5 Shocking Reasons Media Savaged ‘Sound of Freedom’
Reporters pummel fact-based film about heroic special agent saving children
The Netflix movie “Cuties” showcased young girls, dressed in provocative attire, gyrating toward the camera.
Even free speech devotees wondered if that visual approach was necessary to tell the story in play. The media, en masse, rallied to the movie’s side, suggesting “Cuties” critics had it all wrong.
We’re seeing the opposite in play with “Sound of Freedom.” The summer’s sleeper smash follows a special agent (Jim Caviezel) attempt to rescue a little girl from child sex traffickers.
And it’s based on a true story, no less.
The media is rallying once again, but this time it’s to attack the film, not praise it.
- CNN
- The Washington Post
- Rolling Stone
- The Guardian
They all savaged “Sound of Freedom” for various reasons. Some suggested, without evidence, that “Freedom” is a QAnon battle cry. Others intimated child sex trafficking doesn’t exist, or at least not at a level we should worry about.
The U.S. government begs to differ.
A few pummeled Caviezel for the crime of being a Christian and allegedly spreading QAnon theories.
Why? Why would journalists embarrass themselves with such nakedly biased reportage? Why savage a film attempting to highlight one of the most horrific crime networks imaginable?
It’s Tribalism on Steroids
The mainstream media and the film critic community lean to the Left. Hard. They make no bones about it and often push past journalistic standards to flex that cold, hard truth.
Remember the Russia Collusion HoaxTM?
Reporters quickly realized “Sound of Freedom” would be both successful and catnip to right-leaning viewers, even though the film isn’t political or overtly Christian. When those two groups rallied to make the movie a hit, critics and journalists used their various outlets to fight back.
Storytelling Is For Liberals, Dummy
Hollywood, and its various off-shoots, is almost exclusively for left-leaning artists. Outlets like The Daily Wire and indie projects like “That Show Tonight” are the exceptions that prove the rule. Liberal journalists don’t take kindly to right-leaning art invading their space. It’s why they demean or ignore right-leaning success stories like Fox News’ “Gutfeld!” and The Daily Wire’s “What Is a Woman?”
When an indie hit like “Sound of Freedom” comes along, these journalists decry a subversive story within their progressive landscape. And they act (out) accordingly.
‘Freedom’ Exposes Groomers, Inc.
Conservatives have been attacking the Left for its alleged grooming tactics. Drag Queen Story Hours. Pride parades where sexually-charged acts are performed for all-ages crowds. Kiddie content featuring mature themes like non-binary characters and trans-related issues.
So-called gender-affirming surgery on minors.
No matter where one stands on these issues, the Right says it’s protecting children while the Left vehemently disagrees. That narrative plays into “Sound of Freedom” through no direct fault of the filmmakers or product. “Freedom” was completed five years ago and sat on the proverbial shelf until now.
Still, it arrives at a time when protecting children is a core tenet of conservative policy. Journalists are reacting to that atmosphere.
Hollywood Hates Christians (So Do Some Journalists)
How much more proof do we need on this front?
- ‘The Silence’ Casts Christians as the Real Monsters
- Rainn Wilson: God ‘Freaks People Out’ in Hollywood
- Critics Sneer at ‘American Underdog, Faith-Based Audiences’
The stories of Christian actors being ignored, mistreated or maligned are too numerous to discard. Film critics routinely savage faith-based movies, whether they’re good, bad or indifferent.
The press is no better.
Is it any wonder journalists would rally against “Sound of Freedom,” a movie embraced by the faith-based community and featuring a powerful line like, “God’s children are not for sale.”
They Hate Caviezel More
Liberal film critic Roger Moore didn’t just skewer “Sound of Freedom,” which is perfectly fine since art is always subjective. He directed his ire at Caviezel.
Caviezel made it his business to cynically pander to this conservative religious “QAnon” friendly audience, long before he starred in TV’s “Person of Interest,” which was canceled because he’s just not an interesting, expressive actor person.
“Person of Interest” ran for five seasons on CBS, for what it’s worth.
Some of today’s biggest stars have behaved very badly off-screen. “The Flash” star Ezra Miller’s rap sheet is both long and frightening. Alec Baldwin accidentally shot a cinematographer to death on the set of “Rust,” a production with an armorer hired by co-producer Baldwin who was accused of malfeasance.
Caviezel has nothing of the kind on his resume. He’s a steadily working actor who anchored one of the 21st century’s most shocking success stories – “The Passion of the Christ.”
Yet the actor’s strong faith, and willingness to call out media corruption, put a target on his back. That coaxed The Washington Post to call out his views to detract from “Sound of Freedom” and its message.
“Sound of Freedom,” the low-budget film about child sex trafficking almost topped the box office on July 4.
But its star, Jim Caviezel, has linked it to the QAnon movement. https://t.co/4Je2YB3CBH
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 7, 2023
Until these vile beasts promoting this abomination are slayed, nothing changes and the behavior grows.
Duh…The media and Hollywood are against this film because they’re probably part of the sex trafficking ring. They’ll attack anything that might expose them. if the media is against some thing, I immediately know that that thing is true, because they only support their narrative and tell lies.
“Why is this article trying to divide us and politicize this issue with it’s non-fact based, generalized statements?”
Shoot the messenger much?
Seriously, the article is pointing out the rabid hatred being poured out on the film for no honest or obvious reasons, but your problem is… Conservatives POUNCE!!!!!!
Conservatives are supposed to take their undeserved beatings and say, “Thank you, sir, may I please have another?”
“And the Christians who want to force everyone else to live according to their own Christian beliefs.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…… What color is the sky in your world? Which side of the US political spectrum is demanding to educate the other’s children in ways that are explicitly unwanted (not to mention widely held to be evil by the majority of human history in nearly every culture)? Among so many other **VERY OBVIOUS** “forcing others to live according to their own beliefs” examples?