I'd say that either "killing people as a sport" or "taking vengeance on the super rich" counts. As it stands, inequality is growing every year, but it remains far under the spotlight because other rivalries (eg democrats vs republicans) take most of the spotlight. Nicely shared with "racism". Yet movies about racism are seldom censored (1), which makes fox news' stance all the more remarkably wrong.
Movies (as well as games, literature, comics and other media) serve as communication tool that reflect a perception of the world. It is a reality that the political sides and incomes are becoming dangerously polarised. There's something to be said about not fueling the fire, but censorship isn't the answer. It is literally no different than blaming video games for violence.
Also: "people dumber than me might get some ideas" is a lame excuse. Those 'dumb people' find reasons for their actions anywhere. And news anchors rarely talk about it, but those dumb people get their ideas from reality, not from fiction. Ever seen the docu "bowling for Columbine"? In it, Moore draws the comparison between America and Canada. Why has the former so much violence, when all the common punchlines ('violent video games', 'violent movies', 'Marylin Manson', gun possession even...) are equally available everywhere? The answer was (and about 20 years later still is) the news media.
Again: why does fox feel the need to crusade against a horror movie? It's not like it's a new phenomenon. And believe me: the movie really needs to step up in the gore department if it wants to compete with what's already on the market for years (why isn't Fox rallying against other horror movies?).
How long has it been since you've been in a movie theater? Just about EVERY MOVIE EXCEPT THAT ONE(2) features human beings who don't give a damn about which political party they're about (okay, except the lion king...that has animals instead of humans
).
Hmm...I said it before: I can't make you like the movie, and I certainly won't be able to sell you on it on the basis that I haven't seen it either. Heck: I can't even truly disprove anything until then, so I can just point out that there's nothing of that in the trailer, so that "shit idea" originates in Fox directors' minds, interpreting Trump's rambling as being about The hunt.
So yeah...in my opinion, Trump's opinion is of the matter in this situation.
(1): with that, I mean REALLY censored. It's one thing to replace "the N word" with "afro American", but another thing to not make a movie that doesn't discriminate. It's not hard to test this, btw: just ask yourself how you'd feel if all the white actors changed roles with the black ones. Then quite often, the "you can always tell the villain by his skin" isn't a random trope anymore.
(2): that is, of course, provided that the movie is about a fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives to begin with.
that wikipedia page only mentions that as a POSSIBLE part of the movie (meaning: even the washington post hasn't seen the movie(3) ).
(3): is it me, or is the media getting pretty lazy on this front? I get that investigating foreign agencies isn't always easy, but c'mon...how difficult is it to call universal and ask for a review copy so you can spend at most 2 hours to write an article on something you then know something about?
@
stanleyopar2000:
