Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Cider
18 Jul 23 20:10
Joined:
Date Joined: 29 Aug 02
| Topic/replies: 59,509 | Blogger: Cider's blog
After its filming ended in 2018, Sound of Freedom landed a distribution deal with 20th Century Fox. Unfortunately, after the Walt Disney Company acquired 20th Century Fox, Sound of Freedom ended up becoming one of the projects the studio shelved. With what followed, the film's producer, Eduardo Verastegui, spent more than a year getting rights for the movie from Disney. Unfortunately, as soon as Disney released the rights for the film, the COVID pandemic held the film's crew back from releasing it in theaters.

On the bright side, after Disney released the Sound of Freedom's rights, the producer took it to Angel Studios. The studio acquired worldwide rights to the movie and used equity crowdfunding to raise money for its marketing and distribution. According to reports (via The Wall Street Journal), Angel Studios garnered funds worth $5 million in just 2 weeks after 7000 people invested in the project. Before Sound of Freedom acquired $5 million through crowdfunding, its overall budget was estimated to be $14.5 million.

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 56
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 20:29
This reminded me of the German wikipedia having the most German explanation on adrenochrome ever.

Adrenochrom ist zudem Bestandteil einer Reihe zeitgenössischer Verschwörungstheorien wie Pizzagate von 4chan und QAnon. Diese Theorien behaupten die Existenz unterirdischer Lager, in denen Kindern die vermeintlich verjüngende Substanz abgezapft werde, vergleichbar mit altertümlichen Ritualmordlegenden. Da sich das Stoffwechselprodukt jedoch leicht durch die Oxidation von Adrenalin gewinnen lässt, wäre eine Extraktion aus dem menschlichen Körper unwirtschaftlich.[8][9][10]

Adrenochrome is furthermore part of several modern conspiracy theories from 4chan and QAnon. These theories allege the existence of underground camps in which the allegedly rejuvenating substance is being harvested from children, comparable to old-age ritual murder legends. Since the metabolite can be easily won through the oxidisation of adrenaline, the extraction from human bodies would be inefficient/uneconomical" [from a cost/use perspective]

Whoever, as usual efficiency and cost obsessed German, wrote that is completely missing the point that the satanic cabal does not primarily care about those things. They greatly care about the whole ritual harvest deal.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 20:30
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrenochrom
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 20:35
Surely you don't source your information from wikipedia ?


However I know that some people are desperately trying to politically smear the film. Which obviously makes it interesting. Another framing is that it's a faith based film. As if there isn't a faith that promotes the protection of children, in the strongest terms.


Hopefully we will get to make our own judgement.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 20:46
What precisely do you condemn about reading the wikipedia article on adenochrome?
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 20:47
adrenochrome
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 20:54
Personally I have a policy of ignoring wikipedia completely. Even tho it is spammed so heavily in browser searches.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 20:55
But why? What is wrong with reading wikipedia articles on chemical compounds like that for some basic information?
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 20:57
And what is your go to place for such things instead? The Encyclopaedia Britannica has no article on it.
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:02
I told you, I dismiss it as a rule. There may be some genuine content there, and equally some completely twisted content. I have no inclination to try and establish which the thing I'm looking at is.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:04
What's some completely twisted content?
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:04
And what's there to twist with chemical formulas and such? Aaaaaaaaaaaand, what's your go to place for basic chemistry?
By:
lfc1971
When: 18 Jul 23 21:06
The Pied Piper of Hamelin ( German:der Rattenfanger von Hameln )
is a legend from the town of Hameln Lower Saxony, Germany
The legend dates back to the Middle Ages and references a rat catcher
who when the citizens refused to pay for his services as promised he
retaliates by leading the children away.  Wiki
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:07
That is indeed a German legend well summed up in a few brief sentences by Wikipedia.
By:
lfc1971
When: 18 Jul 23 21:11
I still remember vividly as a class in primary school , no older  than 7
reading that story as if it was yesterday
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:11
Though .... did you actually retype/rephrase that from Wikipedia instead of copying it? Or why is there e.g. no Umlaut in Rattenfänger?
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:12
We Germans are very precious about our umlauts. Please do not make us read umlaut-words in which the umlauts were removed.
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:14
Not debating wikipedia, it is by definition edited by anonymous random individuals. I'm sure some of it is reliable, and some of it not. I know in my uni course that we were not allowed to cite wikipedia in submissions. As it was too unreliable.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:15
Cider • July 18, 2023 9:14 PM BST
Not debating wikipedia,


Why not?
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:16
Scared of showing your cranky side if you highlight "completely twisted content" that is only completely twisted for severely cranky people?
By:
lfc1971
When: 18 Jul 23 21:18
ä
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:18
That's the weird part with high status people. Sometimes completely open with showing off just how big of a crank they are, but deep down their high status urges also makes them embarrassed about it at times.
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:19
The thread is about the movie in the title (or more accurately the reaction, as we don't yet have the opportunity to watch it at the cinema).
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:21
Ok, you wrote "Causing a bit of a stir (ie upsetting the right people)."

What are your top five favourite right upset people?
By:
Get me a drink
When: 18 Jul 23 21:27
Apparently, this movie is causing the air conditioning to mysteriously break down in AMC cinemas, and also fire drill evacuations mid-way through the showing. I wonder why...?
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:28
Yeah, why?
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:29
Pop the phrase into a browser search and see the top results of the 'news' tab should do it.

This is the top entry on google

Bloomberg

QAnon and ‘Sound of Freedom’ Both Rely on Tired Hollywood Tropes
Sex trafficking movies routinely skip over some very important questions, which gives the conspiratorial right room to run wild.


Yes. Bizarre.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:30
What's wrong with that item?
By:
Get me a drink
When: 18 Jul 23 21:31
It's almost as if certain people don't want the public to view the film. Can't think why a film that highlights the sex trafficking of children would elicit such a response.
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:31
It wouldn't surprise me if the establishment blocks it getting a licence over here. I've not looked into it, but seems quite strange indeed that it has no release date.
By:
lfc1971
When: 18 Jul 23 21:31
Are any of these stories ever true ?
apart from the pied piper of Hamelin from the Middle Ages
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:31
Wouldn't it be lots easier to simply not show the movies instead of showing it in quite a few cinemas only to then have the air conditioning break down?
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:35
What's wrong with that item?


What are your top five favourite right upset people?



For my sins I've had to watch Bloomberg output on tv for my trading on the odd occasion. Let's just say it lilts in a liberalist direction!

You can do the rest of the work yourself.

But as Get me a drink has noted, some people appear to be very upset about this movie, and it seems it may well be being sabotaged.
By:
Get me a drink
When: 18 Jul 23 21:36
It all makes me wonder where these children are trafficked to. Or rather, who they are trafficked to. I can only hope this film has some answers.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:37

Jul 18, 2023 -- 3:35PM, Cider wrote:


What's wrong with that item?What are your top five favourite right upset people?For my sins I've had to watch Bloomberg output on tv for my trading on the odd occasion. Let's just say it lilts in a liberalist direction!You can do the rest of the work yourself. But as Get me a drink has noted, some people appear to be very upset about this movie, and it seems it may well be being sabotaged.


So you are plainly attacking the outfit (again) instead of arguing the item or position?

By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:42
In the light of the above. Would it be very rude of me to take

Cider • July 11, 2023 8:16 PM BST
Doesn't comply with the woke mantra, essentially. Left wing, liberalist, marxist, however you want to label them go for the person and not their arguments or positions. It's far easier therefore to make people predetermine him as the devil incarnate, they then don't have to listen to what he says. Most people probably think the JK Rowling is anti trans for example. Without knowing anything she has said or done about the topic.


and change a few words to make it

Cider • July 11, 2023 8:16 PM BST
Doesn't comply with the woke mantra, essentially. Left wing, liberalist, marxist, however you want to label them go for the publication and not their arguments or positions. It's far easier therefore to make people predetermine [the website] as the devil incarnate, they then don't have to listen to what [they write]. Most people probably think [Bloomberg lilts in a liberalist direction]. Without [really having read all too much from them or in particular that specific journalist]


to, in a very funny way, question if you could potentially be a bit hypocritical at times? Or is this something totally entirely different?
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:43
No. I said that the film is upsetting the right people. It's called sarcasm. I'm sure that anyone aged over 11 knows what it means.


It's hella weird that media beats are smearing a film that is seemingly based on a true story about children being saved from child traffickers.
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:44
But as Get me a drink has noted, some people appear to be very upset about this movie, and it seems it may well be being sabotaged.

To you too:

edy • July 18, 2023 9:31 PM BST
Wouldn't it be lots easier to simply not show the movies instead of showing it in quite a few cinemas only to then have the air conditioning break down?
By:
Cider
When: 18 Jul 23 21:48
Yes well the part I quoted from Bloomberg is not a review of the movie or the content is it. It's a transparent smear.


And to return to the central theme. It is really interesting that the movie is being flooded with smears from the 'right' people.


One would have though, a portrayal of kids being saved from being trafficked is something that everyone could (and should) get behind....Especially as the film has took off in popularity in an organic way. We will probably be told by the same people that Barbie is amazing :)
By:
edy
When: 18 Jul 23 21:49
Furthermore, if T-H-E-Y wanted it buried, why did Disney not simply keep the rights? There is zero need or obligation for a company like Disney to give up the right.

Or if Disney are not part of T-H-E-M, why didn't T-H-E-Y buy the rights from Disney?

Cider • July 18, 2023 9:48 PM BST
Yes well the part I quoted from Bloomberg is not a review of the movie or the content is it. It's a transparent smear.


What part of the item itself do you view as most smearing?
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com