made like EEAAO being made and are great, agree that Angel Studios have every right to succeed, you cant be against what hollywood is doing because it seems its paying off, Little Mermaid for the hate it got shouod not have made over 300 million worldwide yet it made 500, seems something is working, Angel Studios is right on doing Sound Of Freedom and propelling it to the heights it did. 

 

Sound of Freedom is a good movie, people to the left are exagerating, you saw people wearing pink, wich could mean they made a BarbFreedom douboe feature and had no problem with it. The peoole saying this is Qnon and a pipeline is nearly as exagerated as saying Barbie is a man hating movie. Maybe us time to calm down or not?. 

Edited July 29, 2023 by Day and Date The Best

[charlie Jatinder]

TL;DR what actually is problem with this movie?

[robertman2]

13 minutes ago, across the Jat verse said:

TL;DR what actually is problem with this movie?

The star, director and person movie is based on are all using the movie to promote a conspiracy about Democrats being blood drinking pedos

[XXR vs XXR]

14 minutes ago, across the Jat verse said:

TL;DR what actually is problem with this movie?

 

Without getting into it too deeply, there's basically nothing wrong with the film by itself but the people who made it are either very heavy conspiracy theorists or at the very least, heavy handed politicos. 

[lilmac]

I love, love, love this box-office run. For me, Sound of Freedom joins Mario, Oppy, and Barbie as one of the feel good box-office performances this year.

 

-------------------------------------------------

XXR Dar-Benn

Without getting into it too deeply, there's basically nothing wrong with the film by itself but the people who made it are either very heavy conspiracy theorists or at the very least, heavy handed politicos. 

 

That's why those who are undecided shouldn't worry about the opinions of critics who oppose the film, based on external non-film factors, particularly political ones. In Hollywood, there are plenty of heavy-handed politicos on the left who incorporate their beliefs into their movies, which is something that "Sound of Freedom" did not do. And yet, this doesn't deter conservatives from continuing to watch movies. It's a good film on its own merit. 

Edited July 30, 2023 by lilmac

[MrHardapple]

So no friday numbers yet?

[poweranimals]

4 hours ago, MrHardapple said:

So no friday numbers yet?

What do you mean? They've been available since yesterday.

[WittyUsername]

16 hours ago, XXR Dar-Benn said:

 

Without getting into it too deeply, there's basically nothing wrong with the film by itself but the people who made it are either very heavy conspiracy theorists or at the very least, heavy handed politicos. 

From my understanding, the film also apparently exaggerates the story it’s based on, particularly the accomplishments of Tim Ballard. 

[XXR vs XXR]

Just now, WittyUsername said:

From my understanding, the film also apparently exaggerates the story it’s based on, particularly the accomplishments of Tim Ballard. 

 

I haven't looked into the story but I'm sure that's the case. Most films "based on a true story" tend to exaggerate/embellish the good parts and remove the less appealing ones.

[WittyUsername]

1 minute ago, XXR Dar-Benn said:

 

I haven't looked into the story but I'm sure that's the case. Most films "based on a true story" tend to exaggerate/embellish the good parts and remove the less appealing ones.

True, but considering the people who made this film, the fact that they would play so loose with the details takes on a bit of a more sinister light. 

[Borobudur]

24 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

From my understanding, the film also apparently exaggerates the story it’s based on, particularly the accomplishments of Tim Ballard. 

Like 99% of the movie that about "based on true story" out there.

[Ozymandias]

17 hours ago, XXR Dar-Benn said:

 

Without getting into it too deeply, there's basically nothing wrong with the film by itself but the people who made it are either very heavy conspiracy theorists or at the very least, heavy handed politicos. 

 

This is pretty much what I suspected.  Nothing necessarily problematic with the film itself but due to some of the views a few of the creatives hold there are a lot of people projecting their personal views/biases onto the film whether its loony Q chuds or that terminally online outrage machine that thinks everything they don't like is problematic/far right propaganda/violence/conspiracy theory/etc because welcome to 2023 Murica discourse.

 

 

[von Kenni]

1 hour ago, XXR Dar-Benn said:

 

I haven't looked into the story but I'm sure that's the case. Most films "based on a true story" tend to exaggerate/embellish the good parts and remove the less appealing ones.

 

18 hours ago, across the Jat verse said:

TL;DR what actually is problem with this movie?

 

It's hard to know what the accuracy is but the core of it with my light research is highly likely to be true meaning the part that Tim Ballard & co. organized a baiting operation for human sex traffickers and with the local authorities saved a lot of women and children and caught the organizers. How much do the child characters, him going to the jungle like a poor man's Rambo or the general course of action during the story with the Department of Homeland Security rings true, I don't know. There is so-called investigative journalism from Vice on the general exaggerations of the Operation Underground Railroad that Ballard founded for these operations but I would take that with a grain of salt and would rather see something like that from e.g. New York Times or WaPo.

 

They show some real footage from the operation and have those available online too. They have of course been criticized for exploiting the victims when they try to use them as proof and showing one reality of human trafficking. So either way they are screwed in some people's eyes.

 

Here's one recap about the controversies (some of the things and links there are from Vice stories as well):

 

https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2023/07/10/sound-of-freedom-box-office-sales

 

They take politicians, media, and other influential people to witness firsthand their sting operations such as Tony Robbins in Haiti.

 

 

[WittyUsername]

Well, now Variety is claiming the studio has used some kind of “Pay It Forward” strategy for this movie. 

[JustLurking]

1 minute ago, WittyUsername said:

Well, now Variety is claiming the studio has used some kind of “Pay It Forward” strategy for this movie. 

Have you been living under a rock this past month or something?

[WittyUsername]

Just now, JustLurking said:

Have you been living under a rock this past month or something?

 

I was referring to this tweet. And no, I’m not suggesting it’s unquestionably true. Maybe they’re lying. It wouldn’t be the first time. 

[JustLurking]

1 minute ago, WittyUsername said:

 

I was referring to this tweet. And no, I’m not suggesting it’s unquestionably true. Maybe they’re lying. It wouldn’t be the first time. 

No, what I'm trying to tell you is that the pay it forward thing is true, has been true from the start, and it has been well known as unquestionably true

 

vast majority of the tickets have been redeemed though, really

[WittyUsername]

2 minutes ago, JustLurking said:

No, what I'm trying to tell you is that the pay it forward thing is true, has been true from the start, and it has been well known as unquestionably true

 

vast majority of the tickets have been redeemed though, really

So why are people here claiming it’s a conspiracy?