Sasha Stone, a columnist who writes about films and the Oscars, just took a stand in support of “Sound of Freedom” on her site, arguing that the movie certainly deserves a chance at an Oscar given how important the message is and the massive impact it had on the culture, even despite the media reacting to it with either hysteria or snobbery.
Beginning, Stone argued that if a major studio had made the film, it would have completely dominated the media headlines and led to mass outcry about sex trafficking, but because Christians made it in a small studio, instead we get the media trying to minimize the message by diminishing the value of the movie or framing it as a conspiracy.
“If Sound of Freedom had been released by a major studio in the United States, or even an indie studio with “cred” in the industry, we would all be talking about the plight of children in the sex trafficking rings around the world, but particularly in the poorest countries. There would be reports on 60 Minutes. Variety and Deadline would post op-eds with concerned headlines to show they care,” Stone said.
Continuing, she noted that the reaction from the mainstream media was a mix of “don’t care about this movie because the ‘God people’ made it,” “typical mass hysteria reaction to the success of the film,” and “screeching and hysteria — QAnon this, Steve Bannon that, “right-wing” this, Trump that.”
Stone returns to that point later in the article, saying, “What’s so bizarre, and frankly horrifying, is how little coverage any of it has gotten in light of the film’s success. That’s what cowards we have in our media now — not just those who cover mainstream news but those who cover movies. Their hysteria over MAGA overrides their concern for impoverished children lured away from their families and forced into sex slavery.”
Stone then noted that the media’s reaction to the movie is problematic, as it shows the growing divide between the elite and normal Americans. In her words: “No society, much less any empire, can survive as an elite minority ruling over an abandoned majority. That’s what history tells us, and yet we seem hellbent on repeating the pattern.”
"*" indicates required fields
Beyond the political impulse to at least notice the film is the incredible reaction it has garnered from audiences, who reacted in a nearly unanimously-positive way to it. And so the movie’s mass appeal can’t be ignored, she said: “Sound of Freedom is that good movie, with strong performances at its center, that brings lots of people out to the movies who had long since given up on movies, earns an A+ Cinemascore and a 100% audience rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and is receiving not just applause throughout the film but, in some theaters in some places, standing ovations, you can’t just ignore that. Or I can’t anyway.”
Then, after noting many more instances of the media’s horrific reaction to “Sound of Freedom,” particularly its attempts to slander and smear Tim Ballard, Stone argued that the film should be an Oscar contender: “Why is this an Oscar contender? It isn’t. But it should be. Any movie that brings in audiences like this one did should be considered.”
But, of course, it won’t be. The “faith-based” aspect turns of libs, as does the fact that normal people like it and it wasn’t made by Hollywood. So instead, the Oscars will be dominated by some movie no one watched and those that did hate.
Featured image credit: screengrab from the embedded video, Angel Studios