Posted on 04/28/2023 10:26:46 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Faint interest in film glorifying activists bent on violence, destruction
James Cameron caught little heat for a shocking admission. He hearts eco-terrorism.
It’s one thing for the “Avatar” director to be so green he makes his cast and crew eat vegan. That seems quaint compared to a quote that got ignored by most press outlets.
Now, we have an entire film dedicated to eco-activists willing to employ violence to suit their needs. And it’s clear where the story’s empathy lies.
“How to Blow Up a Pipeline” deserves some sort of Truth in Advertising award. The story follows a gang of eco-thugs plotting to deliver on the title’s promise.
HiT guest critic Joshua Sharf called it “really good agitprop” along with this warning.
In other exchanges, we hear the familiar refrain, “you can’t make omelets without breaking a few eggs,” unaware that violent revolution generally produces a lot of broken eggs and few omelets.
The film enjoyed a limited release April 7 but expanded to north of 500 theaters last weekend. The results?
A measly $600K to date.
The company behind the project told Variety “Pipeline” had more than just box office appeal. It could lure a coveted demographic back to theaters.
Yohan Comte, co-founder of Charades, said the company wanted to “convey the important ecological message” of the film and also believed it had the potential to “draw back the young audiences into theaters.”
Not so fast.
Glowing reviews didn’t help. The film boasts a 95 percent “fresh” rating at Rotten Tomatoes.com, a site that showcases the critical community’s overwhelmingly liberal tilt.
The Hollywood Reporter noted how easily the film’s message could translate into real-world violence.
How to Blow Up a Pipeline might not offer a blueprint for explosive solutions, but it could spark some ideas.
That didn’t dissuade critics from wrapping their arms around the movie. The far-Left, free-speech wary Rolling Stone called it a “hot date movie.”
The Libertarian Reason argued the film does the opposite of its intentions.
it’s also a subtle—if entirely unintended—indictment of the climate movement’s violent fringe activists.
The film’s festival debut also generated copious press, another boon to an indie film’s possible success.
Ironically, social critics savaged 2019’s “Joker” for supposedly promoting violence via its storytelling. The film’s incel-heavy themes, they cried, could spark real-world destruction. The newly woke U.S. Military echoed those concerns.
No actual violence occurred, and “Joker” crushed the box office competition and star Joaquin Phoenix won a Best Actor Oscar for his troubles.
Will “Pipeline” push people to violence? It’s a thorny First Amendment issue, but if so few people actually see the film the chances for mayhem diminish greatly.
I looked up this movie, but I don't see Cameron's involvement listed.
James Cameron has a big “D” by his name. He could be teaching a class in how to blow up pipelines and supplying materials and the corrupt FBI and equally corrupt DOJ and Homeland would be giving him a pass.
I watched part of this movie. The popcorn was OK... I got up and left about a 1/4 way through.
Why did you want to watch it?
When Avatar came out I told a liberal at work that I was rooting for the humans.
She looked at me like I’d just bit the head off a kitten.
No, it isn't.
You didn’t root for the smurfs?
“Why did you want to watch it?”
I didn’t. I just wanted to get out of the house one evening, and nothing else that was playing appealed to me. As it is, I was the only one in the theater, and when I left it was empty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.