Watched 2000 Mules.
I believe the election was stolen, no doubt. The theft must be addressed, and criminals must be punished.
But contrary to the reviews from our side about 2000, I didn’t think it was an effective or compelling movie.
Large segments of the movie are static talking heads, often pointless talking. D’Souza wandering. The movie has the overall feeling of pointless padding to get it to an hour and 26 minutes.
The most fundamental point of the movie is illegality, but the first time that is mentioned is half way through, and it is fleetingly mentioned without clarification. The deadly assumption throughout (and I am being charitable calling it an assumption) is that the wrong-doing speaks for itself.
Some concrete examples are presented late in the movie, but they are singular and are not inconsistent with the (IMO mistaken) attitude that fraud always takes place but it is insignificant, and cannot be shown to have affected the results. The concrete examples feel tacked on, mere suggestions as to how they might relate to the larger issue of ballot stuffing.
The legal question should have been addressed up front: in what precise way will this movie prove legal wrongdoing?
The technical aspects came upfront and were mostly superfluous.
And the opinions of the opinionators was pointless, superfluous and boring. But they came upfront, too, as well as later.
Debbie was a personal add-in, also pointless.
The movie was poorly organized and poorly edited.
This is why our side always loses. We do not have the skill to make things interesting or compelling to anyone but the already committed, who do not demand much.
This could have been a powerful movie. But no normie will sit to watch this poor movie.
You need to watch the film again.