Sound of Freedom a Rorschach test for all sides

Sound of Freedom opened July 4 in a limited number of theaters with comparably little advertising and immediately beat out Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny.

Wow.

So let’s get some questions out of the way.

Is it a good movie?

Yes, very good. The cinematography is excellent, the acting superb, the plot is gut-wrenching and the horrors it depicts are hinted at rather than shown explicitly, like all the best horror movies. They get more emotion out of a man closing a curtain than any slasher flick. This is the kind of movie the audience sits through so silent you could hear a pin drop.

Is it QAnon adjacent?

What the heck does that mean? Does it promote nutty conspiracy theories? No. Does the lead actor Jim Caveziel believe in some? Maybe, so what? Alec Guiness thought Star Wars was juvenile trash and still did a heckuva job as Obi-wan Kenobi.

Some of that impression seems to come from the fact Caveziel in interviews conflates the very real trafficking of children for prostitution and porn with the just as real African practice of using body parts of children and albinos for magic. They’re both real horrors, but not the same thing.

Does it promote religion?

Noooooo, not really. There is a religious undertone but the phrase “God’s children are not for sale” occurs only three times in the film, and there is one reference to a religious epiphany when the character Vampiro describes his road to Damascus moment that led him to quit the cartels and start rescuing children.

But if you believe the notion that pedophilia is… you know, wrong, is a purely religious position then I guess it does.

Is it based on a true story?

Well there lies the problem. One source, an investigator with years of experience in child protection, tells me Operation Underground Railway is kind of dodgy.

Do they exaggerate the magnitude of the problem and the effectiveness of their operations?

Possibly. Which would not be the least bit unusual in any advocacy organization. So how exaggerated does it have to be before you consider the problem not worth your time and attention?

But my source tells me they are vague about how the children they allegedly rescue were rescued. When pressed they say by passing information on to law enforcement, which is not a bad thing but not nearly as dramatic as elaborate stings and commando style-raids.

Worse, they have not been transparent about the collection and disbursement of funds, as required by law for non-profit organizations.

Internet sources say they stage stings for potential donors in countries where prostitution is legal and there the age of consent is low. (How low? As in 12, like our neighbor to the south.) I have no idea how to evaluate that claim.

But some of the criticism is just off-the-wall weird. Rolling Stone called it, “A Superhero movie for dads with brain-worms.”

Even if the movie were nothing but a rollicking good adventure story, that attitude is really creepy.

Reactions like that have convinced lots of people the movie has terrified Hollywood pedophiles.

Nonsense. I have no doubt there are lots of Hollywood pedophiles, but they’re not terrified. In their arrogance they think they are untouchable.

What terrifies Hollywood is that a movie this good, this popular, and this profitable was made on a budget of $14.5 million.

The cost of movie-quality cameras, editing equipment, and even CGI has fallen to the point what matters in making a popular movie is the acting and the writing. Precisely what Hollywood has lately so conspicuously failed to deliver.