Sound of Freedom (movie)

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.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrenochrom

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.

What precisely do you condemn about reading the wikipedia article on adenochrome?

adrenochrome

Personally I have a policy of ignoring wikipedia completely. Even tho it is spammed so heavily in browser searches.

But why? What is wrong with reading wikipedia articles on chemical compounds like that for some basic information?

And what is your go to place for such things instead? The Encyclopaedia Britannica has no article on it.

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.

What's some completely twisted content?

And what's there to twist with chemical formulas and such? Aaaaaaaaaaaand, what's your go to place for basic chemistry?

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

That is indeed a German legend well summed up in a few brief sentences by Wikipedia.

I still remember vividly as a class in primary school , no older  than 7
reading that story as if it was yesterday

Though .... did you actually retype/rephrase that from Wikipedia instead of copying it? Or why is there e.g. no Umlaut in Rattenfänger?

We Germans are very precious about our umlauts. Please do not make us read umlaut-words in which the umlauts were removed.

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.

Cider • July 18, 2023 9:14 PM BST
Not debating wikipedia,

Why not?

Scared of showing your cranky side if you highlight "completely twisted content" that is only completely twisted for severely cranky people?

ä

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.

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).

Ok, you wrote "Causing a bit of a stir (ie upsetting the right people)."

What are your top five favourite right upset people?

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...?

Yeah, why?

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.

What's wrong with that item?

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.

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.

Are any of these stories ever true ?
apart from the pied piper of Hamelin from the Middle Ages

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?

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.

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.

Jul 18, 2023 -- 9:35PM, 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?

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?

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.

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?

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 :)

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?

Or did you never read the item itself before calling it a smear?

looks Interesting ,Don't seem to hearing too much more  about the thousands of  Kids who crossed the Mexico>USA Border and Vanished ,Wonder what happened to them ?

edy • July 18, 2023 9:49 PM BST
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?

A bit like catch and kill. A not entirely uncommon practice of T-H-E-M.

Disney probs thought they had done enough to supress it. Who knows. But if the story is accurate, they had no money. But the makers were very determined and with the help of crowd funding have now seemingly getting traction they could only have dreamed of.

Selling the rights to suppress a movie sounds rather stupid from a company that big and successful.

It still leaves the question why the satanic cabal didn't buy the rights.

They can't be poor. After all, we learned earlier that they still use children even though adrenochrome could be synthethised much more cost effective.

Someone has to sell - Stallone refused to sell
the Rocky story / script for when he was struggling and poor -$200,000 something like that
with no surety it would be a hit

I said I don't know. It's not pivotal as it managed to get released eventually, in spite of the obstacles, and is very very successful. And is being smeared by multiple liberalist publications.

I do find that very interesting, given the theme of the film should be non controversial or political in the sense of people being happy that the story has been put to film. It is also being framed as a faith based film. That is highly strange, I don't see how that correlates with children being prevented from being trafficked for sex.

And that we have no release date domestically.

Well, but do you not think we should be asking those kinds of questions before we send our brains into conspirational overdrive?

Think stuff through first instead of showing that we simply are....a bit stupid?

What is Sound of Freedom and why has the film gone viral? 11.07.23


Sound of Freedom has become almost an overnight sensation in the US, but what is the film all about and where can you watch it in the UK?


Alejandro Monteverde’s film Sound of Freedom has become this summer’s most unlikely hit but a hit nonetheless. The film opened in the US on 4 July (appropriately) and quickly climbed the box office list. Sound of Freedom has made over $40 million in the US box office, an impressive figure for a film that very nearly didn’t make it to cinemas at all.


The film had a production budget of $14.5m, which is minuscule compared to blockbuster films such as Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, which only barely beat Sound of Freedom at last weekend’s box office.


As well as being financially successful, Sound of Freedom has also become controversial. The film was shot all the way back in 2018 but has only now made it to US cinemas. The producers of Sound of Freedom had struck a distribution deal with 20th Century Fox, but the film was shelved by Disney after they bought the company.



Why? Well, this is where the story gets crazy, but let’s look at some facts first.


What is Sound of Freedom about?
Sound of Freedom follows Tim Ballard, the founder and CEO of Operation Underground Railroad (O.U.R.) and a former Homeland Security agent, played by Jim Cavieziel in the film, as he embarks on a dangerous mission to rescue children from sex traffickers in Colombia.


Is Sound of Freedom based on a true story?
Kind of. Tim Ballard is indeed a real person, but his story and its authenticity have been widely criticised.


American Crime Journal investigative reporters Lynn Packer and Damion Moore have criticised Ballard and argue that he has severely embellished his experiences which made it into the movie.

Where can you watch Sound of Freedom in the UK?
We have some bad news. You can’t. Sound of Freedom currently does not have UK distribution, so unless you’re overdue for a trip to the US, you can’t watch Sound of Freedom quite just yet.

What did the critics say about it?
The critical reception has been mixed but veering on positive. The film currently holds a 77% critic rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

1. As a multi billion dollar company you have the rights to something you absolutely do not want out. The money you are getting for the rights are total peanuts.

What do you do? Keep or sell?

2. You are part of the satanic cabal and the rights for a story you absolutely do not want out is for sale. The rights are available for peanuts (peanuts for a cabal as rich and ressourceful as you are)

What do you do?

3. You are a cinema chain that does absolutely not want a story to be shown.

What do you do? Show it in lots of your cinemas and have air conditioning fail in a miniscule percentage of them or do you not show it in your cinemas?

I'm not too concerned with the Disney element. Obviously that's a factor in why the movie has taken several years to be released.


True stories are embellished for the movie theatre all the time, that's how the industry works. It can't just be that allegation that is causing some people to be so upset.

You are not too concerned because the only logical answer destroys your conspirational bubble.

What would you respectively do in questions 1 to 3?

I think it's very unlikely that the cabal that traffics children in incredibly sophisticated ways, that has developed underground areas to harvest adrenochrome, that makes sure the children that are being used for harvesting never get to tell their story, the cabal that the POTUS is a member of (or so I hear), the cabal that has, probably for decades now, suppressed any remote sort of solid evidence and proof of their activities....

...that cabal is really meant to be stupid and sloppy in such epic proportions regarding this movie and the rights to it?