|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jul 18, 2023 8:15:49 GMT -5
No obviously not a 10-yr-old. That fails the basic definition of "consent". But OUR did not limit their activities to children. I have mostly been talking about the movie. There is no mention of Operation Underground Railroad in the movie (from what I am aware). The movie only showed children (very young children) being held as sex slaves for which he would work to free (by posing as a pedophile, usually). From what I understand - the movie is mostly true (like every other movie based on a true story, there will be characters combined and changes to what literally happened). For me, the movie didn't violate some kind of break from reality, the theme of the movie was consistent with reality (Children are not for sale), and the movie was well done. There are going to be people offended by movies based on true stories that make breaks - but then that is the nature of a movie and fitting into 2 hours (it isn't a book). As for what this guy has done unrelated to this movie (not in this movie) - I don't know. If consenting adults were swept up while going in to free children - then tough luck, they are far from innocent. My libertarian sensitivities support consenting adults. However, I do recognize that the porn/sex industry is doing some really sick stuff with usually young girls being victimized. It is possible that many/some don't really have a rational idea of consent - and the industry they are supporting is creating demand for some really sick stuff for Children. There are many grey lines here. I think Mike's point is it's highly questionable any of this actually happened the way the guy says it did. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,229 
Member is Online
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 18, 2023 8:23:33 GMT -5
I have mostly been talking about the movie. There is no mention of Operation Underground Railroad in the movie (from what I am aware). The movie only showed children (very young children) being held as sex slaves for which he would work to free (by posing as a pedophile, usually). From what I understand - the movie is mostly true (like every other movie based on a true story, there will be characters combined and changes to what literally happened). For me, the movie didn't violate some kind of break from reality, the theme of the movie was consistent with reality (Children are not for sale), and the movie was well done. There are going to be people offended by movies based on true stories that make breaks - but then that is the nature of a movie and fitting into 2 hours (it isn't a book). As for what this guy has done unrelated to this movie (not in this movie) - I don't know. If consenting adults were swept up while going in to free children - then tough luck, they are far from innocent. My libertarian sensitivities support consenting adults. However, I do recognize that the porn/sex industry is doing some really sick stuff with usually young girls being victimized. It is possible that many/some don't really have a rational idea of consent - and the industry they are supporting is creating demand for some really sick stuff for Children. There are many grey lines here. I think Mike's point is it's highly questionable any of this actually happened the way the guy says it did. Based on this - I think this movie passes the test on accuracy. Otherwise - we would need to pan every movie ever made based on a true story, because everyone of them will depict something that didn't happen exactly that way as in the movie. www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/sound-of-freedom/ |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jul 18, 2023 8:30:46 GMT -5
I think Mike's point is it's highly questionable any of this actually happened the way the guy says it did. Based on this - I think this movie passes the test on accuracy. Otherwise - we would need to pan every movie ever made based on a true story, because everyone of them will depict something that didn't happen exactly that way as in the movie. www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/sound-of-freedom/The entire thing is based off of his personal account and there has been significant reporting which indicates Ballard is almost entirely full of sh#t. Oh, and that he also has a history of doing sex trafficking in order to stop the sex traffickers. Not saying the movie is bad or good, I haven't seen it, but to call it mostly true I think is inaccurate. |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Jul 18, 2023 8:40:15 GMT -5
Based on this - I think this movie passes the test on accuracy. Otherwise - we would need to pan every movie ever made based on a true story, because everyone of them will depict something that didn't happen exactly that way as in the movie. www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/sound-of-freedom/The entire thing is based off of his personal account and there has been significant reporting which indicates Ballard is almost entirely full of sh#t. Oh, and that he also has a history of doing sex trafficking in order to stop the sex traffickers. Not saying the movie is bad or good, I haven't seen it, but to call it mostly true I think is inaccurate. significant reporting from left wing media, Again, why are liberals fighting tooth and nail to try to discredit this movie? |
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on Jul 18, 2023 8:48:48 GMT -5
The entire thing is based off of his personal account and there has been significant reporting which indicates Ballard is almost entirely full of sh#t. Oh, and that he also has a history of doing sex trafficking in order to stop the sex traffickers. Not saying the movie is bad or good, I haven't seen it, but to call it mostly true I think is inaccurate. significant reporting from left wing media, Again, why are liberals fighting tooth and nail to try to discredit this movie? Again you have no evidence of this. Remember the other day when you fell flat on your face to try and prove what you posted? |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Jul 18, 2023 8:52:40 GMT -5
significant reporting from left wing media, Again, why are liberals fighting tooth and nail to try to discredit this movie? Again you have no evidence of this. Remember the other day when you fell flat on your face to try and prove what you posted? Again, in your opinion which you claim toward every single conservative that puts any information in front of you. Do you realize you’ve never admitted once that you’re wrong. Could it be your problem? |
|
|
|
Post by akbar on Jul 18, 2023 9:19:24 GMT -5
Lots of liberties taken in this entertainment film to scare people. Eh...that's the formula anyways.
Onto reality.
Yesterday a 3-year-old child in California shot and killed their 1-year-old sister after getting a hold of an unsecured firearm, authorities say.
Deputies found a 3-year-old got a hold “of an unsecured handgun,” the sheriff’s department said in a news release.
The family’s 1-year-old daughter suffered a head injury. She was transported to Palomar Hospital and died one hour later, authorities said.
It's not immediately clear if any parents were in the home at the time of the shooting.
“The Sheriff’s Department extends our sympathies to the family and those affected by this death.
There are hundreds of unintentional shootings by children every year in the country. As of July 12, there have been at least 217 unintentional shootings by children, which have resulted in 76 deaths and 149 injuries so far in 2023, according to a count by Everytown for Gun Safety.
How would you like to be the officers responding to this call?
|
|
|
|
Post by staticb on Jul 18, 2023 9:30:23 GMT -5
This is a biased blog, but they do good reporting, and he brings the receipts--you can see the actual case docs and Court Records that this movie is based on. (Just scroll to the bottom if you don't want to read biased opinions) americancrimejournal.com/o-u-r-quietly-exposes-tim-ballards-big-lie/It was a relatively "normal" case and not nearly as sensationalized in the movie. I'd say it's more something like "Greatest Showman" in terms of closeness to accuracy. |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Jul 18, 2023 9:45:59 GMT -5
This is a biased blog, but they do good reporting, and he brings the receipts--you can see the actual case docs and Court Records that this movie is based on. (Just scroll to the bottom if you don't want to read biased opinions) americancrimejournal.com/o-u-r-quietly-exposes-tim-ballards-big-lie/It was a relatively "normal" case and not nearly as sensationalized in the movie. I'd say it's more something like "Greatest Showman" in terms of closeness to accuracy. you want us to take something seriously that has “big lie,” in the heading? |
|
|
|
Post by staticb on Jul 18, 2023 9:51:10 GMT -5
This is a biased blog, but they do good reporting, and he brings the receipts--you can see the actual case docs and Court Records that this movie is based on. (Just scroll to the bottom if you don't want to read biased opinions) americancrimejournal.com/o-u-r-quietly-exposes-tim-ballards-big-lie/It was a relatively "normal" case and not nearly as sensationalized in the movie. I'd say it's more something like "Greatest Showman" in terms of closeness to accuracy. you want us to take something seriously that has “big lie,” in the heading? You can choose what you want to believe. I could have just posted the court docs but I thought the source was important. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 18, 2023 10:19:45 GMT -5
Anyway, back to Indiana Jones, I've seen reports that the budget before marketing (this is important--marketing costs are often about 50% of the budget, especially for what is supposed to be a blockbuster) was between $295 million and $400 million. Yikes. I'm seeing reports that Indy V has now "broken even," which assumes the lower end of the projected budget (~$300 million) and again doesn't include marketing costs. I would say that it can take solace in that The Flash is an even bigger flop, but I'm not even sure if that's true, since The Flash seems to have had a smaller budget (~$200 million).
|
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Jul 18, 2023 10:26:47 GMT -5
Yes, and not a 💧 of that 'sympathy' you accused others of lacking. It was a petty shot at 'Hollywood'. Petty? Or truthful. What do you think American really wants to watch? Not 90% of the crap Hollywood is putting out. And they sure as hell don’t want to be lectured. Just like you don’t like to be lectured on Volley Talk. Are you getting it yet? Thankfully for America, you don’t speak for Americans - who, based on ticket sales, really want to watch Tom Cruise do his own stunts. Or watch a low budget horror movie titled “Red Door,” which came out a week after “Sound of Freedom” and has made more money. Right now, “Sound of Freedom” has made slightly less money than “Cocaine Bear,” so Americans apparently like movies about hopped up forest animals too. In other words, you have no idea “what Americans want to watch.” “Sound of Freedom” is a nice story for its producers and an interesting case study in crowdfunding and marketing, but don’t make it out to be more than it is. |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Jul 18, 2023 10:32:58 GMT -5
Petty? Or truthful. What do you think American really wants to watch? Not 90% of the crap Hollywood is putting out. And they sure as hell don’t want to be lectured. Just like you don’t like to be lectured on Volley Talk. Are you getting it yet? Thankfully for America, you don’t speak for Americans - who, based on ticket sales, really want to watch Tom Cruise do his own stunts. Or watch a low budget horror movie titled “Red Door,” which came out a week after “Sound of Freedom” and has made more money. Right now, “Sound of Freedom” has made slightly less money than “Cocaine Bear,” so Americans apparently like movies about hopped up forest animals too. In other words, you have no idea “what Americans want to watch.” “Sound of Freedom” is a nice story for its producers and an interesting case study in crowdfunding and marketing, but don’t make it out to be mire than it is. If it’s not a big deal and doesn’t have some bigger meaning then why are liberal channels so critical of the film? Why would they bother? Why even focus on it?Why not talk about Tom Cruise? |
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on Jul 18, 2023 10:34:55 GMT -5
Thankfully for America, you don’t speak for Americans - who, based on ticket sales, really want to watch Tom Cruise do his own stunts. Or watch a low budget horror movie titled “Red Door,” which came out a week after “Sound of Freedom” and has made more money. Right now, “Sound of Freedom” has made slightly less money than “Cocaine Bear,” so Americans apparently like movies about hopped up forest animals too. In other words, you have no idea “what Americans want to watch.” “Sound of Freedom” is a nice story for its producers and an interesting case study in crowdfunding and marketing, but don’t make it out to be mire than it is. If it’s not a big deal and doesn’t have some bigger meaning then why are liberal channels so critical of the film? Why would they bother? Why even focus on it?Why not talk about Tom Cruise? You’ve yet to supply a single video of liberal media being critical of this film. In fact they aren’t really mentioning it. It’s more “WAR ON CHRISTMAS” nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jul 18, 2023 10:35:26 GMT -5
Thankfully for America, you don’t speak for Americans - who, based on ticket sales, really want to watch Tom Cruise do his own stunts. Or watch a low budget horror movie titled “Red Door,” which came out a week after “Sound of Freedom” and has made more money. Right now, “Sound of Freedom” has made slightly less money than “Cocaine Bear,” so Americans apparently like movies about hopped up forest animals too. In other words, you have no idea “what Americans want to watch.” “Sound of Freedom” is a nice story for its producers and an interesting case study in crowdfunding and marketing, but don’t make it out to be mire than it is. If it’s not a big deal and doesn’t have some bigger meaning then why are liberal channels so critical of the film? Why would they bother? Why even focus on it?Why not talk about Tom Cruise? Why do we respond to you? Because it's entertaining. Entirely meaningless, but entertaining nonetheless. |
|
