The Hunt

[Crunch]

I thought this was fake, seems it’s not (I’d like to find out it’s some elaborate hoax). It’s a movie about privileged vacationers hunting “deplorables” for sport:

According to the Hollywood trade publication, characters in the film refer to the victims as “deplorables,” which is what Hillary Clinton famously dubbed Trump supporters during the 2016 election. The report noted that a character asks, "Did anyone see what our ratf--ker-in-chief just did?"

"At least The Hunt's coming up. Nothing better than going out to the Manor and slaughtering a dozen deplorables," a character responds, according to THR.

“The violent, R-rated film from producer Jason Blum's Blumhouse follows a dozen MAGA types who wake up in a clearing and realize they are being stalked for sport by elite liberals,” THR’s Kim Masters wrote. “It features guns blazing along with other ultra-violent killings as the elites pick off their prey.”

Set for release in September, “The Hunt” depicts a group of gun-toting strangers who find themselves part of a scheme in which “a bunch of elites kidnap normal folks like us and hunt us for sport,” as actor Ike Barinholtz says in the trailer.

Produced by Jason Blum’s Blumhouse Productions, which was also behind “Get Out” and “The Purge,” the movie stars Barinholtz, Betty Gilpin, Emma Roberts and Hilary Swank, among others.

I guess the only question left is if it will win a Golden Globe or even an Oscar. I suppose it depends on the body count it can inspire across the nation. What’s the over/under? 10? 20?

[Wayward Son]

Ya gotta get on ball there, Crunch.  Where've you been?  Your talking about a premise almost identical to "The Purge:"  gov't makes it legal to shoot poor people one night a year (the rich protect themselves) and it backfires on them.  This is just them guys trying to milk a bit more out of the idea of class warfare.

It'll have the same impact as the three (or is it four? five? anyone keeping count?) Purge films--they'll make a few million, and hardly anyone will notice.    Just like all them Jason films and Halloween films and other slasher films.

[Crunch]

Related:

Democrat and brother to 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Julián Castro on Monday tweeted a list of 44 San Antonio donors who contributed the maximum amount under federal law to Trump in 2019. “Sad to see so many San Antonians as of 2019 maximum donors to Donald Trump,” he wrote, calling out a couple of the city’s better-known donors by their Twitter handles.

Castro is also refusing to back down. In an appearance on Morning Joe on Wednesday, when pressed on whether the people on the list would now be harassed, Castro said he wants the donors “to think twice about supporting a guy who is fueling hate in this country.”

[Crunch]

Ya gotta get on ball there, Crunch.  Where've you been?  Your talking about a premise almost identical to "The Purge:"  gov't makes it legal to shoot poor people one night a year (the rich protect themselves) and it backfires on them.  This is just them guys trying to milk a bit more out of the idea of class warfare.

It'll have the same impact as the three (or is it four? five? anyone keeping count?) Purge films--they'll make a few million, and hardly anyone will notice.    Just like all them Jason films and Halloween films and other slasher films.

Where have you been? Have you seen current events?

Ackshually, the premise dates back to a 1920’s era book called The Most Dangerous Game. It’s been done and redone many times over the years. Van Damme, Rutger Hauer, many others with different spins.

So you love the idea of killing MAGA types. You’re cool with this. Ok

Crunch: Please see your email. -OrneryMod

[TheDrake]

I wonder if you'd have same reaction if they were social justice warriors from antifa. It's a work of fiction.

[Crunch]

Scene from the movie

Dozens of protesters gathered outside of Mitch McConnell’s home in Louisville Monday night, including one who wished the Senate majority leader would suffer several violent injuries.

Response:

Just stab the mother*censored*er in the heart, please,” the videographer replied.

[Crunch]

I wonder if you'd have same reaction if they were social justice warriors from antifa. It's a work of fiction.

Ok, you’re cool with it too. Nice.

What if it was a bunch of abortion activists from planned parenthood? That work of fiction fun too?

[cherrypoptart]

Maybe they'll reshoot it with a twist or alternate ending in which the deplorables get the upper hand and have their revenge. That's how it always works out in the other movies where the victims turn the worm and put the shoe on the other foot though I highly doubt that was the original ending for this film it would make it interesting and "fair". If they kept it secret enough and surprised everyone with an ending like that it would be like a double irony play and the people saying the movie was no big deal might all of a sudden be quite offended while those who were offended would be laughing their heads off. Maybe I should drop this into the producers' suggestion box and ask for a screen credit as a script consultant. Might be a sneaky way to save their investment anyway.

But yeah, as it is the so called irony of it might get interpreted more as hypocrisy and even worse for art sometimes, just bad taste, like Kathy Griffin's Trump head.

[TheDrake]

I wonder if you'd have same reaction if they were social justice warriors from antifa. It's a work of fiction.

Ok, you’re cool with it too. Nice.

What if it was a bunch of abortion activists from planned parenthood? That work of fiction fun too?

It could be. I very much enjoyed a film that postulated libruls who poisoned their dinner guests. Didn't mean I was cool with people actually doing that.

But you never responded to my query. If it was people hunting antifa, how would that be for you?

[D.W.]

As cherry points out, the typical trope is for the hunted to turn the tables on the hunter in this genre.  Despite the lame attempt to cash in on the partisan divide, it sounds like bad story telling...  Or maybe this is more strait up horror movie where 1 gets away all traumatized and the rest are gruesomely murdered by the "monster(s)"?

Or maybe the whole thing is a pet project to rile up people like Crunch?   

[Seriati]

It could be. I very much enjoyed a film that postulated libruls who poisoned their dinner guests. Didn't mean I was cool with people actually doing that.

The Last Supper right?  I enjoyed it too.  That was a self reflective piece where liberals explored how their belief in their goodness was confronted as they eliminated cartoon versions of conservatives.

I think this film is in poor taste, but so is most of the horror porn genre.  I would find interesting if those who defend the piece would think of it differently if we "correctly" dog whistled by say having it be  a release of KKK films and the hunted being minorities?  Or would you recognize that for the dangerous piece of propaganda encouraging the events that it is?

To me the appropriate response here is to consider what the actual message is and if it's truly a message of hate to condemn and even blacklist those behind the film as the hate mongers they are. 

[TheDrake]

True, it really depends on the full context. Are the Magans the protagonists, or is it the hunters? Do they escape the clutches of the evil liberals and turn the tables on them? If so, it could be a commentary on the dangers of demonizing and threatening a group.

The movie follows a group of twelve people who wake up in a clearing - with no idea where they are or how they got there - only to find themselves being hunted by a collection of wealthy "elites"... that is, until one of them (GLOW's Betty Gilpin) turns the tables on her would-be killers.

Would a propaganda film against conservatives end with one of them turning the tables on a liberal elite?

[Crunch]

As a derivative work, I assume this story follows the original with the hunted turning the tables on the hunters. But that’s not the point at all. Obviously.

We are in a time period where liberals are demanding that Trump inspired terrorism and violence with his tweets. We are also in a time when politically motivated shootings have occurred and groups like antifa routinely engages in violence against conservatives or any other political opponents. All with the blessings of the left.

Now, let’s drop in a high value production that glamorizes hunting and killing political opponents. Spends a couple of hours showing how exciting and cool it is along with all the justifications for doing it. You can see right here in this thread a couple of people are embracing that fantasy, giving it room to breathe.

Does anyone really think that this is a good thing? I see a couple of you do.

[Wayward Son]

So you love the idea of killing MAGA types. You’re cool with this. Ok.

F**k you, G2, you stinking liar. 

Wayward: Please see your email. -OrneryMod

[Wayward Son]

I should also point out that the premise of this thread is based on unsubstantiated rumors.

However, the ideology and political affiliation of the characters who hunt and kill what appear to be working-class people from largely rural areas remains unclear, despite the aforementioned websites’ [The Epoch Times and The Blaze] repeated and emphatic descriptions of them as “liberal” and “left-wing” elites. Notwithstanding the context of a fictional horror movie, it should be unnecessary to point out that hunting human beings for sport has never been a tenet of Enlightenment liberalism or modern-day American progressivism.

We asked Universal Pictures whether it could confirm the accuracy or authenticity of those elements of the script published by THR, but we did not receive a response in time for publication. It’s unclear whether the script allegedly seen by THR was at an early stage of development, or a final draft, or whether those elements that suggest a liberal-conservative enmity between the characters made it into the final cut of the film itself.

Without having confirmation of those important details or being able to watch “The Hunt,” we cannot confirm the accuracy of the claim that the movie features “liberal” or “left-wing” characters hunting “Trump supporters” for sport.

And as a few have pointed out, it is the typical Hollywood trope of the quarry turning the tables (which goes all the way back to the short story, "The Most Dangerous Game.")

The official Universal Pictures website for the film, which describes it as “a new mysterious social thriller,” contains the following plot summary:

“Twelve strangers wake up in a clearing. They don’t know where they are, or how they got there. They don’t know they’ve been chosen … for a very specific purpose … The Hunt.

“In the shadow of a dark internet conspiracy theory, a group of elites gathers for the very first time at a remote Manor House to hunt humans for sport. But the elites’ master plan is about to be derailed because one of the hunted, Crystal (Betty Gilpin, GLOW), knows The Hunters’ game better than they do. She turns the tables on the killers, picking them off, one by one, as she makes her way toward the mysterious woman (two-time Oscar® winner Hilary Swank) at the center of it all."

When the hunters are ultimately the ones who get killed, it is hardly an endorsement for hunting.

[scifibum]

Sounds like the movie depicts these "elites" as evil and the "MAGA types" as not? I'm not saying this kind of film is any good for society. I'm sure it's not. But I don't think the political effects, intended or actual, would be to encourage killing Trump supporters.

[TheDrake]

As a derivative work, I assume this story follows the original with the hunted turning the tables on the hunters. But that’s not the point at all. Obviously.

Yeah. And SAW glamorizes and normalizes kidnap and torture.

The key will be in the portrayals. Who are the audience supposed to sympathize with? Who are they supposed to hate?

If you wanted to make a movie that encouraged backlash against magans, you'd have a serial killer wearing the trademark hat.

[Crunch]

Sounds like the movie depicts these "elites" as evil and the "MAGA types" as not? I'm not saying this kind of film is any good for society. I'm sure it's not. But I don't think the political effects, intended or actual, would be to encourage killing Trump supporters.

Then why would anything else that we’re constantly told invited violence not be the same bucket?  There’s a double standard here.

[D.W.]

That whole bucket is a joke.  It's a common tactic of deflection is all. 
Now excuse me as I go back to watching John Wick movies and playing my first person shooter games.

[TheDrake]

Sounds like the movie depicts these "elites" as evil and the "MAGA types" as not? I'm not saying this kind of film is any good for society. I'm sure it's not. But I don't think the political effects, intended or actual, would be to encourage killing Trump supporters.

Then why would anything else that we’re constantly told invited violence not be the same bucket?  There’s a double standard here.

Brokeback mountain depicted a gay person being killed for being gay. Was that an anti-gay film?

[scifibum]

Sounds like the movie depicts these "elites" as evil and the "MAGA types" as not? I'm not saying this kind of film is any good for society. I'm sure it's not. But I don't think the political effects, intended or actual, would be to encourage killing Trump supporters.

Then why would anything else that we’re constantly told invited violence not be the same bucket?  There’s a double standard here.

No there isn't a double standard. People who deplore movie and video game violence in general are largely consistent about that. People who think Presidents shouldn't scapegoat brown immigrants, or laugh at the suggestion that they be summarily shot, are consistent about that opinion.

The parallel you're looking for is a liberal leader at a rally yukking it up about violence against Republicans. Good luck finding an example as prominent as Trump.

[Wayward Son]

Looks like the Right-Wing-o-sphere is going nuts about the rumors about this movie.

A nut named Rick Wiles is blaming the Jews. 

“They’re talking about murdering conservative Christian rural citizens in this country. That’s no joke. The Jews of Hollywood spent tens of millions of dollars to produce that movie. This is not a joke, this isn’t satire. They’re sending a message: get ready to kill conservatives.”

“The Jews are plotting a Jacobin revolution in this country,” he continued. “If that hasn’t convinced you, what will it take? Next year, when they’re shooting you?”

Fox News calls it "the liberal Twitterstorm fantasy taken to the next level."

Of course, Our Racist President says: ""The movie coming out is made in order ... to inflame and cause chaos. They create their own violence, and then try to blame others. They are the true Racists, and are very bad for our Country!"

And there's Ammoland.  "As for white Americans who believe in their nation being the “greatest terrorist threat,” we see who the murderous aggressors are."

All for a movie no one has seen yet.

[Crunch]

Sounds like the movie depicts these "elites" as evil and the "MAGA types" as not? I'm not saying this kind of film is any good for society. I'm sure it's not. But I don't think the political effects, intended or actual, would be to encourage killing Trump supporters.

Then why would anything else that we’re constantly told invited violence not be the same bucket?  There’s a double standard here.

Did you think Top Gun was an anti Naval aviation film? 

Brokeback mountain depicted a gay person being killed for being gay. Was that an anti-gay film?

[Crunch]

I’ll finish the post. ....


Top Gun depicted a guy dying as he ejected from the plane. Wasthat an anti naval aviation film?

[Crunch]

Universal has decided to scrap the release of The Hunt — an R-rated satire in which elites hunt "deplorables" for sport — following a series of mass shootings across the country. The film had been set to hit theaters on Sept. 27.

Smart decision. Fueling the fantasies of killing political opponents is not a reasonable thing at this moment. Perhaps in a year or two, if things have settled a bit.

[ScottF]

I just watched the trailer for the first time. It kinda just looks like the same lame, violent garbage that Hollywood spews out all the time.

If they’re pulling for general reasons around the gameification of murder then fine, but I didn’t see any particular political undertones beyond the typical left/progressive stuff that already exists in most movies anyway.

[D.W.]

I for one thank the Deplorables for sparing us from this crappy movie. 

[Seriati]

No there isn't a double standard. People who deplore movie and video game violence in general are largely consistent about that.

I think the double standard he's looking at is that the same people who run Hollywood and Big Tech, which produces extremely violent content with massive amounts of murder and gun crime, strongly align politically, with those calling to ban guns and decrying the President's "hateful rhetoric."  Honestly, they claim the President wants to murder brown people because he wants to enforce the actual laws on immigration, and that's hateful rhetoric, but a movie about murdering your political opponents is just entertainment that doesn't have an impact on the national conversation. 

To make that clear, the President is responsible for a mass shooting because his words disagree with them politically, even though he's never remotely said anything that calls for a mass shooting; but they can put out a movie about murdering their political opponents and you'd be "crazy" to claim they have a responsibility for any uptick in violence.

[scifibum]

A movie that depicts those acts as despicable. An anti-movie-violence critique could be coherent. This is just bogus concern trolling.

[Seriati]

So, if a movie depicts a graphic rape scene as despicable, does that mean the rape scene won't end up as a clip on porn sites?  Did putting it into the movie, that probably got an R rating as low box office, move the needle more than the millions (?) of men that will watch it over and over again stripped from context?

I just don't know.  I do know that a lot of people have really confused views of things like gun violence from believing the way media presents guns.  Automatic weapons show up all the time on tv, virtually never in real life.  Every tv cop fires their side arm at least every couple weeks, real cops?  Maybe never in their whole career. 

Have you never read anything (and there are thousands of articles on it) about how portraying black kids as thugs on tv led to stereotypes?  How is it possible that it's "clear" in that case, and completely impossible in the other?  Answer - it's not.  Marketing, propaganda, communication effectiveness all follow principals, and the reason this is "different" is just because some people want it to be considered so.

[D.W.]

As a writer/actor trying to tell a story, the idea that one snippet may be extracted and played without context must be a pretty distressing thing.  Never gave that much thought before.

[TheDrake]

Do we even have any reason to believe this was going to be a negative portrayal? Having someone play the role of innocent victims is a commentary about how they are being treated unfairly. It could make people pause and consider how they feel about liberal mobs threaten people at their homes and restaurants.

[scifibum]

So, if a movie depicts a graphic rape scene as despicable, does that mean the rape scene won't end up as a clip on porn sites?  Did putting it into the movie, that probably got an R rating as low box office, move the needle more than the millions (?) of men that will watch it over and over again stripped from context?

This is an example of why rape scenes should be treated sensitively. But there won't be a parallel, unless you expect there to be violence-porn-for-liberals that somehow uses footage from this movie in a way that somehow BOTH:

1. excludes the context that the "hunters" are villains
AND
2. includes the context that the hunters are "liberal elites" and the hunted are "MAGA types". 

This is granting that all those characterizations were accurate in the first place, which might be a stretch.

For the record, I think movies and TV shows glamorize violence and it's a problem, and I also think this movie sounds stupid and offensive. But it does not victimize "MAGA types" in portraying them as victims of evil liberals.

[Crunch]

It depicted people killing each other for political reasons.

I don’t think it matters who was heroic and who was the villain or who was portrayed as the victim. I think that so many of you trying to deny what the plot really was demonstrates that you know it was a bad idea at this moment in time. But, so many of you seem to really dig this fantasy of killing your political opponents so you try to go through the mental gymnastics to accept it.

And you’re probably wondering why the second amendment even exists.

[TheDrake]

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pro-trump-movie-cancelled-thanks-to-trump/

[D.W.]

So... standard trope, not horror movie murder-porn. 
Either way, thanks for sparing the public this fine piece of film. 

[Seriati]

I think that's an interesting take on the review, but it's hard to say if it is really true.  If you recall The Last Supper, it wasn't really sympathetic to the "conservatives," its was completely about those on the left.

There are characters that Hollywood has produced overtime that had parts of the tone correct, but this movie doesn't sound it would have cast the "deplorables" as good people, my guess is that they'd have had the heroes be a couple that didn't "deserve" to be there (either taking the fall for someone else, or a slight that's more imagined than real).  There'll be plenty of really "deserving deplorables" who get killed, but they won't be anyone you recognize as someone you know from real life, they'll be caricatures from a 40's KKK convention or the like. 

[TheDrake]

Good point, Seriati. Last Supper followed a progression from, hey you can really sympathize with their motives while not agreeing with their murder. The first guest was about as reprehensible as you can get, I'm assuming a huge number of people from all political circles would hate.

Other guests were spared by the group as a whole, which shows their humanity and also helps generate sympathy.

I'd be surprised if there wasn't at least one full on caricature in both of those groups in the Hunt, if not all. Based on The Purge, I'd be surprised if there were any nuanced characters.

[scifibum]

But, so many of you seem to really dig this fantasy of killing your political opponents so you try to go through the mental gymnastics to accept it.

Not sure if you're demonstrating extremely poor reading comprehension or something else, but it reflects poorly on you (not the people you are falsely accusing of things).

[TheDrake]

It's funny when people are all about free speech, decrying censorship, deplatforming and demonetization while applauding their victory in suppressing a film by acting like a screaming mob.

[ScottF]

I don't think there's a majority of people applauding this. Like all censorship and "outrage" it's typically a tiny vocal minority. I'm not a fan of a studio caving on stuff like this, regardless of the political leaning.

[Crunch]

But, so many of you seem to really dig this fantasy of killing your political opponents so you try to go through the mental gymnastics to accept it.

Not sure if you're demonstrating extremely poor reading comprehension or something else, but it reflects poorly on you (not the people you are falsely accusing of things).

So what’s your theory on why they support this film being released at this moment in time?  I’d be ok with it under more temperate times but with antifa support and rationalizations of their actions I think it’s reasonable to assume some level of fantasizing about this. A poll about eliminating your political opponents came out recently and about 20% of Democrats though it was a good idea, a little more than 15% of republicans thought so as well. Want to fuel that? It’s a good idea, you think?

You can pretend it’s all me, that’s the easy way out. But reality doesn’t agree with you.

[Wayward Son]

But, so many of you seem to really dig this fantasy of killing your political opponents so you try to go through the mental gymnastics to accept it.

Not sure if you're demonstrating extremely poor reading comprehension or something else, but it reflects poorly on you (not the people you are falsely accusing of things).

So what’s your theory on why they support this film being released at this moment in time?  I’d be ok with it under more temperate times but with antifa support and rationalizations of their actions I think it’s reasonable to assume some level of fantasizing about this. A poll about eliminating your political opponents came out recently and about 20% of Democrats though it was a good idea, a little more than 15% of republicans thought so as well. Want to fuel that? It’s a good idea, you think?

You can pretend it’s all me, that’s the easy way out. But reality doesn’t agree with you.

At what time does the film identify all the hunted characters as being Trump supporters?  Please give the range of minutes, so I can see for myself without having to sit through the whole stupid thing.

Otherwise, stop being outraged that people aren't outraged about your fantasy, and making up stories about why they aren't outraged. 

[Crunch]

Uh, the film was pulled from release so, you see, the exact minutes are not available yet. Also, you can see the release materials from the distributor to find out about political affiliations. It’s actually pretty easy.

I’m not outraged, I even talk about the movie being released at a later date. I only question this timing. The fantasy is yours. The stores being made up are, well, yours.

[Crunch]

Police in San Antonio arrested a man early Tuesday morning in connection with gunshots fired through the windows of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in the city, according to the agency.

But yeah, it’s just a fantasy on my part. Right. Tell me again that this isn’t happening.

[Wayward Son]

Uh, the film was pulled from release so, you see, the exact minutes are not available yet.

So how do you know those minutes will be released?  Crystal ball?

[Wayward Son]

Police in San Antonio arrested a man early Tuesday morning in connection with gunshots fired through the windows of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in the city, according to the agency.

But yeah, it’s just a fantasy on my part. Right. Tell me again that this isn’t happening.

Waitaminute.  You're saying that a movie, that has not yet been released and only a few seconds of clips have been shown, has inspired someone to start shooting at his political opponents?  Seriously? 

So tell me, how do you think racist rhetoric from the President influence White Nationalists?  

[Seriati]

Wayward, that wasn't what he said.  If the Dem's theory on Trump's responsibility for mass shootings is to hold water, then it must follow that attacks on ICE can be directly attributed to the anti-ICE rhetoric of the Dems.

[TheDrake]

Wayward, that wasn't what he said.  If the Dem's theory on Trump's responsibility for mass shootings is to hold water, then it must follow that attacks on ICE can be directly attributed to the anti-ICE rhetoric of the Dems.

Possibly. Or ICE policy. When Democrats demand better treatment for detainees, that isn't inciting violence, is it? When you claim that there's an invasion of illegals that must be stopped, that seems a little different. If Democrats are calling ICE agents violent criminals or a threat, I've missed it but I'm open to being persuaded.

[Seriati]

TheDrake, you can't play this both ways.  Trump's "rhetoric" often is not accurately described and never directly calls for violence, yet the Dem's want to make the hard attribution, they can't walk back the language they've used on ICE and have any consistency in not being responsible here.