BuckSwope

OR- just wait for it, it's possible they are just SONGs and neither are to blame for either groups thinking or actions. I think it's funny when anybody brings up music as a blaming mechanism - see metal music as well. It's never music in general, just crap they don't like (and usually don't bother to listen to or interact with).

It's the rap music!

We disagree on that last part. It was a bit much for me.

When I saw it, it was on Shudder.

You are trying so hard to get around you saying OK to grooming. It's not the 18 year old deciding at 18 to date a teacher that is the grooming, it's the teacher interacting with the student while they were underage that helped the 18 think it's ok to date their teacher when they turned 18. You know, the grooming.

100%. Don't take the warnings lightly on that one.

Looks like VUDU or Plex, WTF they are or a $4-5 rental. I get why it gets put in there with Saw and others - there is torture and there is extreme violence. After that, I still think Martyrs is incredibly well made and is wrestling with some interesting ideas. Saw is dumb poorly acted crap for the most part.

All the worst stuff is from overseas. We don't seem to have the stomach for much beyond Saw here, whether it is profits, ratings board, whatever.

French version. I forget there was an American remake. Never seen it.

I still cringe at the "torture porn" label. A lot of great movies get tossed in the pile because they show extreme stuff, IMO. To me the bad ones are the Hostel/Saw type movies. BUT, I also think those are just the natural extension of another subgenre that notoriously has bad movies - the slashers. Let's be real - the reason most people watch slashers is because they want to see people offed in all sorts of ways. Showing some t1ts is a bonus, of course. Those movies are just extreme versions of that - watching people get killed slower and blurring in some sex. I guess where I am going is that I see things like Martyrs and the like thrown in that bucket, and I don't view those types of movies the same way. That said, I still also enjoy a couple saw movies and Hostel for what they are. They are nowhere near as hard to get through as something like Martyrs, and are mostly just laughably dumb movies.

A. I understand that it's about him, not made by him. B. As would I, that's why I said I don't think much is getting there. C. I won't, but many will. I get that you don't seem to care about that point, I am just saying that is the main reason I see for people staying away from the movie and being so vocal about it - whether they are right or wrong. They don't want to support, give voice to, or give money to these people. I thought that was a valid reason.

It does sound like bad policy to stop DNA testing at the border. I'd like the reasons for that too. That said, and speaking of optics, it is a little hypocritical to immediately question that border policy in relation to child trafficking, but don't seem to care about ones you support (Remain in Mexico) that are shown to increase trafficking. So in that case you are choosing border over trafficking. Not sure the numbers, but I'd guess one of those increased the numbers taken more than the other decreases the number being caught.

We agree, and that is what they are doing - correct? So that is the main complaint by people because the money and these donations are going back to him and his foundation. It's that movie is yet another vehicle to sell this story and get more money. How it gets twisted to libs protecting pedos is beyond me. Personally for me, it's mostly about not wanting people to get grifted and I want a serious topic addressed and tackled effectively. I could be wrong, but I don''t think much of the ticket sales gets funneled back to Ballard and the org, but I'm pretty sure I read OUR asks for donations at the end. I haven't seen it, so you can verify that or I will when I see it. That's what I had a problem with, and have even more concerns now. Besides that, I just thought the idea of a 'based on true events' movie being touted like this was pretty funny because of my history with them and knowing how many liberties are taken with the stories.

So sorry. In interviews they played he kept referring to it as a necklace/the necklace. Forgive me in advance, stryker.

Well, we are talking about the general American movie going public.

I think you misunderstood my post, or I wasn't clear. The bolded is what they are saying is going on. Ballard IRL says things like he saw this kid, embraced this kid, he was at the stop, the kid got the necklace, etc.. That is what he is saying when he gives interviews, and that is the story being told at the center of their donation efforts IRL (they have raised millions and millions selling the necklaces). So, yes - the claim is that through these documents, which I understand to be the filings of the stops and interviews, it shows he is telling an untrue story AND that untrue story is that the 'based on true events' is also based on.

He's made the point about that too. It's because the movie and foundation focus on something that IRL is shown to be a tiny % of the cases around child trafficking/abduction. Yes, on one hand you can say that if it leads to catching some of those people - WGAF? What the criticism is the downside is if people walk away from the movie and hype around it thinking that what is presented in the movie is largely how it goes IRL - then in theory that could lead people to not looking where their kids are truly vulnerable. I'm not convinced of that, but I understand what it being said. For me the more harmful is IF this causes a big uptick to a foundation that might not be on the up and up. I'd rather good intentioned people not get duped and something like child trafficking addressed correctly and efficiently.

Silence of the Lambs was also not touting bringing awareness to serial killers or asking for $ to help catch serial killers. Right there is the big difference in the situations. Interesting example, because SotL also had a bit of criticism around it about it's portrayal of Bill. Just about any 'based on' movie has people complaining about the details. I haven't seen a link, but in their podcast they keep referring to a court document that proves that the "necklace" moment didn't happen. If I remember right, Ballard claims one of them ran up to him and gave him a hug and the necklace? Evidently there are filings that show that couldn't have happened, and that is largely what they use to sell themselves and raise money. Isn't that the central story of the movie too, him rescuing those two kids? So the big complaint is not that the "based on true events" got the story largely right but made up stuff for movie excitement, it's that Ballard's hole story about himself and what he is selling is based on something that never happened.

Oh yeah - One Cut of the Dead was great too. I need to rewatch that one soon.

One of my soft spots are horror/comedy that are also decent horror movies overall. I make sure that people who like Scream, Cabin in the Woods and others have also seen movies like Tucker and Dale and Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon. I need to think of others. House of the Devil, Triangle, [rec], A Tale of Two Sisters, Splinter, Lake Mungo, and others are ones that I remember making sure horror fans at the stores had checked out.

It's on Showtime or the add on for Prime. Pretty sure that's where all the A24 movies end up. I thought it was a blast and the pay off was great. Not the best of the last few years but well worth the watch.

Looks like a 3rd is in the works - MaXXXine?

She played both in X - Maxine and Pearl (old lady).

You must have read a lot of his posts then.

That's how I usually listen to pods. 1.3x-1.5x. It does throw me off a little if it's a music podcast and sometimes I adjust back for those.