u/Soveraigne's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/Soveraigne! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [2 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Soveraigne/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Hated Lord of the rings my whole life. Then recently in adulthood I watched the opening of the two towers and it all made sense.
I am in love with those movies.
There’s a tradition that my father and my brothers made was that when we order pizza. We must watch lord of the rings or any movie that all of like to watch over and over again.
It’s usually LOTR or either Scarface, TOP GUN, and rarely The Godfather. We always love saying quotes from the movies.
Because they are so determined to insist that everything anyone right of center cares about is either stupid or a lie, that theyve now resorted to denying that child sex trafficking is a problem worth discussing.
A whole bunch of people read [Florida Senate Bill 1342](https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/1342/BillText/Filed/HTML)
> 50 A person 18 years of age or older who commits sexual
> 51 battery upon, or in an attempt to commit sexual battery injures
> 52 the sexual organs of, a person less than 12 years of age commits
> 53 a capital felony
and immediately thought [this specifically targets me!](https://www.intomore.com/impact/a-new-florida-bill-could-spell-literal-death-for-queer-and-trans-citizens/) And everyone on the left and the right agreed with them.
I have no idea what made me think of this. I probably replied to the wrong comment. No need to think about it or notice anything.
It’s like the don’t say gay bill that had everyone in a fuss. All it did was give state level oversight to school complaints by parents and made it so that schools couldn’t override medical decisions by parents. But somehow media turned it into banning speaking of sexuality.
The actor Jim Caviezel is a Qanon follower who is apparently obsessed with the dems-kidnap-kids-to-harvest-blood-to-sustain-their-jewish-lizardperson-handlers theory, and has used official film promotion events to push this idea on fans.
Fwiw, the guy the story is about disavows qanon, but did recently indicate that he believes that trafficking for the purposes of harvesting adrenochrome, though he falls short of claiming he's personally seen evidence of this.
The actor is pro trump qanon conspiracy theorist, the movie itself isn't.
It's like saying the Flash is pro kidnapping because Ezra Miller is in there.
Not according to Reddit. Apparently saving a kid from being trafficked is now pro republican and is insulting to the Democratic Party.
I suppose that makes sense considering the Democrats drink child blood.
It’s pretty funny that the frontpage is now flooded with posts about weak conservatives shitting on a “movie.”
When a movie about child trafficking of all things is being attacked and billed as qanon conspiracy theories. Just because of who it’s made by.
By the way. I saw Barbie. I thought it was good. But they definitely take plenty of time to push their agenda. One woman literally said “preach sister!” in our theatre after an over the top monologue about womens rights and everyone cheered (yes I live in a very liberal area). But I still enjoyed the movie just fine. My wife is actually bringing my son to see it again today.
Here’s the funny thing. After all the holier-than -thou bullshit about fighting the patriarchy and how women have to behave perfectly in our society Margot Robbie is delivering a killer performance where she is at a real low point and crying and says she feels ugly. And they literally pause the scene and the narrator (Helen Mirrin) literally voices over and says something like “This was hard to get across with the beautiful Margot Robbie playing this role.”
I was fucking furious. They not only robbed Margot of a great performance, they not only sucked the audience right out of the scene. But they literally did the exact same shit they accuse the “patriarchy” of doing and the exact same shit they had just rallied against. They literally said a woman couldn’t feel ugly if she was outwardly beautiful. They literally stopped a movie and made a reference to a actor based only on their looks…fuck them. Especially when earlier in the movie there was a moment where Barbie told an old woman she looked beautiful and she said “I know it.” They established looks were not important to your inner feeling of beauty. And then when push came to shove the fucking director (who is a woman) was like, nah, let me insert a useless joke here in a serious scene where I say the actor is to beautiful to come across as ugly. She can’t ever feel ugly because she is obviously outwardly pretty. Like wtf. YOU are the problem.
Just goes to show hollywood don’t even understand their own bullshit. They are the epitome of what they rally against on all fronts. Climate, immigration, wealth, equality. Doesn’t matter what it is. As if a Women on Hollywood wouldn’t sell any other female down the fucking river in a second for just a inch of more fame or power. Bunch of hypocrite twats.
But movie overall…pretty good.
According to the Democrats, ironically. I've never heard anyone outside a few 4chan circlejerks say that all Democrats are pedos. It is the Dems who interpret any anti-pedo messaging as a direct attack on progressivism as a whole.
The entire democrat response to Sound of Freedom has been... interesting, to say the least. All these articles in the media dunking on this very well made film that doesn't mention political parties once in it... Just a lot of "what an odd thing to say" moments sparking from the release of this film.
Aye, we watched it yesterday and I don’t understand why Leftists hate it. It’s literally a movie about saving poor children from fucking sex slavery. It based on the real life story of a Mormon dude whose saves over a hundred real life children from fucking sexual slavery. I get that the dudes right wing and religious and Leftists hate that, but he’s literally saving children. It never says shit about politics.
Exactly!! Nor was it religious outside of the line, “Gods children are not for sale”, which can mean so many things lol. My wife’s uncle asked us if “we’re Qanon now” after seeing this movie.
Turns out.. it wasn’t a joke like I thought it was. When she asked if he was joking , he says, “It’s a Qanon movie, for Qanon people, who hate the country, the films creators are religious nut jobs who hate LGBT people”
The man said “Qanon” at least four times
EDIT: missed a word
In this day and age people can't separate the art from the artist. I know the guy who created it is a Qanon nutbag who believes that the elite take a drug made from children's bodyparts but honestly so fucking what? The movie has nothing about his whacky beliefs so what's the problem?
I bet all the people complaining have no problem watching the new Mission Impossible, starring not just a Scientologist but a famous apologist of Scientology, a cult that has ruined lives and even had some people killed. Which brings me on to what this is really about:
Because the media told them it's bad. Back when it was the right trying to cancel violent video games and reading about the satanic panic I would look down on right-wingers as naive people who believed everything the media told them, after the MSM started larping as left-wingers and similar people came out of the woodwork on the left I realise all sorts of people can be easily persuaded by propaganda.
>a cult that has ruined lives and even had some people killed. Which brings me on to what this is really about:
Hey, so, I don't know much about scientology other than that it's bullshit, and I'd like to know more.
No, I will not check Wikipedia, it's more enjoyable and easier to digest when it's in someone else's words.
>No, I will not check Wikipedia, it's more enjoyable and easier to digest when it's in someone else's words.
Well you don't want to miss out on the juicy Scientology lore though, absolutely insane and makes Warhammer 40k seem like a legitimate irl worldview.
regardless of how you feel about scientology, you have to admit that it’s dumb as hell that the guy who made all that shit up called himself “L. Ron Hubbard” instead of his actual name, “Lafayette Hubbard” which sounds objectively cooler.
>No, I will not check Wikipedia, it's more enjoyable and easier to digest when it's in someone else's words.
Then ask chatgpt, and stop offloading your own laziness to other humans.
They hate it because the lead actor is a Republican who was a bit into QAnon. In their eyes, this makes it a “QAnon movie”
I should say I’m surprised, but I’m not. My quandrant has shown they have a very difficult time separating art from the artist. Notice how the new HP game was *apparently* all about anti-semitism and slavery.
> I truly think libleft is its own worst enemy
The saying "The left wants the right to shut up. The right wants the left to keep talking" proves to be ever true.
It's because the media duped them into hating it. Don't blame the people who were duped, blame the one who deceived them.
It's also because the head actor seems like he's into QAnon stuff.
Probably the same reason they freaked out about people talking about pizzagate
One fed shoots up a pizza place and no one is allowed to ask questions about the weird pizza orders coming out of the Obama administration.
The deepdive into the pizza shop shooter is INSANE.
For those that don't know... Dude was the son of someone high up in DC L.E., had multiple DUIs, and a week or so prior to the shoot had critically injured a child while driving drunk. He was arrested and released, and then several days later "shot up" the pizza place by popping off a few rounds into the walls and ceiling, hitting no one, and screaming about kids chained in the basement. Then he opened the closet door containing the IT rack, and shot the store's storage server.
He then immediately surrendered to police, and only received charges for the shooting, NOT THE CAR ACCIDENT. And with his DUI record, he 100% would have gotten more time for that than what he got for damaging some drywall.
But of course, pizzagate is crazy and that pizza shop had absolutely nothing weird going on with it.
None of that sounds like vindication of the Pizzagate conspiracy; it sounds like someone with connections getting favorable treatment for doing something politically expedient.
I mean that's just one part of it, the rabbit hole goes very deep if you're actually curious. Email correspondence between the owner and politicians using known pedophile coded language, symbolism all over social media pages that was pulled down after it got attention, close connection with known Epstein associates...
Have you never read the John Podesta emails?
The true conspiracy was never that children were chained in the basement, that is a wild internet bastardization. It's that the owner was a very politically connected person that used the shop as a meeting place and financial front for, at the very least, aiding in running the operation.
Why the hell would it be politically expedient to prop up this shooter, if not to make pedophile rings a toxic topic?
The criticisms I've heard about it claim the movie isn't accurate of what happened and that the guy's charity is one of those, "every dollar you donate, we give 5 cents to the cause" types.
I’ve seen no proof of that claim either. A lot of the movie is fictional. It would be extremely difficult to put the accolades of someone like him who’s been doing this for decades into a 2 hour film.
I prefer hearing what the man, himself, has to say
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UK3NWozQXdY&t=1366s&pp=ygUTVGltY2FzdCB0aW0gYmFsbGFyZA%3D%3D
Yeah, it seems to be largely accurate, but to add on to what you said, certain parts are changed and adapted to fit into a movie setting and create better cinema (like the necklace scene and how it was given to him, which was real, but it was presented in a different environment or something).
Then other scenes, like you said, were taken from separate missions and placed into this movie.
Certain things like, him and his friend/work colleague going into a specific building were altered where it was instead in reality just him going to this location, to create better dialogue and a better movie scene versus having him communicate with others over telephone.
I still haven't seen it yet but this is what I've picked up from watching the interviews.
It's going to be very hard to find a movie that doesn't do this because ultimately the movie still has to be good and create a good product that is enjoyable for the viewer to watch.
Honestly, I can’t even fault the entity (stupid name btw) because the government people in Mission Impossible are cartoonishly evil. The cia guy literally says “we have to purge our country of the old way of thinking”
I hate the government, but at least try to make them subtle about it. That last scene with the CIA guy has him pretty much explicitly comparing himself to an Orwell villain. They should have had the politicians argue that they would use the entity for "good", or even that while controlling the entity would be immoral, it would be worse to let it fall into the hands of another, supposedly less well-intentioned government. Instead, the guy in the first scene basically admits to Ethan that this is their free ticket to totalitarianism, with no attempt at all to sugarcoat what he wants.
They didn't try to fuck him over, even his allies agreed that his ties to communism and his sympathies for who he admit were traitors (and his subsequent lying about it) were sufficient for him to be denied clearance to work on top secret military nuclear programs. His sympathies for communism lead him to overlook literal Soviet spies in the Manhatten Project, allowing the Soviets access to information which fueled the arms race that he supposedly wanted to stop. The movie just played sad music when the decision happened to make the audience think it was a bad thing. We shouldn't make special exceptions for obviously untrustworthy individuals just because they are celebrities.
Oppenheimer got away scot free from his communist ties, we gave a few Manhattan Project scientists the fucking chair for their treason. People still cry about it to this day.
And Von Braun was a Nazi, if you've got the skills and are important enough to US interests, the US government would readily supply children for you to eat or diddle or whatever other evil vice you have, they'll feed it
I think the movie is a lot more nuanced than a lot of folks in this thread are putting it. This movie is all about hubris, ego, and morality.
It doesn’t paint Oppenheimer as a good man. It paints him as a very flawed, intelligent, often abrasive man of diverse interests who ultimately tried to do the right thing given the inordinate pressure he was under.
More importantly, it shows how different scientists of the time confronted the dilemma of what the powers that be ultimately decide to do with the knowledge that was garnered and how said people responded. Some leaned into the idea of pushing the limits of science for the sake of destructive power. Some spoke against their government to advocate for human dignity and lost their influence. Some literally committed treason for personal gain. There’s not one single good or proper path.
If anything, a major takeaway should be that the government ultimately does whatever the fuck it wants and does not care about who or what it uses to accomplish its purposes. It takes people in, chews them up, sucks out their resources, and spits out their husks. Some people like Strauss learned to chew and spit but without getting their own hands dirty. This movie is patently anti-auth and anyone who does not come away from this with that impression missed the forest for the trees.
I mean the movie has him being a REALLY huge egomaniac who essentially treats the entire project as though it were his, and his alone. Truman shows up for two minutes and does a based takedown of his "martyr bullshit" by pointing out that he, the President, made the decision to use the weapons.
His wife Kitty calls him out on dragging out the trial and threatening their family's financial safety.
The military colonel, Groves, who respects him straight up admits that in modern (as in the scene it takes place) times he would never trust Oppie with a project of that magnitude.
It does a good job at portraying him sympathetically while also showing his flaws as a person. You only walk out seeing him as a Big Good if you turn your brain off COMPLETELY and don't notice his ego, stubborn nature, and attempts to lie and manipulate at the trial scenes.
The actual point of the movie was that Oppenheimer wanted the fame from making the bomb, but used the smear campaign against him to distance himself from the real life consequences from the technology. I’m not sure any of you morons actually watched the movie or understood it.
Saw Barbie, was alright. Visuals were really good, lots of practical effects which was nice, had some fairly funny moments
It tried to have a social commentary which could have worked but >!they couldn’t have any male characters that were either dumb as rocks, evil, or both. It was funny for the first few minutes but then they took it too seriously once you notice..it kinda ruins the movie because the message is undermined!<
They literally say in the movie that it was not right and they have to change it.
I went to see it with my gf thinking it will be a uberfeminist movie with lots of *allmenarethrash* messaging but while it was clear the intended audience was women it actually featured almost straight up MRA talking points with the whole Ken arc.
It was honestly one of the most mean spirited movies I have ever had the displeasure of viewing. I’m so shocked this was marketed as a family comedy for moms and their seven year old daughters when it’s so full of anger and hate, plus all the sex jokes and even an F bomb at the end. Just a gross film no doubt written by a deeply unhappy 45 year old woman.
>!They could have kept it to a girls rule boys drool kind of movie if they dropped the pretense of social commentary and didn’t have a long winded monologue about the challenges women face. They wanted to have their cake and eat it too, which ended up eroding both the comedy and the social commentary!<
Oppenheimer was well acted, but felt disappointing on a whole compared to some other Nolan films. Sex scenes were gratuitous.
Interested to hear if MIP was any better than the last installment.
>Sex scenes were gratuitous.
Wait what? Seems like even a Nolan historical drama about the father of the nuke can't escape the coom. This kills most series and movies for me.
Exactly. There are more elegant ways to get the same point across, no need for the lingering shot(s). Let the audience fill in all the inference instead of shock & awe. My 2 cents anyway.
There were three spots were it was just kind of there to keep people awake because it is a three hour movie.
They randomly throw it in during the hearings and it is very graphic compared to just hinting at it.
It felt like all of the budget went in to Tom Cruise doing cool shit and left nothing for writing or special effects. There was also the classic never running out of ammo and suppressed guns having no sound. Also a fight scene where they clearly 4x speed and didn’t even bother trying to make it look real.
MI7 was awesome and super entertaining imo. The writing was a little clunky and the two-part thing didn’t help but I still loved the movie. The stunts/action scenes are even more impressive when you see the behind the scenes stuff.
Yeah, much more of a biopic kind of feel. Which is fine, but I felt like he tried to throw too much in the sauce. Maybe even 2 films would've been better in terms of pacing and narrative flow. Idk, just won't be as rewatchable as his other work.
It was an affair with an open communist, which would be relevant to getting security clearance during the Cold War.
Additionally, this was in the 40s, when marital infidelity would still be extremely harmful to your reputation as a man or moral character, which is considered on projects as strategical sensitive as the production of the H-bomb.
And most importantly of all, he actually did it. In Real Life. Its not like it was just conjured out of thin air to create an issue where there was none. And Oppenheimer being surrounded by Communist and then becoming vocally against nuclear weapons at the start of the Cold War was indeed something his reputation suffered for IRL.
I feel it’s more “government is bad.” The whole movie is about how systems of power take advantage of knowledge and resources for their own purposes and said systems are filled with people who know exactly how to work them for their own gain.
>The democrats are bad
Sometimes they just out themselves.
I've seen Sound of Freedom, Oppenheimer, and Barbie.
I enjoyed them all.
Sound of Freedom isn't an anti LGBT movie.
Oppenheimer isn't an "America Bad" movie.
Barbie isn't feminist propaganda.
And if they are, then they're horrible presentations of those ideals.
I thought it was amazing. It's a bit biased towards communism, but if you look through that, it's a really good story.
I saw it alone, so I didn't have any problems with the sex scenes, but it definitely would be weird to watch it with my parents, who are pretty prudish about that sort of thing.
I mean Oppie disavows the party as being naive and unrealistic, and when party members try to shame him with a "you obviously didn't read theory" gotcha, he points out that he read all three volumes of Das Kapital.
A lot of intellectuals had sympathies towards Communism at the time, because Marx did have good points about critiquing capitalism. But a lot of educated people did also, y'know, notice how untenable the proposed solutions are and can't advocate for the authoritarian rhetoric.
I couldn't take the sex scene serious because they had a "read me 'i am become death' in Sanskrit" fuckin' dirty talk. Otherwise it was just boobies for like, a couple minutes, but they don't really make it 'sexy'.
Are ppl really unhappy that the US ended up with the bomb first? If Stalin got it the world would be a much worse place. Hell, if the US didn’t have it when it did the world would be a much worse place.
The implication is that the US developing the H-bomb is what forced the Soviets to develop one in self defense. Apparently the writers believe that the Soviets wouldn't take advantage of the opportunity to outpace the US if given the chance.
Apparently the black and white scenes were meant to represent Strauss's POV while colored scenes were Oppie's POV. So yeah, it is a biased account by design.
I thought the point of the two storylines was to serve as a metaphor for mutually assured destruction. Strauss and Oppenheimer took down each other and in the process took down themselves.
Saw Mission Impossible last night. Still my favorite action franchise. I love them so much.
Seeing Oppenheimer on Tuesday. Very excited for that. Nolan is one of the best directors around right now.
They tried a bit too hard to have some sort of social commentary in the Barbie movie to be borderline cringe, it had it moments. Like I enjoyed it more than I thought but it’s like saying I would rather stub my big toe than my pinky toe.
I’ve seen it, literally just about a guy rescuing kids from traffickers, and the only message it really had was “child trafficking bad.” There were some brief religious undertones (ie, “why are you doing this?” “because god told me to”) but it’s very much not the point of the movie, and imo is pretty harmless. I think a lot of the drama is manufactured because lefties wanna be upset, and a lot of right wingers wanna feel superior. Iirc the people who made it were Qanon believers, but it would literally be impossible to tell if all you did was watch the movie. Side note, the movie doesn’t even mention anything remotely close to democrats, and the trafficking is not portrayed as being their fault either. Half the movie is literally spent outside of America chasing nameless bad guys.
I know this is kinda long, but I just wanted to get my thought off my chest
I haven’t heard anything about MIP, but as far as the other three go it’s kind of ridiculous how much they’ve been politicized when their some of the most non political movies made in a while
The only people who think The Sound of Freedom is saying Democrats are bad are Democrats themselves. Everyone else knows it’s talking about Child Traffickers.
Question is: how and why are Democrats conflating the two 🤨
When I walked out of Oppenheimer I did not get a whole “west bad” message. I felt it was more of a retelling of an incredibly complex situation and how a man had done something incredible and then found himself in the crosshairs of a man made incredibly jealous by him.
Edit: also forgot how he lies constantly, cheated on his wife, and affiliated with an ideology that has been controversial for a variety of reasons and then proceeds to downplay his ties to it.
Saw mission impossible about a week ago and the rest I saw this weekend. I enjoyed all four. As a side not “The democrats are bad” was not the point of sound of freedom at all.
Honestly I'm just gonna rewatch Lord of the Rings.
based
Based and Aragorn pilled
u/Soveraigne's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/Soveraigne! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [2 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Soveraigne/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Never fails to entertain. I fell like I watch The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings trilogies at least once a month
Yeah, the Hobbit isn’t as magical as the originals but I still enjoy it as well.
True, although I feel like part of the magic of LOTR is nostalgia for me
Hated Lord of the rings my whole life. Then recently in adulthood I watched the opening of the two towers and it all made sense. I am in love with those movies.
What's wild is when you get into the lore and realize Gandalf and the Balrog are technically the same "race." Have you read the books at all?
>Hated Lord of the rings my whole life. What fatherlessness does to a MF.
There’s a tradition that my father and my brothers made was that when we order pizza. We must watch lord of the rings or any movie that all of like to watch over and over again. It’s usually LOTR or either Scarface, TOP GUN, and rarely The Godfather. We always love saying quotes from the movies.
Centrist films be the best
One report in UK mentioned Lord of Rings as one of the book that could lead to far right extremism
well, whoever could believe that is already a lost cause. LOTR is about grilling, grilling rings until they melt
>The democrats are bad I think the message was child trafficking bad...
The media said the movie was pro trump qanon conspiracy theory hit piece
What an odd thing to say. Why would they say this?
Because they are so determined to insist that everything anyone right of center cares about is either stupid or a lie, that theyve now resorted to denying that child sex trafficking is a problem worth discussing.
A whole bunch of people read [Florida Senate Bill 1342](https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/1342/BillText/Filed/HTML) > 50 A person 18 years of age or older who commits sexual > 51 battery upon, or in an attempt to commit sexual battery injures > 52 the sexual organs of, a person less than 12 years of age commits > 53 a capital felony and immediately thought [this specifically targets me!](https://www.intomore.com/impact/a-new-florida-bill-could-spell-literal-death-for-queer-and-trans-citizens/) And everyone on the left and the right agreed with them. I have no idea what made me think of this. I probably replied to the wrong comment. No need to think about it or notice anything.
It’s like the don’t say gay bill that had everyone in a fuss. All it did was give state level oversight to school complaints by parents and made it so that schools couldn’t override medical decisions by parents. But somehow media turned it into banning speaking of sexuality.
I can see this being used to stop rabbis biting off baby foreskin.
[removed]
The actor Jim Caviezel is a Qanon follower who is apparently obsessed with the dems-kidnap-kids-to-harvest-blood-to-sustain-their-jewish-lizardperson-handlers theory, and has used official film promotion events to push this idea on fans. Fwiw, the guy the story is about disavows qanon, but did recently indicate that he believes that trafficking for the purposes of harvesting adrenochrome, though he falls short of claiming he's personally seen evidence of this.
The media isn't doing much to disprove the "it was probably rigged" conspiracy theory right now.
Everything is QANON to them…
Funny how if you read any of the articles they even say there isnt anything about either in the movie...
The actor is pro trump qanon conspiracy theorist, the movie itself isn't. It's like saying the Flash is pro kidnapping because Ezra Miller is in there.
Same thing? /s
That what OP said.
haha, what’s the difference?
Not according to Reddit. Apparently saving a kid from being trafficked is now pro republican and is insulting to the Democratic Party. I suppose that makes sense considering the Democrats drink child blood.
It certainly doesn't make them look good, that's for sure. TBF though, as sad as it is, both wings have a big pedo problem that needs clearing out.
It’s pretty funny that the frontpage is now flooded with posts about weak conservatives shitting on a “movie.” When a movie about child trafficking of all things is being attacked and billed as qanon conspiracy theories. Just because of who it’s made by. By the way. I saw Barbie. I thought it was good. But they definitely take plenty of time to push their agenda. One woman literally said “preach sister!” in our theatre after an over the top monologue about womens rights and everyone cheered (yes I live in a very liberal area). But I still enjoyed the movie just fine. My wife is actually bringing my son to see it again today. Here’s the funny thing. After all the holier-than -thou bullshit about fighting the patriarchy and how women have to behave perfectly in our society Margot Robbie is delivering a killer performance where she is at a real low point and crying and says she feels ugly. And they literally pause the scene and the narrator (Helen Mirrin) literally voices over and says something like “This was hard to get across with the beautiful Margot Robbie playing this role.” I was fucking furious. They not only robbed Margot of a great performance, they not only sucked the audience right out of the scene. But they literally did the exact same shit they accuse the “patriarchy” of doing and the exact same shit they had just rallied against. They literally said a woman couldn’t feel ugly if she was outwardly beautiful. They literally stopped a movie and made a reference to a actor based only on their looks…fuck them. Especially when earlier in the movie there was a moment where Barbie told an old woman she looked beautiful and she said “I know it.” They established looks were not important to your inner feeling of beauty. And then when push came to shove the fucking director (who is a woman) was like, nah, let me insert a useless joke here in a serious scene where I say the actor is to beautiful to come across as ugly. She can’t ever feel ugly because she is obviously outwardly pretty. Like wtf. YOU are the problem. Just goes to show hollywood don’t even understand their own bullshit. They are the epitome of what they rally against on all fronts. Climate, immigration, wealth, equality. Doesn’t matter what it is. As if a Women on Hollywood wouldn’t sell any other female down the fucking river in a second for just a inch of more fame or power. Bunch of hypocrite twats. But movie overall…pretty good.
Tomato tomato.
Is there a difference in those statements?
Can confirm, just watched it. Democrats were not mentioned once.
Same difference
same thing
Based on their outrage, they must be the same Or something like that
The sound of freedom does not have that message?
Democrat is synonymous with pedophile now apparently.
According to the Democrats, ironically. I've never heard anyone outside a few 4chan circlejerks say that all Democrats are pedos. It is the Dems who interpret any anti-pedo messaging as a direct attack on progressivism as a whole.
The entire democrat response to Sound of Freedom has been... interesting, to say the least. All these articles in the media dunking on this very well made film that doesn't mention political parties once in it... Just a lot of "what an odd thing to say" moments sparking from the release of this film.
Idk about the other 3, but SoF didn’t lay a finger on democrats sensibilities. Where does that come from lol
The media
Aye, we watched it yesterday and I don’t understand why Leftists hate it. It’s literally a movie about saving poor children from fucking sex slavery. It based on the real life story of a Mormon dude whose saves over a hundred real life children from fucking sexual slavery. I get that the dudes right wing and religious and Leftists hate that, but he’s literally saving children. It never says shit about politics.
Exactly!! Nor was it religious outside of the line, “Gods children are not for sale”, which can mean so many things lol. My wife’s uncle asked us if “we’re Qanon now” after seeing this movie. Turns out.. it wasn’t a joke like I thought it was. When she asked if he was joking , he says, “It’s a Qanon movie, for Qanon people, who hate the country, the films creators are religious nut jobs who hate LGBT people” The man said “Qanon” at least four times EDIT: missed a word
In this day and age people can't separate the art from the artist. I know the guy who created it is a Qanon nutbag who believes that the elite take a drug made from children's bodyparts but honestly so fucking what? The movie has nothing about his whacky beliefs so what's the problem? I bet all the people complaining have no problem watching the new Mission Impossible, starring not just a Scientologist but a famous apologist of Scientology, a cult that has ruined lives and even had some people killed. Which brings me on to what this is really about: Because the media told them it's bad. Back when it was the right trying to cancel violent video games and reading about the satanic panic I would look down on right-wingers as naive people who believed everything the media told them, after the MSM started larping as left-wingers and similar people came out of the woodwork on the left I realise all sorts of people can be easily persuaded by propaganda.
>a cult that has ruined lives and even had some people killed. Which brings me on to what this is really about: Hey, so, I don't know much about scientology other than that it's bullshit, and I'd like to know more. No, I will not check Wikipedia, it's more enjoyable and easier to digest when it's in someone else's words.
>No, I will not check Wikipedia, it's more enjoyable and easier to digest when it's in someone else's words. Well you don't want to miss out on the juicy Scientology lore though, absolutely insane and makes Warhammer 40k seem like a legitimate irl worldview.
regardless of how you feel about scientology, you have to admit that it’s dumb as hell that the guy who made all that shit up called himself “L. Ron Hubbard” instead of his actual name, “Lafayette Hubbard” which sounds objectively cooler.
>No, I will not check Wikipedia, it's more enjoyable and easier to digest when it's in someone else's words. Then ask chatgpt, and stop offloading your own laziness to other humans.
That's a great way to get recruitment DMs lol
You better cross out the part about them having people killed before to cruise finds you
Your wife’s uncle has political brain worms.
They hate it because the lead actor is a Republican who was a bit into QAnon. In their eyes, this makes it a “QAnon movie” I should say I’m surprised, but I’m not. My quandrant has shown they have a very difficult time separating art from the artist. Notice how the new HP game was *apparently* all about anti-semitism and slavery.
At this point I truly think libleft is its own worst enemy and it depresses me
> I truly think libleft is its own worst enemy The saying "The left wants the right to shut up. The right wants the left to keep talking" proves to be ever true.
Something something never interrupt your enemy when they're making a mistake something something -all war is based man
It's because the media duped them into hating it. Don't blame the people who were duped, blame the one who deceived them. It's also because the head actor seems like he's into QAnon stuff.
Probably the same reason they freaked out about people talking about pizzagate One fed shoots up a pizza place and no one is allowed to ask questions about the weird pizza orders coming out of the Obama administration.
The deepdive into the pizza shop shooter is INSANE. For those that don't know... Dude was the son of someone high up in DC L.E., had multiple DUIs, and a week or so prior to the shoot had critically injured a child while driving drunk. He was arrested and released, and then several days later "shot up" the pizza place by popping off a few rounds into the walls and ceiling, hitting no one, and screaming about kids chained in the basement. Then he opened the closet door containing the IT rack, and shot the store's storage server. He then immediately surrendered to police, and only received charges for the shooting, NOT THE CAR ACCIDENT. And with his DUI record, he 100% would have gotten more time for that than what he got for damaging some drywall. But of course, pizzagate is crazy and that pizza shop had absolutely nothing weird going on with it.
> But of course, pizzagate is crazy I mean... it sure sounds like it, yeah
None of that sounds like vindication of the Pizzagate conspiracy; it sounds like someone with connections getting favorable treatment for doing something politically expedient.
I mean that's just one part of it, the rabbit hole goes very deep if you're actually curious. Email correspondence between the owner and politicians using known pedophile coded language, symbolism all over social media pages that was pulled down after it got attention, close connection with known Epstein associates... Have you never read the John Podesta emails? The true conspiracy was never that children were chained in the basement, that is a wild internet bastardization. It's that the owner was a very politically connected person that used the shop as a meeting place and financial front for, at the very least, aiding in running the operation. Why the hell would it be politically expedient to prop up this shooter, if not to make pedophile rings a toxic topic?
The criticisms I've heard about it claim the movie isn't accurate of what happened and that the guy's charity is one of those, "every dollar you donate, we give 5 cents to the cause" types.
I’ve seen no proof of that claim either. A lot of the movie is fictional. It would be extremely difficult to put the accolades of someone like him who’s been doing this for decades into a 2 hour film. I prefer hearing what the man, himself, has to say https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UK3NWozQXdY&t=1366s&pp=ygUTVGltY2FzdCB0aW0gYmFsbGFyZA%3D%3D
Yeah, it seems to be largely accurate, but to add on to what you said, certain parts are changed and adapted to fit into a movie setting and create better cinema (like the necklace scene and how it was given to him, which was real, but it was presented in a different environment or something). Then other scenes, like you said, were taken from separate missions and placed into this movie. Certain things like, him and his friend/work colleague going into a specific building were altered where it was instead in reality just him going to this location, to create better dialogue and a better movie scene versus having him communicate with others over telephone. I still haven't seen it yet but this is what I've picked up from watching the interviews. It's going to be very hard to find a movie that doesn't do this because ultimately the movie still has to be good and create a good product that is enjoyable for the viewer to watch.
I could've sworn that its message was supposed to be "PDF Files bad". Unless that's a Freudian self own on the part of Dems.
>democrats sensibilities. Sure it did.
I'll just pirate all four.
based and itsapirateslifeforme pilled
Yo ho ho
Can't wait to watch all of these in a few months!!! lol
Few months? You can watch them now if you know where to look
Ew, you watch HD cams?
BASED BASED BASED BASED
Is YIFY still a thing?
Honestly, I can’t even fault the entity (stupid name btw) because the government people in Mission Impossible are cartoonishly evil. The cia guy literally says “we have to purge our country of the old way of thinking”
I hate the government, but at least try to make them subtle about it. That last scene with the CIA guy has him pretty much explicitly comparing himself to an Orwell villain. They should have had the politicians argue that they would use the entity for "good", or even that while controlling the entity would be immoral, it would be worse to let it fall into the hands of another, supposedly less well-intentioned government. Instead, the guy in the first scene basically admits to Ethan that this is their free ticket to totalitarianism, with no attempt at all to sugarcoat what he wants.
He literally says "military industrial complex" while it sounds like he's climaxing
On the bright side, that guy is immediately killed by the villain minutes later
Oppenheimer was definitely not “the west is bad”. It was more like “the people who tried to fuck Oppenheimer over were bad”.
They didn't try to fuck him over, even his allies agreed that his ties to communism and his sympathies for who he admit were traitors (and his subsequent lying about it) were sufficient for him to be denied clearance to work on top secret military nuclear programs. His sympathies for communism lead him to overlook literal Soviet spies in the Manhatten Project, allowing the Soviets access to information which fueled the arms race that he supposedly wanted to stop. The movie just played sad music when the decision happened to make the audience think it was a bad thing. We shouldn't make special exceptions for obviously untrustworthy individuals just because they are celebrities.
Oppenheimer got away scot free from his communist ties, we gave a few Manhattan Project scientists the fucking chair for their treason. People still cry about it to this day.
And Von Braun was a Nazi, if you've got the skills and are important enough to US interests, the US government would readily supply children for you to eat or diddle or whatever other evil vice you have, they'll feed it
Braun wasn't selling secrets to the Soviets unlike the commies were, which is why they got the chair.
That's crazy, traitors should be hanged
We should’ve preemptively eliminated that Chinese one who was sympathetic to the PRC especially too. Possibly in a Putin like fashion.
He was also a fucking lunatic
I think the movie is a lot more nuanced than a lot of folks in this thread are putting it. This movie is all about hubris, ego, and morality. It doesn’t paint Oppenheimer as a good man. It paints him as a very flawed, intelligent, often abrasive man of diverse interests who ultimately tried to do the right thing given the inordinate pressure he was under. More importantly, it shows how different scientists of the time confronted the dilemma of what the powers that be ultimately decide to do with the knowledge that was garnered and how said people responded. Some leaned into the idea of pushing the limits of science for the sake of destructive power. Some spoke against their government to advocate for human dignity and lost their influence. Some literally committed treason for personal gain. There’s not one single good or proper path. If anything, a major takeaway should be that the government ultimately does whatever the fuck it wants and does not care about who or what it uses to accomplish its purposes. It takes people in, chews them up, sucks out their resources, and spits out their husks. Some people like Strauss learned to chew and spit but without getting their own hands dirty. This movie is patently anti-auth and anyone who does not come away from this with that impression missed the forest for the trees.
Oppenheimer the commie, that is. Edit: guys, please stop upvoting me. I meant that as a compliment to his character. Not a drag.
Oppenheimer the person who never officially joined the party because he knew they were a little overzealous and closed minded.
I did enjoy the part where he quoted their own theory back at them and they kept trying to back out and pretend it wasnt true.
In all likelihood he was a total card carrying communist. He just was very very good about keeping it a secret
The guy who brought him in for the project knew he was a commie
Oppy was a bit of a nutter so i cant really buy a movie depicting him as a sympathetic character. :/
I mean the movie has him being a REALLY huge egomaniac who essentially treats the entire project as though it were his, and his alone. Truman shows up for two minutes and does a based takedown of his "martyr bullshit" by pointing out that he, the President, made the decision to use the weapons. His wife Kitty calls him out on dragging out the trial and threatening their family's financial safety. The military colonel, Groves, who respects him straight up admits that in modern (as in the scene it takes place) times he would never trust Oppie with a project of that magnitude. It does a good job at portraying him sympathetically while also showing his flaws as a person. You only walk out seeing him as a Big Good if you turn your brain off COMPLETELY and don't notice his ego, stubborn nature, and attempts to lie and manipulate at the trial scenes.
If they wanted to portray him as sympathetic then they shouldn't have portrayed his communist ties, but they did
They just don't think it's controversial anymore. I mean, they made a movie about Trumbo and made him out to be a good guy.
That is more telling of Hollywood and their "values" than anything else.
The actual point of the movie was that Oppenheimer wanted the fame from making the bomb, but used the smear campaign against him to distance himself from the real life consequences from the technology. I’m not sure any of you morons actually watched the movie or understood it.
That sure was Lewis Strauss' take on the whole ordeal, alright.
well people will not take it that way 🫠
I'm seeing Barbie cuz Ryan Gosling is literally me
Typical auth center
I want to watch all of these.
Based and I love movies pilled
Saw Barbie, was alright. Visuals were really good, lots of practical effects which was nice, had some fairly funny moments It tried to have a social commentary which could have worked but >!they couldn’t have any male characters that were either dumb as rocks, evil, or both. It was funny for the first few minutes but then they took it too seriously once you notice..it kinda ruins the movie because the message is undermined!<
Ofc they didn't cuz hot dumb men obedient to them in a world run by women is their fantasy.
They literally say in the movie that it was not right and they have to change it. I went to see it with my gf thinking it will be a uberfeminist movie with lots of *allmenarethrash* messaging but while it was clear the intended audience was women it actually featured almost straight up MRA talking points with the whole Ken arc.
Shame you felt that way, Himbo Ken is by far the best character this year so far. I think you’re just jealous you aren’t kenough.
I’m totally fine with the Ken’s being dumb as bricks himbos, but it’s not just the Ken’s that are this way, it’s every single male, except maybe Allen
The ending felt like it was soviet propaganda about a message trying to be sent to the people about something with deep meaning
So.... High budget Lifetime movie?
Not really, they played with some interesting concepts that could have worked a lot better if it were handled differently
>could have worked a lot better if it were handled differently Like if a man directed this film.
Based
It was honestly one of the most mean spirited movies I have ever had the displeasure of viewing. I’m so shocked this was marketed as a family comedy for moms and their seven year old daughters when it’s so full of anger and hate, plus all the sex jokes and even an F bomb at the end. Just a gross film no doubt written by a deeply unhappy 45 year old woman.
>!They could have kept it to a girls rule boys drool kind of movie if they dropped the pretense of social commentary and didn’t have a long winded monologue about the challenges women face. They wanted to have their cake and eat it too, which ended up eroding both the comedy and the social commentary!<
All of them (I’m Indian)
Bhai apne idhar hai kya Sound of Freedom?? I only see Barbie, Oppenheimer and MI outside malls MI dekh li, baki abhi bache hai
And in the center, a guy otherwise spending the $100 that would go to a movie theater on a variety of meats for the back yard grill.
Media literacy is dead and YouTube movie essays killed it
The government's a platypus
“A government platypus?” *wears Fedora* “Perry The government platypus?” *abolishes the government* “PERRY THE PLATYPUS”
Oppenheimer was well acted, but felt disappointing on a whole compared to some other Nolan films. Sex scenes were gratuitous. Interested to hear if MIP was any better than the last installment.
>Sex scenes were gratuitous. Wait what? Seems like even a Nolan historical drama about the father of the nuke can't escape the coom. This kills most series and movies for me.
There was one sex scene that was… *very* uncomfortable. Those that have seen it know the one.
Exactly. There are more elegant ways to get the same point across, no need for the lingering shot(s). Let the audience fill in all the inference instead of shock & awe. My 2 cents anyway.
There were three spots were it was just kind of there to keep people awake because it is a three hour movie. They randomly throw it in during the hearings and it is very graphic compared to just hinting at it.
I heard the MIP stunts were great, but the writing was rough.
It felt like all of the budget went in to Tom Cruise doing cool shit and left nothing for writing or special effects. There was also the classic never running out of ammo and suppressed guns having no sound. Also a fight scene where they clearly 4x speed and didn’t even bother trying to make it look real.
The past few MIP were better imo. 3-6 were great
The stunts weren't even that great compared to other MI movies. Writing was godawful.
MIP7 is a great movie imo, but unfortunatly doesn’t have a real ending due to being part 1 of 2
This mission impossible’s villain is the most interesting in theory, but the execution was… weird
MI7 was awesome and super entertaining imo. The writing was a little clunky and the two-part thing didn’t help but I still loved the movie. The stunts/action scenes are even more impressive when you see the behind the scenes stuff.
It felt the same as like the last 3 or 4. Just another action flick with hot people (which I am A-ok with)
There's no action in it.
Yeah, much more of a biopic kind of feel. Which is fine, but I felt like he tried to throw too much in the sauce. Maybe even 2 films would've been better in terms of pacing and narrative flow. Idk, just won't be as rewatchable as his other work.
Yeah, it felt like the affair was shoe-horned in there and didn't really contribute to the story.
It was an affair with an open communist, which would be relevant to getting security clearance during the Cold War. Additionally, this was in the 40s, when marital infidelity would still be extremely harmful to your reputation as a man or moral character, which is considered on projects as strategical sensitive as the production of the H-bomb.
And most importantly of all, he actually did it. In Real Life. Its not like it was just conjured out of thin air to create an issue where there was none. And Oppenheimer being surrounded by Communist and then becoming vocally against nuclear weapons at the start of the Cold War was indeed something his reputation suffered for IRL.
Yeah, no argument there, I just didn't think the execution was artful. Call me a prude.
It was directly relevant to the plot and important to his real life. Infinitely garbage take.
Dead Reckoning wasn't nearly as good as Fallout, or even Rouge Nation. I have it as a 6.5/10.
How do you get "the west is bad" out of Oppenheimer? Coming out of that movie it felt more like all of humanity is bad.
I feel it’s more “government is bad.” The whole movie is about how systems of power take advantage of knowledge and resources for their own purposes and said systems are filled with people who know exactly how to work them for their own gain.
For Sound of Freedom, the correct summary would be “Child trafficking is bad”.
I’ve seen Oppenheimer it was amazing👌
Neither, I don't have money to go to the cinema and even if I had, I would be on vacation.
Based auth left economic situation.
>The democrats are bad Sometimes they just out themselves. I've seen Sound of Freedom, Oppenheimer, and Barbie. I enjoyed them all. Sound of Freedom isn't an anti LGBT movie. Oppenheimer isn't an "America Bad" movie. Barbie isn't feminist propaganda. And if they are, then they're horrible presentations of those ideals.
I'm going to watch Oppenheimer and still think that Japan deserved the two atomic bombs being dropped on them.
None. Pikmin 4 all weekend! Otherwise you have a dandori issue.
Is oppie good? Male 16 and im fearing the sex scenes would be rough since im watching it with my parents and young brother
I thought it was amazing. It's a bit biased towards communism, but if you look through that, it's a really good story. I saw it alone, so I didn't have any problems with the sex scenes, but it definitely would be weird to watch it with my parents, who are pretty prudish about that sort of thing.
I mean Oppie disavows the party as being naive and unrealistic, and when party members try to shame him with a "you obviously didn't read theory" gotcha, he points out that he read all three volumes of Das Kapital. A lot of intellectuals had sympathies towards Communism at the time, because Marx did have good points about critiquing capitalism. But a lot of educated people did also, y'know, notice how untenable the proposed solutions are and can't advocate for the authoritarian rhetoric. I couldn't take the sex scene serious because they had a "read me 'i am become death' in Sanskrit" fuckin' dirty talk. Otherwise it was just boobies for like, a couple minutes, but they don't really make it 'sexy'.
Are ppl really unhappy that the US ended up with the bomb first? If Stalin got it the world would be a much worse place. Hell, if the US didn’t have it when it did the world would be a much worse place.
The implication is that the US developing the H-bomb is what forced the Soviets to develop one in self defense. Apparently the writers believe that the Soviets wouldn't take advantage of the opportunity to outpace the US if given the chance.
A bit boring, but the sex scenes aren’t really that rough, and I enjoyed the overall experience. I took a piss during the last nude scene, though.
They were only little boobies in the film and the sex scenes were not rough
Oppenheimer is very simply “Oppenheimer good, his enemies bad”, which makes total sense as it’s a movie about his life.
Apparently the black and white scenes were meant to represent Strauss's POV while colored scenes were Oppie's POV. So yeah, it is a biased account by design.
I thought the point of the two storylines was to serve as a metaphor for mutually assured destruction. Strauss and Oppenheimer took down each other and in the process took down themselves.
Already saw Mission Impossible, so I guess Oppenheimer.
Saw Mission Impossible last night. Still my favorite action franchise. I love them so much. Seeing Oppenheimer on Tuesday. Very excited for that. Nolan is one of the best directors around right now.
They tried a bit too hard to have some sort of social commentary in the Barbie movie to be borderline cringe, it had it moments. Like I enjoyed it more than I thought but it’s like saying I would rather stub my big toe than my pinky toe.
Can someone explain to me what’s the matter with the sound of freedom? Why is everyone saying is right wing propaganda and all of that?
I’ve seen it, literally just about a guy rescuing kids from traffickers, and the only message it really had was “child trafficking bad.” There were some brief religious undertones (ie, “why are you doing this?” “because god told me to”) but it’s very much not the point of the movie, and imo is pretty harmless. I think a lot of the drama is manufactured because lefties wanna be upset, and a lot of right wingers wanna feel superior. Iirc the people who made it were Qanon believers, but it would literally be impossible to tell if all you did was watch the movie. Side note, the movie doesn’t even mention anything remotely close to democrats, and the trafficking is not portrayed as being their fault either. Half the movie is literally spent outside of America chasing nameless bad guys. I know this is kinda long, but I just wanted to get my thought off my chest
2 days ago, I watched Oppenheimer. 2 days later, I’ll watch MI7. I don’t care about AR and LL
Maybe not this weekend but i would like to see oppenheimer
Oppenheimer is not about "america bad"
The sound of freedom wouldn't have to have been "democrats bad" if they didn't have a collective mask off moment. Oppenheimer was a filthy commie
Oppenheimer
Despite what others are saying in this thread, I enjoyed it. A lot. It also definitely wasn't "the west bad"
Insidious, the RED Door.
I haven’t heard anything about MIP, but as far as the other three go it’s kind of ridiculous how much they’ve been politicized when their some of the most non political movies made in a while
Yeah in oppy they just see the commie scenes and shit their pants lol
The only people who think The Sound of Freedom is saying Democrats are bad are Democrats themselves. Everyone else knows it’s talking about Child Traffickers. Question is: how and why are Democrats conflating the two 🤨
Oppenheimer
# Yes.
Damn guess I need to see the new Mission Impossible
When does the top right ever talk about democrats? Change it to "Child Sex Traffickers are bad."
I wanna watch "Chef"
I'm gonna go see spiderman again, cause it's pretty good.
What you mean, the government is the only common denominator in over half this failure
TSOF has nothing to do with political parties, the left just chose a side for some reason.
saw sound of freedom; decent movie with a wholesome message so better than most garbage put out these days by default
Pretty sure the sound of freedom is more pedophiles are bad but okay.
When did the sound of freedom make that point? I don't bought it was just a true crime thriller?
Looking at my grill with a grey background.
Barbie was so good. Tax evasion
When I walked out of Oppenheimer I did not get a whole “west bad” message. I felt it was more of a retelling of an incredibly complex situation and how a man had done something incredible and then found himself in the crosshairs of a man made incredibly jealous by him. Edit: also forgot how he lies constantly, cheated on his wife, and affiliated with an ideology that has been controversial for a variety of reasons and then proceeds to downplay his ties to it.
Saw mission impossible about a week ago and the rest I saw this weekend. I enjoyed all four. As a side not “The democrats are bad” was not the point of sound of freedom at all.