I want to focus on the production values: the acting, the direction, the screenplay, etc. That's what we should focus on, not the politics. I think Jessica Chastain is going to give a great performance, the direction looks really good, & the editing looks amazing.
sharewhat if they are using the movie as political propaganda? Should that not be taken into account?
"Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong." J.J. Rousseau
You don't want anyone to challenge the second amendment yet you're infuriated by other's exercising the first. Face it, anyone who feels the state of gun rights is just fine, won't be influenced by a 2 hour fictional movie. Anyone who believes change is needed, is already supportive of stricter regulations. And those are the only two groups at odds. So the movie won't change any minds, nor does it seem like it'a trying to. If the movie is making any assault on the country, it's at its broken political system. Any good movie, especially a thriller or drama, needs conflict. A movie about lobbying needs a cause to debate. There's no bigger debate in this country than gun legislation. So the writer chose the issue thatb will make for the greatest challenge for the characters. It's that simply. Now, do the filmmakers support more gun control - most likely. Does the film try to be a polemic for the liberal opinions of the issue - not if you watch the movie. Both sides of the debate are revealed and both sides have flawed characters - it's a movie; flawed characters are necessary to make it dramatic, interesting and relatable. I can appreciate there's a lot of sensitivity and strong opinions when it comes to gun rights. I think those in disapproval of the film give it way too much credit on what kind of influence it can have. It's a fictional story about DC lobbying that grounds itself (somewhat) in reality by dealing with a topical issue that people know and care about. That will make for great drama. And clearly some controversy and polarizing opinions. I don't get the sense the filmmakers were worried about that. It would be awareness to the film which in turn would make people think and talk about it, and maybe curious to see it at some point - that's how the human mind generally works. Jews watched Passion of the Christ. Scientologist watched Going Clear. We all stare at car wrecks and rainbows. And movies find an audience when they are 1) talked about, 2) well made. This one is both. And it looks like it only cost $13 million to make so between theatrical box office and all the other ancillary markets it doesn't seem like this movie can lose money. So keep talking about it in any light; it only helps the movie.
sharemost people know propaganda when they see it. "The move the NRA doesn't want you to see."
"There are over 5 million of us, and we're armed."
Give me a break. They might as well have shown NRA members in brown shirts goose-stepping down Pennsylvania Ave.
"Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong." J.J. Rousseau
Sounds like good marketing to me. It's grabbing attention. And any attention is good attention for a movie's awareness. Please keep writing about it and talking about it, say anything you want - those who agree with your views, wouldn't see it anyway. Those who don't, will be more curious to see it when people bash it over the gun issue. The movie can only benefit from all this.
shareHave you seen it?
I saw it last night and it's not pro or anti gun control. It's about corruption in lobbying and THAT industry and the effect they have on democracy.
There are two lobbying firms both trying to get Senators to vote for or again a bill on gun control. But really it could have been a bill on anything, because this is about corruption in lobbying not guns. Both lobbying firms are as bad as each other and the whole industry comes out of it badly as do corrupt senators.
This isn't Erin Brockovich at all.
Perhaps see the film before making a judgement?
so it's not the movie the NRA doesn't want you to see? There's no PSA at the end? There's no line about 5 million people being armed and said in a threatening manner?
"Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong." J.J. Rousseau
Mdpomroy is completely correct.
How are we supposed to know if it's the movie The NRA doesn't want you to see? Most that were willing to watch the movie aren't the unhinged NRA nut-type who have the irrational fear that "they're gonna take our guns away." And besides the fact that that fear is mental illness level delusional it's also about as practical as building a wall with Mexico, shipping all illegals back there and charging Mexico for said wall. There's no real or reasonable method of implementing such a plan.