Ballard became more of a known quantity after the release of the movie Sound of Freedom, a dramatization of his mission in which he was played by actor Jim Caviezel. Critics of the film have argued that Ballard’s claims about his accomplishments have been “dramatically overstated or without clear documentary evidence.”

  • dangblingus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s a verifiably trash movie. It’s not even remotely realistic in its depiction of child trafficking. “Giving a rats ass about the politics” is people understanding that it’s garbage conservative propaganda and nothing more.

    • Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      So you think it would be better to not have a movie talking about it at all so that it wasn’t in conversation? The poor attempt is better than none, in my opinion.

      I’ve watched plenty of historical movies about events that have transpired in the past, which weren’t completely accurate, and none of them got canceled for it so I don’t get rhetorical differenc tbh, except this bullshit politics angle.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Since when is having accurate information in a documentary political? Thats why its getting blasted. You don’t present bad information about human trafficking. Sure, that Dinosaur Planet shit has inaccurate shit about dinosaurs, but its about dinosaurs. It doesn’t directly harm anybody. This shit bag does.

        • Hazzia@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          That person seems to be unable to tell the difference between a Documentary and a Dramatic Reenactment.

          Dramatic retelling are allowed to play fast and loose with the story, since its point is to get across certain emotions to the audience. A responsible dramatic retelling acknowledges that certain parts of the movie are fictionalized, and usually the portrayed events are already well understood by the populace, or information is readily and widely available (see Oppenheimer).

          A documentary is first and foremost meant to be informative and bring to light a topic or series of events that aren’t well known by the populace. Inaccuracies in these is a huge red flag as that implies they’re trying to set a specific narrative for the topic before bringing it into the public eye, basically meaning it’s propoganda. And “not caring about the politics” about a propaganda piece doesn’t suddenly make it ineffective, or any less a piece if propaganda.

          Thank you for coming to my Ted talk, person I replied to who was not the one confused about the issue but who I responded to anyway

          • Sanctus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dudes username is Ubermeisters. They are either an Uber virtuoso, or they subscribe to a specific set of ideals. Its always those ones that “don’t care about the politics”.

            • Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Or I’ve had this username for a really long time across a lot of platforms and just used to think German language sounded cool (thanks Rammstein/The Matrix) but sure, let’s start wild assumptions about who each other are, seems productive.

              I’ll pass

              • Sanctus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                About as productive as defending a documentary someone had produced about themselves.

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So you think it would be better to not have a movie talking about it at all so that it wasn’t in conversation?

        If it misleads people and misinforms them about the problem, yes. This paints a false narrative of hero militant types rescuing kids from shady orgs when the reality is that kids need to be saved from family members and others close to home. This messaging harms real efforts to save kids by recasting the issue in ways that are more exciting and less authentic. If you don’t see that, I don’t know any way to persuade you.

        • Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          But it brings light to the situation, and brings the situation into conversation. Those are both good things.

          My takeaway was absolutely not that kids get to rely on some fucking military dude to come save them… And if you watch the movie and you got that I don’t know what the fuck is wrong with you.

          Just because that happens to be the sequence of events that happens in the movie, doesn’t mean you need to be so simple minded as to absorb the verbose plot as the message…

          • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Wow. I don’t typically reply to old replies, but I let my inbox slip while I was busy. This is some of the stupidest shit I’ve ever seen.

            There’s an awesome Jim Cavezel / Tim Ballard ep of the QAnon Anonymous podcast (anti-Q) that came out today about these folks. Too bad you need to pay to support to listen to the ep because it’s on their premium feed. I wish you’d hear it.

            Apologies for typos, I’ve been celebrating a life change with friends.

      • Zippy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is fine to watch an entertaining movie as long as you do not think fiction as fact? Take Chernobyl. It was nearly all fiction yet people bring it up all the time.

        • Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Didn’t take it as fact, never take movies that I buy tickets for, at an entertainment facility, to be factual enough to base facets of my core ethos on for sure.