The movie “The Sound of Freedom” is an action thriller, borderline horror, film that depicts the nature of child sex trafficking based on the story of real life hero, Special Agent Tim Ballard of Homeland Security. Ballard was responsible for freeing over 100 children who had been trafficked and bringing dozens of traffickers to justice. The movie released on July 4, 2023, and it immediately prompted controversy while garnering high reviews (currently on Rotten Tomatoes, 75% from 24 critics and 100% from over 5,000 movie goers), and a hefty profit (up to $40 million currently after a $15 million budget). Here’s my take on the movie and the swirl of controversy around it.

The movie review

It’s a powerful, disturbing film. It’s not for families to watch, and honestly, it will be difficult for adults who have experienced trauma. For those who do go, it presents a gripping, suspenseful, meaningful story of hope and justice. Jim Caviezel, who plays the lead, does a decent job, more animated than his portrayal of Jesus in “The Passion,” but not by much. The script does run slow and predictable at points, but as a film, it delivers exactly what it promises. It is not a preachy film, and the religiosity is subtle and understated. Ballard is a Christian, but we don’t get much more than a single quote from the Bible, and another character who compellingly tells his story of a mystical conversion. It’s not your run-of-the-mill Kirk Cameron and Kevin Sorbo team up against the liberals who have brought on the apocalypse kind of Christian film. I recommend seeing it, with the aforementioned caveat.

The controversy

Now the conspiracies here are several layers thick.

1. Jim Caviezel is a QAnon conspiracist. This is simply true. I’ve heard him in interviews retell the adrenochrome conspiracy, which is absolutely pseudo-scientific nonsense. It’s the worst kind of science fiction, the QAnon crowd has definitely bought in, and you are gullible if you do too. This isn’t to say that Caviezel isn’t a good actor, or that he doesn’t star in good movies, or that this isn’t a good movie. It isn’t to say that this movie forwards the adrenochrome conspiracy – it doesn’t even allude to it. This is simply to say exactly what I am saying – Jim Caviezel believes in nonsense.
2. Immediately, a couple of outlets, the Guardian and Rolling Stone among them, pounced on Caviezel’s offstage commentary and accused the film of forwarding these conspiracies. To be specific, they act as though the movie is the Trojan horse for transporting QAnon conspiracies, despite the fact that the movie includes none of it. The little Trojan warriors are all inside Jim Caviezel’s head. The Guardian’s author is anonymous (let’s call her GAnon). She’s obviously given to a few crazed conspiracy theories of her own, and desperately wants to find one here, as though the QAnon people got together and wrote a movie script as sort of a gateway into their world. Because there is not actually any conspiracy theory in the film, she seems committed to the idea that where there is no smoke, there must be a very well-hidden fire. Those versed in modern media will simply see these two publications for the ideological rags that they are and move on.
3. Now here’s where the social media frenzy begins. Conservative outlets, including those trying to promote the film, and of course Fox News, and about a million people on Twitter, pounced on the negative reviews and announced that Hollywood was trying to stop the film from being seen! Maybe there really is a trafficking ring made up of liberal Hollywood elites who don’t want the truth to get out! I don’t in any way think most of these outlets really believe this (except Mel Gibson – he really believes it); rather, I think the fastest way to promote your movie (or book) is to announce that some ideological group is trying to suppress (or burn) it. Jim Caviezel (who, I want to be very clear, believes in nonsense) has said that major distributors passed on the films. There are rumors that Netflix, Disney, and Amazon all rejected it, but none of that has been confirmed by Netflix, Disney, or Amazon yet. Nonetheless, pay attention – the conservative outlets are counting on public outrage to boost ticket sales and film viewership. They do this because they are aware of the swirl of QAnon theories about liberal elites, child trafficking, and adrenochrome, and even if they know those theories are far-flung, they also know there is a grassroots gathering of conservatives who have rallied around them. And there’s an election next year.
4. That works. People really will go and see it because of all the media outrage. And then they’re going to find out that it’s actually a pretty good movie, which accounts for the perhaps slightly over-inflated 100% in viewer reviews. Some mainstream and not at all Christian outlets like Variety have also given it good reviews, because, in fact, it’s not a bad movie. Five stars.

In the end, I hope the movie does raise awareness of and opposition to the trafficking industry, I hope audiences are inspired by the conspiracy-free film, and I hope that maybe in the future Jim Caviezel stays in his lane.