Just got out of the theater and I'll probably do a longer write-up later as I'm busy getting food at the moment. Also all the promotional stuff for the film said it releases July 4th but I pre-ordered the tickets for the 3rd and just saw it so idk, maybe it just looked better on the promotional stuff to say that it released on the 4th? Also open to any questions about it :)
Comments (45)
sorted by:
Appreciate the post, and the time shortage.
However, I've just read 3+ so-called review posts, and all of them are just a few sentences saying, this is great, this or good, etc, etc.
To be honest, I have to stay away from certain things, because they cut me too deeply. So I'm wary. I'd really like to see a pede review that actually tells us something about the film itself: plot? story line? tough sections? approach to the topic? approach to the film-making aspect?
Such things.
If I don't find something like this here, I might just have to find it elsewhere. Btu to be honest, I already avoid the JC interviews. This stuff is always raw and hits me very hard, to be honest.
Hi, I want you to see it, so I made an account after lurking for a long time to answer your questions.
Plot: Homeland security officer arrests a pedo, pretends to befriend him to discover source of trafficking, goes to extensive lengths to save a child. I don’t want to spoil it for you but that’s the synopsis.
Tough sections are the suggestions towards sex. The film does well at not revealing anything graphic or punching you in the face. However, the suggestions that the children were being used for sex were very obvious and clearly intended.
Approach to the topic from a storyline perspective is similar to Taken, if you’ve seen that movie. If not, it’s a very linear action storyline. From a message perspective, it’s presented in a very straightforward way that is not especially thought provoking - going so far as to simply state facts in the prologue and epilogue re: human/child trafficking. There is a scene where the protagonist cop is directly stating statistics. I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing (normies need that), but from a movie perspective it did seem kind of cheesy.
From a film-making perspective, it’s unambitious* (ninja edit) but its message is clear and powerful. I think anyone would appreciate the movie, even if you are deep in the weeds with all of this shit like many of us here are. But it must be said that the film is clearly directed towards people not paying attention to what’s going on. Hope this helps
Thank you so much!
Thank you GJ3. Great first posting to the board.
I really appreciate this and you really answered the queries in my mind. You've relieved me of a good amount of stress around this. Thanks.
I was going to come in, but this synopsis is perfect. Concur 100%
Was the theater packed?
I'd say about two-thirds full, which was more than me & my gf were expecting given that the promotional stuff all said it released on the 4th. Also had a conversation about epstein with a guy and his wife when it was over lol.
Also surprised it was only rated PG-13 for "violence, sex trafficking, smoking throughout" etc...
The smoking warning always cracks me up. They literally will let your kids cut off their testicles but they don't want to trigger anyone offended by SEEING someone smoke a cigarette. Clown world.
Right? I worried for that man's poor mouth every time that cigar got so small.
That cigar-smoking ally guy who was partnering with Caviezel/Ballard to set up the sting was an AMAZING actor too. I was blown away when he was telling Caviezel/Ballard the story about why he got into the rescuing kids after his 'hooker' night.
Yeah, that part was in a trailer I saw. What one might call a 'come to Jesus' moment.
Where I live showing was for last night at 7... I needed three tickets... I had a hard time getting three seats in a row and was stuck getting them in the front row, ugh my poor neck. Mind you I purchased a few days ago, as soon as I saw my local theater would be offering ONE showing.... so front row, not so great BUT I got my tickets, and the silver lining is the theater was almost sold out. The next day I checked to see if it sold out and it had and they were now offering a showing for tonight at 7, on the 4th. We got to the theater and were informed that if we wanted to, we could choose new seats because they had opened another theater because of so many wanting tickets and the first offering sold out so fast... so we got our new seats in a better viewing spot in the second theater room... the second theater room had approximately 50 people in it.... I call this a huge win... sold out in 24 hours and strong demand so additional theater showing at same time and now additional days it is offered. Young man at the ticket desk stated he was hoping it would stay two weeks and that he was hoping he would get to see it.. WE ARE THE MAJORITY!
Did they name names?
No, but they clearly re-enacted a procurer who collected children by pretending to be an agent rep for a modeling agency (Rachel Chandler & Jean Luc style). And the island they showed on a map was an obvious nod to Epstein island, even though this movie was made long before Epstein because a widely-known public figure/monster.
It's not the only sex trafficking island out there. JC said he watch people when this was screened and everytime people started talking same spot in movie. After each he would ask questions as to why.. they all said Epstein Island. And hes right there are many. Bidens have Water Island not far from Epstein Island . I always wonder if that's why we were told to "Watch the water".
I saw that same JC interview where he was so perplexed about why the audience everywhere started chatting at the same moment (the island map shot) in the movie. That was so interesting!
Does the movie get the message across? Little kids being put into slavery for sex? Does the movie broadcast the message of how much evil there is in the world?
Yes it does
I'm not sure that I can watch it. Is it bearable in matter of content? Harder question to ask than I thought. Is it unbearably heartbreaking?
I'm still not sure I trust Caveziel either. He sure speaks highly of Sean Penn, and has been "one-eye" photographed. Don't know when the one-eye pics were from, but he was speaking positively about Penn today. Hell, maybe I'm wrong about Penn, but he sure spends a lot of time doing Haiti "humanitarian" work.
https://i.pinimg.com/236x/d0/a5/bd/d0a5bd062ce0e9433707683bfaa1e90a.jpg
Yikes, that's troubling. Liz Crokin doesn't trust him I found out today, which is interesting.
Sauce?
From her Twitter post:
I’ve been exposing elite pedophile rings & Pizzagate for 7 years now. No one will touch this topic of Pizzagate because they are ALL owned, compromised or sold out in some way. If you claim to be exposing child sex trafficking all while you brag that you only answer to God, then don’t bend a knee to anyone especially! — Fox News (who did more to cover up Pizzagate than any other network!) And then there’s the Disney issue! I would like to know why Jim Caviezel did not put this film out independently on a website like Mike Smith did with Out Of Shadows. We all made nothing off that film, as we put it out for free, because all we cared about was getting the truth out.
https://twitter.com/LizCrokin/status/1675796811527733248
Not true. She has just within last day posted "Jim just made his first twitter post "w Mel Gibson speaking about how all should see this movie. So be careful of what you read. Always go look and see what you can find pro or con what's said.
From her Twitter post:
I’ve been exposing elite pedophile rings & Pizzagate for 7 years now. No one will touch this topic of Pizzagate because they are ALL owned, compromised or sold out in some way. If you claim to be exposing child sex trafficking all while you brag that you only answer to God, then don’t bend a knee to anyone especially! — Fox News (who did more to cover up Pizzagate than any other network!) And then there’s the Disney issue! I would like to know why Jim Caviezel did not put this film out independently on a website like Mike Smith did with Out Of Shadows. We all made nothing off that film, as we put it out for free, because all we cared about was getting the truth out.
https://twitter.com/LizCrokin/status/1675796811527733248
They were very careful to NOT show anything graphic to avoid imprinting horrific visual images into the audience's head. Instead, they IMPLY what's about to happen, but don't show it - ever.
However, they make it VERY clear that these kids are being used for sex, but without any of the children being seen undressed or any adults being seen undressed.
Thank you.
to be fair he is younger in that photo and probably just gets told to do that pose, Like most of them i doubt they are all in the know just dumb fucks doing as they are told
Agreed. I don't not trust him (heh). I have just become a horrible skeptic with regard to those in power and in Hollywood.
We all have buddy, i am hoping this guy is different
Hey it’s up to anons to pick up where the public media leaves off throughout the whole Great Awakening, we just got a huge shift in the Overton window to work with!
Thanks for the review, going tomorrow.😊
I'm going to see it tomorrow, do I need to bring tissues?
Bring tissues! This is a wonderful film for normies but for those of us who have been deep down the rabbit hole, it cuts much deeper.
Yes, def bring the tissues (I went thru at least 5).
Does it mention adrenochrome?
Jim Cavezeil is mentioning it in every interview he is doing though.
No, they didn't go there (re: Adreno). And they didn't go down the organ harvesting rabbit hole either. This movie only focused on the child sex trafficking element.
Movie was held up 5 years by Disney. So culture your expectations by what was known then..
At the end of the movie, you have to wait for a special message... in that message it states that the USA is the largest consumer of child sex. Which I admit I was shocked even going down the rabbit hole... I had actually thought some of the other Countries would be worse than the US, I guess not.
Where can I watch this?!
tix available at angel.com/sof
Why did he give the children he rescued right back to the agencies that exploited them?