Just opened Prime and found the title streaming since last month.
99% AUDIENCE SCORE @ Rotten tomatoes
Apparently Disney banned this one so keen to check it out.
Users who wish to Block "Additions to Streaming Services" can do so by clicking on the Streaming Service Addition tag, then clicking the 3 dot menu, then clicking hide on new deals and/or front page. Ensure that on the home page, the new front page is selected for customisation to show. Video Instructions here or More info here.
Yes I've brought the pop corn
Disney didnt ban it Einstein
*FTR ive watched this
The term "banned" really triggers the conspiracy theorist crowd. Like a moth to the flame.
GTA 3 PS2 original banned copy FTW.
That quote makes me think of true free market principles, with true 'conservative' values. They saw that they weren't going to be profitable being connected to it, but agreed with the ideas.
And yet they still are the enemy for everyone.
Why we can't just unite against the bullshit of monopolistic business and extreme wealth…. That's the real outrage. We can work out the rest. I have faith
The term banned actually applies because using the definition of the word ban, Disney did exactly that.
they didnt
facts dont care about feelings
@jabroni: You say that like you don't understand what the meaning of banned is. I'm sure there's much much more you don't understand.
@Willy Beamish: if i buy the rights to a wu tang album but dont release it for consumption, i havent banned it
is English your first language?
They didn't ban it. They just didn't choose to release the film when they owned the rights. There have certainly been questions as to the factual accuracy of the film and the backgrounds of the people who made it, so it's no surprise they chose not to be involved with it.
Choosing to not make a movie isnt banning the movie.
Ahh yes the Q-anon adjacent propaganda piece that child traffic experts say does more harm than good.
Anytime someone posting quotes the Rotten tomatoes AUDIENCE score you know they have something to hide.
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/sound-of-f…
It is legitimately based a true story….
Very loosely.
Literally shows footage of real events at the end of the movie - anyone against this movie id question their motives
forget the politics around it child/human traffic is just wrong
@Trying2SaveABuck: Would say the same about sexual harassment, which is what 6 women have accused the protagonist of in real life.
@Trying2SaveABuck: If the movie is, as you've said 'legitimately based on a true story', I think it's pretty inseparable from the person it is based on.
If you're anti-trafficking, I'd suggest that a movie promoting a false narrative about a man who allegedly abused multiple staff of an ostensible anti-trafficking organisation isn't particularly helpful to that cause (and that's before getting into issues with the film's depiction of trafficking, which experts have criticised).
anyway going to be a lot of triggered lefties defending pedos doesnt suprise me
Wow.. here we go
@youfnc: reminds me of right wingers then Catholic priest were getting accused of being pedos and no one wanted to believe it but this is lefties saying 'nah hollywood isnt full of pedos' Mel is the problem…..
it is sad it is a horrible crime and sadly political polarisation has just made the average person to stupid to think for themselves
@Trying2SaveABuck: Mmm, "lefties". Funny how when you actually look at it there are lots and lots of right wingers who seem to be the ones consistently committing sex crimes and sex crimes against children. See good lists here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/t8r2x2/comment/hz…
and here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/m430pz/comment/gqsul3…
@Trying2SaveABuck: No one is defending pedos. Theyre saying that a man literally profiting off "raising awareness" is also a sexual predator.
@Trying2SaveABuck: I'm not against the movie - but the person upon whom it is based has been cut off from OUR and sued by multiple women for sexual abuse.
He is hardly a poster child for the cause.
That said, it is an important one.
@Almost Banned: Prove it.
I looked into this rumour when it surfaced last year and couldn't find any substance to it. Some court documents might change my mind.
(edit, OK found this: https://churchleaders.com/news/466312-theres-strong-financia… ) Will wait for the results of any trial, would be sadly ironic if the accusations turned out to be true but they shouldn't stop people from watching the movie as it's a different topic.
@EightImmortals: How bout dis': https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24024461-file_3727
I mean, its hardly a secret…
@Almost Banned: Thanks for that. Raises some interesting questions and I'll await the outcome of the trial with interest. If it turns out the events of the movie were not factual then for me, that would be a good thing. It's kind of depressing thinking there might be creeps like those in the movie out there in any large numbers so I'd more than happy if the stories were false. But on the other hand, this movie isn't the only of them, and they have persisted over time despite the known cover-ups by authorities.
@EightImmortals: It's eems Tim ballard was a perverted grifter that created this his charity and subsequent movie to become rich and take advantage of women. He sounds like a Trump.
That's most of Hollywood's output in a nutshell
Sound of Freedom 3 - Pedo Hunt, will be better.
Legitimately
In another story uncovered by VICE News, OUR heavily marketed its role in the rescue of “Liliana,” a young trafficking survivor, with Ballard telling a fanciful story about this rescue in Congressional testimony and in op-eds and media appearances in which he called for a border wall. She in fact rescued herself, and did not meet OUR representatives until years after she’d done so, when she was preparing to testify against her traffickers in court.
I don't know about you, but true fighting human trafficking is when Trump backed lunatics steal the story of a young trafficking survivor and make themselves the hero. Also when we believe made up child trafficking Qanonsense like pizzagate, while disregarding actual conservatives trafficking and r-ing kids.
"while disregarding actual conservatives trafficking and r-ing kids."
Like who?
Epstein's list?
So is The Amityville Horror.
Creative liberties have been taken. This guy is out there peddling his movie as 100% factual, and Qanon use it to push their theory that theres a system of underground tunnels for trafficking.
Considering the amount of people who support this movie, saying they want to #saveourkids also voted for Trump, who has links to Epstein, its interesting to see what people will choose to turn a blind eye to
Hurr durr don't believe the reviews
Believe this leftist propaganda mouthpiece instead
I've never seen the movie, probably won't watch it either, but you legit sound a fool trying to quote Rolling Stone as any sort of authority.
Why didn't you post a more authoritative / legitimate news source in the first place?
@Jakal: Longer & more detailed slanted propaganda…great! From the little I've read about this film, I still can't work out why people would be so vociferously against a movie that seeks to highlight the horrors of child trafficking.
@Ham Dragon: To quote the USA today article
"By highlighting false narratives and reinforcing inaccurate stereotypes, we condition ourselves to be on high alert for things like windowless vans, failing to notice actual signs of exploitation. In doing so, we may miss the economically and socially vulnerable young person lured into trafficking by offers of meals, gifts, shelter or simple companionship."
and
"In addition to problematic depictions of child trafficking, it is also troubling how "Sound of Freedom" glorifies rescue missions, disregarding decades of research and experience showing that international sting operations are dangerous, sometimes illegal, often unethical, and fail to dismantle or discourage human trafficking. While rescues and raids make for an action-packed movie, they are far from the preferred response to any kind of human trafficking."
@Jakal: A movie not providing an accurate portrayal and instead embellishing details for the purposes of entertainment? Knock me down with a feather.
Legit plenty of movies out there address certain issues and depict responses to or solutions for these issues (drugs, kidnapping etc etc) that may be completely unethical or illegal but you don't get a seemingly coordinated response that trashes a particular movie when Liam Neeson goes after his daughters' kidnappers for the third time and murders them in cold blood one by one.
It's very tenuous to claim that a niche movie told as a story and not a documentary will somehow affect people to the degree they unwittingly overlook human trafficking clues…talk about grasping at straws.
@Jakal: Lol who cares if they are illegal and/or unethical if they are successful in saving people. You really only need the last point on them being ineffective in actually solving the problem
IT IS A MOVIE
Funny how when they race swap beloved characters we are told not to take it so seriously - mermaids don't exist, its only a film.
But when they put out an anti-child trafficking movie we are suddenly told that movies are super serious, we must take it all very literally, oh and child trafficking is somehow not that important…
So you're saying that to you, whether a mermaid is played by a white actor or not, is as important as an inaccurate portrayal of child sex trafficking in a movie based on a true story?
When you say "child trafficking is somehow not that important" - who/what are you referencing?
I did not say anything about magnitude of issues.
I said this is typical of the crowd that think it is absolutely essential that every movie become a vehicle for gay and trans propaganda - but when people push back against that, all of a sudden those people say - what are you getting upset about, its just a movie…
@Almost Banned: No you literally said "oh and child trafficking is somehow not that important" - who are you referencing here?
'Anti child trafficking movie' has their ever been a pro child trafficking movie ?
Ah yes, sorry, the audience score. Heaven forbid the people decide whether or not a movie was enjoyable rather than the pre-approved "movie critics" lmfao.
Except when the audience reviews are brigaded by those trying to artificially inflate the movies popularity, just like buying tickets to a movie that won’t be used because of its “message”.
The movie manipulated people into thinking buying movie tickets for others to see a fabricated movie was doing their part to help fight sex trafficking. All it did was make them all rich.
Save some Kool-Aid for your comrades!
Not according to the writer and director: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/aug/15/sound-of-freedo…
I reviewed the provided link and believe a better criticism is that it could have been presented in a more beneficial way for victims. However, claiming that it can make the situation worse seems like a stretch. The article is lengthy and repeats the same idea multiple times, possibly assuming many people would only read the title and sub-title. The overall content isn't particularly strong.
However, their critique of the movie can also raise more awareness and potentially assist others in improving their approach when creating this kind of film.
Audience ratings are far more reliable than critics reviews. Critics have a Brahmin Left Unimind. Anything promoting liberalism get 90+%; anything else gets under 60%.
The Rolling Stone magazine is pure "liberal" propaganda; like Vice they pretend to be counter-culture but in reality they support progressive left statism (capitalism + fake 'cultural' marxism). They are just mouthpieces from the Democrat party.
💯
Except when those audience reviews are artificially inflated, which would seem to be the case here.
"Critics have a Brahmin Left Unimind" - sorry, have to disagree completely. Film critics are people well versed in cinema and talk about what makes a good vs a bad film, e.g. cinematography, editing, acting, plot, characters, artistic vision, originality, genre, precedents from other movies, comparisons with the director's other works, etc.
You could possibly call them "Brahmins" if you like, because they're buffs and usually know a ton about the movie format, same as a music critic can offer analysis and perspectives that tell you more than a fanboy saying "I like this but I can't explain why, it's just good music".
Personally, my choice will always favour critics' reviews over audience ones, and it rarely fails when a movie has high critic scores and only middling audience ones - that means it might be a bit challenging or unsettling, as opposed to a feelgood formulaic POS.
Something like this with 57% critics but 99% audience I wouldn't touch with a bargepole at the best of times, but this one is even more suspect because the scores have obviously been brigaded. If we adjusted for the brigading it would very likely have mediocre scores for both.
So sorry, I have literally thousands of movies that would sit above this in my to-view list and life's too short to waste on garbage.
Those are certainly all words
No offence, but someone really should look into you
There's a difference between banning and not releasing a dogs**t movie they inherited via acquisition because they think it will flop and will fail to recoup distribution costs. They did however underestimate the stupidity of Americans (and seemingly Australians) and their ability to fall for grifters.
The disdain for the viewing public in your post is palpable.
Maybe you should get a job working for Disney - you seem to share their appetite for movies that push unpopular agendas and lose money over ones people want and actually make money.
Yes, Disney.. that company famous for not making any money. Sh*tty $30B gross profit in 2023, don't know how they keep the lights on.
Star Wars mostly. AB is referring to some of their recent efforts with a distinctly slanted narratives that missed the mark with audiences.
@Ham Dragon: Star Wars is one part of Disney. They milking the crap out of all their properties. Stretching it too thin. It’s not slanted narratives, it’s fatigue.
I adored Star Wars as much as anyone. I love Mandalorian. Can’t be bothered to watch all the other Star Wars tv shows. It’s too much. Same with the new movies.
@N11: Disney bought Star Wars for the merchandising opportunities, not the theatrical content. Shit even breakfast cereal is branded with the logo nowadays, you can't get away from it. That's where they're making money.
@Ham Dragon: At least they don't have to resort to emotionally manipulating people with a film pretending to be true to make audiences think that buying a ticket contributes to fighting child trafficking. A large chunk of the profits where bought it through this pay it forward scheme. The whole movie is a grift just like the guy in it who has now been thrown out of the charity that he made 500k a year from . This has always been a get rich scheme for him as well as a way to abuse women. He has a lot in commen with Trump …
@ubcool: You seem awfully emotionally invested in hating something that has literally zero bearing on your life.
@ubcool: Not defending anything, just enjoying watching clowns get panty-twisted over a niche corner of the culture wars. Watch the movie or don't, but it seems stupid to deepdive on the alleged behaviour & financial dealings of the actor/producer/whatever because why? Your ideological internet comrades are incensed that people on the right hate child traffickers & want to murder pedos? Weird flex to be against that…
The viewing public likes some pretty shit movies tbf
"hey now, I resemble that remark! 😡"
- Ozbargainers in between telling others to "do their own research"
"Apparently Disney banned this one." A Google would've helped here.
The film's director:
"I think what happened was the following. You know, when Disney bought Fox, imagine all the content that there was to go through. I think we got lost in translation. We were a little movie. Also, we were with Fox International, which is even a step farther from domestic Fox. So I just think that, when the merge happened, our film got lost. I don't think it was intentional to be like, 'Oh, we don't want anyone to see you.' I just think it was the nature of when one company gets bought.
Setting aside any politics, it's also just not a great movie - rewatch Sicario if you have to.
Seems crowd funding & Elon Musk played a role to remove it from being 'shelved' by Disney
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0CFpJpWwAIfDA-?format=jpg&name=…
I was going to watch it, but if Elon Musk champions it, I'm not sure. The Chief Twit proves that the line between genius and lunacy is sometimes imaginary.
What's wrong with Elon?
@Binchicken22: Rhetorical.. 😅
Lefties started to hate him when he ALLOWED freedom of speech on X.. 😅
He's still busy making free-landing rocketships, dominating the electric vehicle market and making brain chips to control these sheep.. 😆
@strangeloops66: He might actually reply if you posted that on X.. 😅
Fat chance in hell for the leaders of the other social media platforms..
"rewatch Sicario if you have to"
Or Lilya 4-Ever, that's actually a very well done movie about sex trafficking.
Lol. Imagine getting that negatively affected because of a "MOVIE".
Someone needs an actual life. lol.
Yet you commented still, hmmmm
If you actually want to help stop child trafficking, I can recommend this charity.
https://www.destinyrescue.org.au/
They have some confronting documentaries to watch also.
The voice of reason on ozbargain
But these people don't want to watch documentaries about actual child trafficking, they want to TRIGGER LEFTIES, dammit.
Seems like they're doing a pretty good job, why else would there be screeching to this extent over a frigging movie being added to a streaming service.
Its been on Prime for a month - so this post won't get an upvote.
I haven't watched it yet - but I will at some point.
I have heard lots of things both good and bad about it, but will reserve my position until I've watched it.
That said, I did recently watch Run, Hide, Fight - which is also available on Prime and was supported by the Daily Wire.
For a cheap indy movie it was not bad.
"Everyone who disagrees with me politically is a pedo"
Politics and conspiracies aside, its actually a decent movie
IMO Jim Caviezel's best work is definitely Person of Interest, cracker of a show.
![[SUBS, Prime] Sound of Freedom (2023) Now Streaming @ Prime Video](https://files.ozbargain.com.au/n/62/830462.jpg?h=b440f1c8)
this will get some peoples panties in a bunch for sure, how fun