Movies

A Violent Movie Satirizing America's Culture War Gets Cancelled by America's Culture War

After outraged responses from Fox and Trump, Universal yanks The Hunt from its schedule.

|

At the intersection of post-shooting panic and our hyperpartisan culture wars, the film The Hunt was struck by a semi-truck of stupid outrage and cancelled.

The Hunt, an R-rated violent satire of the very attitudes that ended up destroying it, is based on the well-worn horror trope of people hunting other people for sport. The twist for The Hunt is that the hunters are rich urban elites (read: liberals) hunting average Joes with accents from flyover territory (read: conservatives). The movie comes from Blumhouse Productions, the same folks behind the Purge series and Get Out, which also involve the privileged violently taking advantage and killing the less privileged.

Here's the trailer:

In movies like this, the audience is expected to identify with and cheer for the people being hunted. The elite liberals are the bad guys of the movie. They are hunting down and murdering conservatives because of their opinions.

Yet somehow, thanks to Fox coverage and some subsequent tweets from President Donald Trump, the movie's concept was twisted into an idea that Hollywood wanted us to be rooting for murderous elites. The Daily Beast notes that The Hunt has been the subject of at least 21 segments on Fox News and Fox Business Network (including reruns), and that these reports have generally assumed that the movie is a celebration of murdering conservatives:

For instance, during Thursday night's broadcast of Lou Dobbs Tonight, host and top informal adviser to the president Lou Dobbs described the film as a "sick, twisted new movie," adding that the prospect of "globalist elites hunting deplorables sounds a little too real." His guest, Fox News contributor and close Trump ally Robert Jeffress, further noted that this "revealed the hypocrisy of the left" and if the movie "was about conservatives killing liberals, you would see an outrage on the left."

The movie was scheduled to open on September 27, but now Universal Pictures won't be releasing it at all.

The Hollywood Reporter notes that the decision not to release the film also follows those shootings. This is true. It is also true that they alread yanked ads for the film in the wake of last weekend's mass shootings. But of course you cannot help but note that Donald Trump tweeted out attacks on the film the day before the cancellation came.

This is stupid snowflake nonsense from right-wing pundits—and probably just the pundits. (Are any conservatives who don't make a living off the televised culture war offended by the film?) It is as inane as blaming video games for real-world violence.

Certainly, movies and television shows have been pulled or delayed when the timing of violent or deadly real-world incidents intersects in a potentially traumatic way. But this isn't really a case of that. The Hunt is being cancelled because a group of vocal partisans cannot handle a movie that satirizes the caustic turn the culture war has taken.

NEXT: New Research Shows There’s One and Only Way To Combat Obesity

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Or maybe the deplorables just shot back at the elites first, using economic bullets?

    1. If by economic bullets you mean kneejerk, butthurt bitching by people who don’t know the whole fucking plot, yeah, sure.

      Nope, they fire back IN the movie, actually. The libs get picked off one by one. The deplorables win in the end. From what I understand the libs end up looking like real pussies.

      It’s basically a cross between the The Last Supper and The Most Dangerous Game; the liberals all die in The Last Supper, too.

      1. Citation? No one has actually seen this movie, only the trailer.

      2. Great, now the Conservatives are overreacting to something without bothering to get the facts. It’s a shame too. I really wanted to watch another extremely violent and implausible movie. Oh well, I haven’t watched the ???????????? ???????????????????? mini-series yet, so I still have that to look forward too.

        1. That’s weird, there’s a bunch of question marks where I typed The Purge. ???

          1. Three percent of the American public could make this a very profitable entertainment (disregarding foreign revenues). Set it up as a ‘middle finger to Trump and the deplorables’ act of civic expression and it could be quite successful.

            1. Yeah, it’s porn for you progtard traitors.

              1. Trump and the conservative pundits are stupid on this one. They don’t understand reverse psychology. Any conservative or libertarian who sees their kind being murdered by liberals in the flick is going to become more hardened against the liberals. One couldn’t do a better anti-elite, anti-liberal propo piece. Hell, it might even gain sympathy from some liberals. Disclaimer: no one’s seen the flick to know for sure.

      3. “The deplorables win in the end.”

        A silly fantasy, in other words.

        1. no spoilers, please

        2. A silly fantasy, in other words.

          Written with all the hubris of a Clinton..

          1. “”Yet somehow, thanks to Fox coverage and some subsequent tweets from President Donald Trump, the movie’s concept was twisted into an idea that Hollywood wanted us to be rooting for murderous elites.”‘

            Who is the Rev rooting for in that movie?

  2. Is this a sequel to The Last Supper?

    1. I was going to mention that – it’s not as if Hollywood would never glorify the murder of non-progressives. (Because you never know, you could be killing the next Hitler!)

      Of course, as I understand it, the popularity of Last Supper was confined to the extreme prog masturbatory echo chambers.

      1. Whoa, I came up with a really gross mixed metaphor there.

      2. Did you even see The Last Supper? The libs all got killed in the end. Ron Perlman turned the tables and poisoned all of them, LOL. I thought the movie was pretty funny.

        The first guy had it coming, though…

        1. It was many years ago, I may have missed a few key details.

          But basically, I thought their *failure* to kill the Hitler-type guy which was portrayed as a mistake. He conned them into letting him live.

          1. The point of that film was they would engage some strawman caricature and verbally bully them before killing.

            As I said above
            It was basically the plot in reverse of Season 1 of Tucker Carlson. or how ultra-deluded Arthur Hicklib imagines his interactions on this forum will go every time he posts.

            1. “The point of that film was they would engage some strawman caricature and verbally bully them before killing.”

              Haha, yeah, that’s prettymuch it. The first guy [the neo-Nazi] had it coming though. All in all nobody in the movie were really “good guys”, including the libs. I’d say it made them out to look pretty bad, actually, which I think was the whole point. Hell, if anything you could argue it was Perlman’s guy that they tried to end up looking the “best”, haha.

              “As I said above
              It was basically the plot in reverse of Season 1 of Tucker Carlson. or how ultra-deluded Arthur Hicklib imagines his interactions on this forum will go every time he posts.”

              Yeah, close enough, LOL.

              1. Enjoy your fantasy life, guys. But when you return to real life, try to remember who has won the culture war and which side must comply with the rules established by the victors.

                1. “” try to remember who has won the culture war and which side must comply with the rules established by the victors.””

                  Yes, native Americans must comply with the rules of their victors.

                2. See what I mean?

          2. No, they didn’t fail and he didn’t con them. They killed him but it was an accident, LOL. After that they had an “epiphany” and decided that killing other people “like him” was justifiable and they should keep doing it.

            What followed was a series of several different flavors of right-winger: an anti-gay priest, a rape apologist, a gay-hating hillbilly, etc. It ended up with Ron Perlman playing a sort of political conman who pretended to be a right-wing nut but didn’t really believe his own bullshit.

            It was an entertaining movie. I suggest watching it. Plus it’s got a young Cameron Diaz in it if that’s any incentive.

      3. Holy crap, I thought I was the only one who saw that. Ron Eldsrd was hot for 10 minutes when his character appeared on ER. Courtney Bance I believe was the “heavy”.
        The point of that film was they would invite the rube rednecks over and engsge them in conversation and then debate where their atguments wer unasssilable and their superior intellect would confound and confuse the poor deplorables right before they administered the coup de grace.

        It was basically the plot in reverse of Season 1 of Tucker Carlson. or how ultra-deluded Arthur Hicklib imagines his interactions on this forum will go every time he posts.

      4. I *loved* The Last Supper and I remembered watching it at a College Republican event hosted at a friend’s home. I actually don’t think any of my progressive friends have heard or ever watched it but I think it’s developed a cult fandom amongst conservatives.

    2. Hunh?
      THE LAST SUPPER (Columbia; Toronto International Film Festival, 8 Sep 1995; general US release 5 Apr 1996) Box office: $459,749.
      Relatively obscure reference there, but the Wikipedia plot summary sounds relevant.

  3. People have a right to complain about something they don’t like. Universal has a right to listen to those complaints and cancel distribution. What’s your problem? Why are you _whining_ that the (probably awful) movie isn’t being released?

    1. What DID happen to “MUH PRIVATE BIZNESSES!” Reason?

      Defend big tech being douchebags. Criticize movie studios for being douchebags, but the “other way” politically. Consistency isn’t a BAD thing.

      1. I think the point is that people should grow a fucking backbone and not get offended by every little thing.

        1. ……unless the Don tweets something

          1. Bingo. At least Roth didn’t have THAT going against him, eh? Now, Obama might’ve said something if he was still in office, but I don’t think Roth would’ve cared, haha.

          2. Don “PROTECT TRANS KIDS” Cheadle?

            Protect them from the reality that they ultimately might not want to be a surgically, hormonally, and irreversibly sliced and stitched facsimile of their non-natal gender?

            Way off track but I was already thinking about Don Cheadle for some reason. I’m not sure he thought it through.

        2. Exactly. Especially when the thing you’re bitching and moaning about isn’t as clearcut as you think it is. This is a perfect example.

          People did the same thing with Eli Roth’s ‘Death Wish’ remake. They said it was racist because all it was was some white vigilante hunting nothing but black criminals. NOT true. Total fucking bullshit. Just your typical PC, lefty whining about absolutely nothing.

          People just see what they want to see and are more than willing to twist things to meet their stupid fucking biases. The facts just don’t matter. Only difference is the people getting butthurt. Well, that and the fucking President chiming in, LOL!

    2. All movies deserved to be released ♪ ♫ born free free as the wind blows ♪ ♫ and rise and fall on their own merits. Including Manos the Hands of Fate and Future Hunter and this movie, whatever its title was.
      If Universal doesn’t want to risk it, some one will, is Lompanics still in operation?

      1. Nope, Loompanics Unlimited shut down in 2006.
        They’d publish anything that had been banned anywhere.

    3. I agree

      “This is stupid snowflake nonsense from right-wing pundits”

      Unlike liberal snowflakes, I don’t recall any right-wing pundits or Trump demanding to stop the film from being shown. They just pointed out how divisive it is, and that it makes liberals look like they’d like to kill half the country.

      The way I see this, is the Hollywood liberals who put the movie together were totally oblivious to how they look, thinking their audiences wanted the deplorables killed. They got woke, and realized it was totally counterproductive to their political goals, and yanked the movie, less they create a backlash that hits them in the pocketbook.

      1. Nor do I expect any right wing snowflakes will organize and disrupt people wanting to watch the movie.

  4. (Are any conservatives who don’t make a living off the televised culture war offended by the film?)

    So we should automatically discount what someone says if they get paid to opine about the culture war…….

    1. I’m outraged at your outrage at Reason’s outrage at Dobbs’ outrage!

      1. That’s outrageous.

    2. I don’t really care about the movie. I just want all the progressives removed from the US.

      1. You can dream all you wish. In the real world, though, you must pay the price for your ugly views by toeing the line established by better Americans against your wishes.

        Culture wars have consequences.

        1. Are you at war, rev?

          It’s a shame you’re so unhappy.

          It is cute that you think you’re winning, tho.

          Haha

        2. Arty, if we decide you’re going to leave, then you will leave. If not, then feel free to choke our rivers with your dead.

          Seriously, if we have had enough of you, what do you think you and your friends are going to do about it? Being an anti gun pussy that probably has cowered from every real fight in your life doesn’t bode well for you, and your proggy pals are no different.

          1. Seriously, if we have had enough of you, what do you think you and your friends are going to do about it? Being an anti gun pussy that probably has cowered from every real fight in your life doesn’t bode well for you, and your proggy pals are no different.

            I see you are still engaging in the fantasy that a culture-war-turned-actual-war in the US will be one-sided.

            In reality, you can expect the bloodiest civil war in modern history. There many not be many hardcore progressives who own guns, but based on where I live I would estimate that a good 50% of gun owners would oppose your goals, and of course your methods would leave them no choice but to resist with force of arms.

            Nobody wins this.

  5. This is the kind of utter myopic shit article that stops me from subscribing to Reason.

    1. It’s not a good article, I completely agree. But I like reason because its libertarian but also they often put out articles that disagree with each other. More importantly they call out the stupidity of the left and right all the time.

      1. Have we not all been taught left-right =zero?

        1. Im pretty sure you mean Left/Right = [1 + Left^2 – Right^2]

        2. Lolz

        3. don’t say that, it might summon the Hihnfection

  6. Meh. Here’s betting that they’ll wait until the controversy generates plenty of publicity, and then release it in some format anyway. This much scandal is too good an opportunity to pass up, not to mention the only people outraged by it are white. I’ma gonna bet we haven’t heard the last of this movie.

    1. My money’s on this prediction.

    2. “This much scandal is too good an opportunity to pass up, not to mention the only people outraged by it are white.”

      Yet another similarity to Death Wish, then, perhaps, LOL.

    3. They have til January to get it into a single Indie theater for Awards season

  7. “The Hunt is being cancelled because a group of vocal partisans cannot handle a movie that satirizes the caustic turn the culture war has taken.”

    Forgive the Right for not having faith that an industry that openly dislikes them might NOT be making a film that won’t portray them as anything better than “Well, they deserved it”.

    1. I dislike weaponized outrage…but it’s out there and has been used plenty in the past. The Right does eventually notice that certain things do work.

      1. We are at war with the progressives. Time to start hitting back really fucking hard. They aren’t going to ever stop on their own.

        1. Why stop? Winning is good.

          Listening to clingers whine about being vanquished isn’t so bad, either.

          1. Arty, it won’t end well for you,

      2. That’s ironic, because “Weaponized Outrage” was the working title of the film during shooting.

        1. IMDb Internet Movie Database
          The Hunt
          Trivia
          This was originally going to be called “Red State vs Blue State”.

    2. Openly dislikes? I think you mean, would “gleefully murder if they could get away with”.

      And that’s the point. The left has no problem with putting people it doesn’t like in death camps

      There’s no reason to think it’s “satire” and not propaganda hoping to lead to the death of anyone not a leftist.

  8. What really sucks is that my friend Damon was on the creative team.

    1. Lindelof?

    2. That sucks for him, but if I was in Damon’s position I don’t think I’d care much one way or the other as long as I got paid in full (and maybe got a couple of relevant clips for a showreel?)

  9. Now, I don’t know about this particular movie, but Hollywood has been known to put out movies where the audience is subtly encouraged to root for the bad guy.

    I could mention some of the gangster films, which portray the bad guy protagonists as tough guys who do things their way and get respect (and money and sex), then at the end they have a death scene just to make clear that the wages of sin is death and never mind all the cool stuff you saw before.

    Or the movie *Falling Down,* where a regular guy starts turning into a psycho, and we’re supposed to sympathize with him up to the moment when (spoiler alert) he’s threatening his wife and kids and the cops have to take him down, while he protests that he’s not the bad guy.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD5ofrSNDFA

    1. Yeah, what a cop-out “ending” that movie had. It was as if the Hayes Code had come back into effect, and the bad guy had to be punished before the movie could end.

      1. Well, that’s the thing – in movies with a lingering whiff of the Hayes Code, you have the bad guy come to a bad end and that makes it OK to have him portrayed sympathetically for most of the movie.

        The stronger version of the Hayes Code specifically tried to close such loopholes and insisted that bad guys be unsympathetic from the beginning.

        Of course, today under the, I guess you could call it, modern reverse-Hayes-Code regime, you no longer need the fig leaf of the bad guy getting punished – you can have him let his freak flag fly, kill lots of extras and even main characters, and then retire to his mansion.

        1. Or you can have the protagonists go out in a blaze of glory, increasing the sympathy factor, as in

          (spoiler alert)

          Thelma and Louise.

          1. Ya spoiled it for me!

          2. Bitch Cassidy

    2. Falling Down was a good movie, but I didn’t feel a huge amount of sympathy for D-Fens either because their isn’t a huge amount of background to the character and/or so many others seem to have it way worse yet don’t go around making such a fuss.

      It’s interesting now to watch that because he’s textbook “white male cis-hetero privelege”, and you’d really have to pile on the adversity to ellicit any sympathy from the kind of audiences who actually go online and review things, and especially from the “critics” who are coordinated in their talking points and propaganda.

    3. Netflix had that stalker series YOU that was like that. Several times I felt like we should stop watching because I caught myself in that squicky place of rooting for the serial murdering stalker???

      And then there’s Dexter.

    4. Trying to understand what pushes a character over the edge is not necessarily sympathizing with the character in the sense of seeing justification.

      Sometimes It’s a kinda variation of schadenfreude in the sense “I have put with a lot a crap, too, but never acted out like that that dude, yeah he was done wrong but handled it poorly”.

  10. So Reason thinks it okay to show a movie that encourages the killing of people they disagree with. How about a movie with golden haired people hunting down brown skinned people, would anyone even notice or care?

    1. The Ayn Rand Institute is notoriously stingy with movie licensing so you may be waiting some little while.

      1. Hi tony. How is the clock?

        1. Lolololol why the fuck is he still running that sad blown sockpuppet lolol

      2. In what Ayn Rand book does anybody hunt anybody?

        1. In Ayn Rand’s Anthem the rebel and his mate just want to be left alone to pursue their own destiny. Pretty much the theme of the movie The Fountainhead.

          I don’t see elements of Purge or The Hunt in Ayn Rand’s works; I do see it in some of her critics.

    2. Roots is still widely considered one of the most epic broadcasts in the history of television.

      1. Hey, some of those white people were brunettes.

        1. The blondes all had brown roots.

      2. And also wildly historically inaccurate. Well acted and produced, compelling even, but definitely takes more than just “poetic” license with the facts of the slave trade, especially on the supply side.

        1. Well, yeah, because Alex Haley ripped off a huge chunk of it, and anyway, no Hollywood production is going to show the origins of the vast majority of African slaves–which were mainly brown-skinned Berbers and sub-Saharan African slavers from other tribes.

          Because taking 5 guys and some dogs to capture a single African in a net is so much more efficient and cost-effective than trading for them in bulk from the locals.

    3. Dude, BOTH SIDES kill each other, and a conservative ends up picking off all the libs one by one Rambo style. And it’s a chick, no less!

      As far as your movie idea goes, I’m not so sure a movie about Nords killing Dark Elves for sport would do so well. Now maybe if they included it in a larger plot.. oh.. oh! You meant honkeys killing niggers! Uh, yeah, sorry about that. Yeah, some people might get pissed, but if the niggers end up WINNING in the end, who cares, right?

      1. Django unchained?

        1. Posse? Rosewood?

    4. It’s a fucking movie, not an instructional video.

    5. Why would you assume that the movie encourages killing people? It’s about that. Portraying something isn’t encouraging it. That’s the attitude of the kind of people who want to ban things for the children. Get a grip.

  11. Emotionally immature and frail people can’t handle free speech.

    Also, this film is an exuberan demonstration of disgusting pandering .

    1. The push back wasnt government related.

    2. Has anyone actually seen it? Who is “pandering”? Everything is supposedly “pandering” to some identity group these days; a highly cynical and irretrievably identarian worldview.

  12. Sounds like a terrible movie.
    No car chase scenes, no tit action.

    1. There’s trains and drones.
      I do think the deplorables steal an elite’s Mercedes at one point and a guy’s head gets Gallagher’d by a car tire.

      I’ll bet it’s good, clean fun on a epic Tucker & Dale vs Evil scale (where the rednecks are the good guys and the preppy college kid in the woods is the psycho killer).

  13. If I have to hear one more goddamn stupid fucking thing about this “horrible” movie having a plot about elitist liberals making a game of killing redneck deplorables, I’m going to stroke out. Look, you dumb fucking retards, the plot of the movie isn’t about the elitist liberals hunting the redneck deplorables, it’s about how the redneck deplorables outwit and outfight the elitist liberals. Have you never seen “Revenge of the Nerds”? Do you seriously believe the plot of that movie somehow glorifies jocks and preppies oppressing geeks and has a message that it’s perfectly okay to do so? Do you really not understand that at the end of the movie it’s the nerds you’re supposed to be cheering for? This is the same goddamn thing, but with fewer pranks involving toilet paper and more people getting stabbed in the eyeball with electric drills.

    1. Is it possibly the meta-level satire of making fun of the real “deplorables” who actually believe that this is a realistic premise that bothers people?

      1. Ahahahah do you think we’re gonna forget you outed yourself as Tony, Tony?

        1. Didn’t this sock go full Hihnswarm recently? Bold, caps, “left – right = zero” etc? Maybe I’m thinking of another one.

          1. Esmeralda? No, Tony just stupidly forgot he was llogged into it and started talking to himself.

            1. I was beginning to think that Tony didn’t want to be our pet retarded monkey any more.

            2. No, you logged in with my name because you needed to manufacture evidence that I was using a sockpuppet, which I’ve never done (unlike you), and which is apparently the only thing that matters in the world to you.

              Get professional mental help.

              1. Tony, you’re a known liar, and a general piece of shit. So your word doesn’t carry much weight here.

                Just admit your stupid bullshit. Right now you’re just embarrassing yourself.

                1. In all seriousness, who gives a shit who is whose sockpuppet? I can tell you’re a reprehensible sack of shit based on the content of your posts alone. I don’t need the help of a name to do that, although it is an interesting coincidence that 99% of the time I read a post with zero redeeming features, I see “Last of the Shitlords” above it.

                  Shit, for all I know, your name is simply the sock used by all of you idiotic partisan rightists who post here every time they want to say something they know is indefensible & don’t want to associate with their primary.

                  But who gives a fuck? A post stands on its own merits. Or, as is the case with anything I’ve seen you post, doesn’t.

    2. Look, you dumb fucking retards, the plot of the movie isn’t about the elitist liberals hunting the redneck deplorables, it’s about how the redneck deplorables outwit and outfight the elitist liberals.

      Can you provide a cite? No one has actually seen the full movie.

      1. Seems to be the premise of the trailer.

    3. If the deplorables win, it’s fantasy.

      1. At least I shamed you into ditching your stupid written crutches.

        Behavioral engineering of someone as disaffected as you is my favorite kind of engineering.

        1. You aren’t Scott Shackford. I was not responding to, or thinking of, you.

          1. That’s how good behavioral engineering works bruh. You’re conditioned.

            1. Open wider, clinger. Your betters aren’t through with the likes of you. And you will comply.

              1. It’s quite obvious to me that Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland is the equivalent of what Open Borders Liberal-tarian would be if he A: was satirizing actual progressives (instead of figments of his imagination), and B: wasn’t penned by a blithering imbecile.

                But, hey, don’t let me stop y’all from being successful trolled.

          2. “”You aren’t Scott Shackford. I was not responding to, or thinking of, you.”‘

            What an awesome tactical maneuver in your war of culture. I can see why you think you’re on the winning side.

      2. Arty, do you understand that everyone my side has all the guns and the training to use them, and your side is full of 130 lb. soyboys who have never even been in a fight, let alone own guns?

        How do you expect to win? Amd hiding behind cops won’t work, as most of them are not on your side and really hate douchebags li,e you.

        1. Not to mention the military isn’t on his side either

        2. I sincerely doubt that most gun owners are “on your side”, considering that your “side” is the destruction of the American experiment through pointless civil war engendered by your own inadequacies and insecurities.

          I’m genuinely curious what state you live in, where your fantasies suffer from so little disillusionment.

    4. Will it have more or less bouncy house coed rape?

      Asking for a friend…

  14. Former MCC inmate: There’s ‘no way’ Jeffrey Epstein killed himself

    There’s no way that man could have killed himself. I’ve done too much time in those units. It’s an impossibility.

    Between the floor and the ceiling is like eight or nine feet. There’s no way for you to connect to anything.

    You have sheets, but they’re paper level, not strong enough. He was 200 pounds — it would never happen.

    When you’re on suicide watch, they put you in this white smock, a straight jacket. They know a person cannot be injurious to themselves.

    1. Not suicide, Arkancide.

    2. Did they find the three bullet holes in his back?

    3. Bill Barr says he didn’t do it. He wouldn’t lie to us, would he?

    4. He wasn’t on suicide watch when he should have been so, basically, it was murder by suicide.

    5. “”When you’re on suicide watch, they put you in this white smock, a straight jacket. They know a person cannot be injurious to themselves.”‘

      This is why they had to take him off suicide watch. You can’t fake a suicide so easily when they are on suicide watch.

    6. A hand towel and 8-12″ of elevation is enough to hang oneself. It doesn’t require significant force or height, merely time.

      I’ve seen more photographic evidence of this than I care to.

      Also, he was taken off suicide watch.

      It’s entirely plausible the guard(s) looked the other way, possibly even provided tools/encouragement. But it’s highly implausible he was actually murdered.

  15. Their marketing PR backfired on them. They tried doing the Streisand Effect to get people to go see it out of sheer morbid curiousity, but they probably shot themselves in the foot when the revealed footage featured a lefty stabbing a redneck in the eye with a stiletto.

    They couldn’t do the “if you don’t watch this movie you’re a bigot” angle that’s become a leading marketing tactic these days, so they tried the ultraviolence angle.

    1. That exact scene is from a soldier’s letter captured in the Balkan Wars–the ones that began when China quit importing heroin, and escalated until 1919. Looter parties don’t like media folks tipping their hands as to what they’re really all about. In Hitler’s platform that movie would be banned as a “deliberate political lie.” Now they ban it as wishful thinking that hits too close to home.

      1. I’m starting to suspect that Hank Phillips is the nom de plume of Hank Williams Jr’s meth pipe.

  16. I actually, intentionally wrote nothing about this to Universal or to any politician. I was hoping they’d run with it and that the elites wouldn’t be able to help themselves by implying that this would actually be a good idea. The resulting outrage from people who thought about the implications would have been both fun to watch and helpful to show the elite for who they are.
    We may have lost that opportunity, but I suspect that it won’t be the only opportunity to do so.

  17. Just read this quote about this movie over at Ars Technica:

    “It’s worth noting that this character’s statement, and her refusal to see the hunted as fully human beings, are not even remotely representative of a liberal stance”

    https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/08/universal-stops-marketing-the-hunt-after-most-recent-deadly-mass-shootings/?

    I keep asking liberals the same question: Do you or don’t you believe that homophobes, racists, and xenophobes possess human rights–including the right to free speech?

    Seeing progressives squirm while they say that free speech isn’t a human right, that deplorables don’t possess human rights, or that deplorables have free speech rights that shouldn’t be violated is incredibly satisfying, whichever way they go.

    Regardless, the belief that the rights of homophobes, racists, and xenophobes shouldn’t be respected is rampant on the left, and the distinction between believing that certain people’s human rights shouldn’t be respected and that those people are less than human isn’t much.

    1. Where’s the Rev, he can explain things for us.

      1. Bigots have rights, too.

        Including the right to be replaced. By their betters. And soon.

        1. And again my behavioral engineering is working on you, and you ditched the snippets of repetitive language you rely on. Good dog.

          1. What are you babbling about, you bigoted rube?

            1. The fools won’t replace us!

              1. You will be replaced. By tolerant Americans. By Jews. By educated women. By Hispanics. By Muslims. By agnostics. By modern citizens. By the liberal-libertarian mainstream.

                1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland
                  August.11.2019 at 2:11 am

                  What are you babbling about, you bigoted rube?””

                  Tolerant like that guy?

            2. So, all this time you’ve been upset because you can’t read?

        2. Your new and improved bigots are much better at it, it’s true.

        3. By force if necessary, eh, Rev.? Get them up against the wall and be done with it?

        4. ^ RALK is obvious just a less funny and more nasty version of OBL

    2. The commies are exactly the same as Ken. He calls them “liberals” as was popular when the Bert Hoover régime mounted the gallows in November, 1932. In reality, prohibitionist Republican National Socialism was defeated–five times running–by the Liberal Party plank to repeal prohibition. Communists call libertarians “conservatives”, which turnabout is the best way to cause thinkers to cross the street to avoid us. Ask yourself if looters–“right or left”– are where you expect to find honesty.

      1. The Rev is King of the Dumbasses — stop trying to take his job!

      2. Are you having a stroke, Hank?

    3. Progressives have no souls. Tony, Buttplug, etc. are proof of that.

    4. Of course liberals believe they are entitled to those rights. Name one who doesn’t. I’ll wait, and if you dig one up from underneath some rock in Berkeley, I’ll denounce him.

      But you changed from talking about basic speech rights to saying bigots have to be respected. They do? No they don’t. They’re fucking bigots. They deserve to be laughed at until they feel shame.

      The only person in this conversation who trampled on the First Amendment is the president of the United States.

      1. Really? Antifa attacking speakers and attendants to a speaker they disagree with believe in free speech? Hate speech isn’t free speech? Free speech is white privilege and supremacy? How about trying to do away with 2A rights? Ninth amendment and 10rh amendment rights? Forcing people to buy a product? Banning smoking in private establishments? Banning plastic straws? Sexual harassment kangaroo courts at public universities that ignore the 4A, the 5A, the 7A and 8A not to mention the presumption of innocence? Forcing people to provide services that run counter to their religious liberty? Should I continue?

      2. “”The only person in this conversation who trampled on the First Amendment is the president of the United States.””

        How?

        1. His significant Twitter presence, not to mention his being the most powerful politician on earth, combined to pressure a private business to decline to produce a piece of artistic speech.

          You guys spent way too much time thinking tax cuts for billionaires were more important than any other freedom. So thanks for that.

          1. “His significant Twitter presence”

            Him exercising his freedom of speech.

            “”not to mention his being the most powerful politician on earth, “”

            So?

            “”combined to pressure a private business to decline to produce a piece of artistic speech.””

            This is no evidence he pressured them. The company gave their reason and this wasn’t it.

            Do you think Hollywood does Trump’s bidding when Trump rants on Twitter?

            1. Keep sucking Trump cock. It’s really a good look.

              Imagine if Obama got a movie cancelled because it hurt his feelings.

    5. Just ask them if a conservative movie studio (assume one exists) had made a movie about rich businessmen hunting down liberal political activists, if the left would see it as free artistic expression, or a coded green light to the hit squads.

    6. Following the link:
      “”We pay for everything so the country belongs to us,” Swank’s character declares in the film’s trailer. …. It’s worth noting that this character’s statement, and her refusal to see the hunted as fully human beings, are not even remotely representative of a liberal stance — nor a traditionally conservative one.”

      It is a blue state coastie elitist stance — by our “betters”, to use Art’s favorite word.

      I do prefer the more subtle take on this in The Hunger Games — the capitol elite versus denizens of the districts.

      1. (Forgetting subtlety, seeing Betty Gilpin playing a “deplorable” beating the crap out of a Hilary Swank playing an entitled wealthy elitist might be a purge.)

        At the Ars Technica link re The Hunt as a variation of the plot of “The Most Dangerous Game”:
        “But there’s of course a twist in this case: the hunted all hail from red states (“deplorables”), and the hunters are purportedly “liberals”—albeit of the super-entitled uber-wealthy variety.”
        — Original story dated 1:45pm ET, 8 Aug 2019, Thu.

  18. The initiation of harmful and deadly force is what the Republican and Democratic parties are all about! This movie is the next best thing to that Remarque-able war story All Quiet on the Western Front: — “Then in the arena the ministers and generals of the two countries, dressed in bathing-drawers and armed with clubs, can have it out on themselves. Whoever survives the country wins.”
    In a Nixon/IRS-subsidized “democracy”, kleptocracy, those voters need to fight it our while Libertarians pay admission to watch and bet on the outcome.

  19. And that’s why I see claims of Incitement as just another Buzzword

  20. Look guys, Damon Lindelof has a writing credit on this one.

    Nothing but good can come from killing the movie.

  21. The movie was scheduled to open on September 27, but now Universal Pictures won’t be releasing it at all until a Democrat is President .

  22. No I don’t want the movie cancelled. Yes, I find it offensive. However, if the end result will be the underdogs kicking the asses of the elite (not a given outcome from Hollywood) the movie may seek to offend everyone. There’s a market for that, if you don’t mind be even more niche than such movies tend to be.

  23. Boo hoo hoo, poor put-upon Hollywood, missed out on a potential billion-dollar blockbuster, because everyone wanted to see it except for a mere handful of complainers. Now we won’t get to see a bunch of second-stringers try and fail to affect “redneck” accents and won’t get to see crappy special effects. How sad for the future of the American film industry

  24. “The movie comes from Blumhouse Productions, the same folks behind the Purge series and Get Out, which also involve the privileged violently taking advantage and killing the less privileged.” Said by someone who has either never seen the dreck that is the Purge series of movies(Haven’t watched the TV show, ain’t gonna.), is blind and deaf, or is lying through their fucking teeth. The Purge movies are a masturbatory fantasy of what the left thinks the right would like to do to the country entwined with their own moronic ideas that violence is something that can be removed from human nature if you just find the secret sauce.

    1. I thought Get Out was really really well done. Enjoyed it immensely.

      The Purge is the same tired fever dreams and projection that you see Tony and Kirkland engage in all the time. No, humanity would not devolve into rape and murder gangs if you told them they could get away with any crime one day a year. Most people would smoke some pot or take some ecstasy and fuck a stripper. (That might be overly naive on my part I admit.)

  25. I agree with Shackleford here. The push back was probably even more ill-conceived than the movie premise itself. Put out the film and let the people who want to see it do so, those who don’t want people to see cry about it, and everyone else remain oblivious to the whole dust-up.

    The boycott should be people not going to see it not stopping other people from seeing it.

    1. Universal is who’s stopping other people from seeing it.

      Just sayin’.

      1. Pushing for that outcome is what’s ill-conceived then.

        1. Did anyone push for that outcome?

          Or did people just express outrage? Because I’m not seeing anything but outrage.

    2. But that would require Trump and his FOX News mainlining fanboys not to be titty babies whining about how they’re the victim of everything all the time.

  26. Dear Trump and Fox:
    Jesus H. Christo, people. It’s only a friggin’ movie.

  27. Progressives with guns? I thought they only used Molotov cocktails, cement milkshakes, bats, and public shaming.

    1. Don’t forget bike locks.

    2. Amd only when they outnumber their target by at least six to one.

    3. “”Progressives with guns?”‘

      That’s how you know it’s fantasy.

  28. Nothing new from the LEFT as they have been killing those that disagree with them in large number since Stalin. Even today in Central and South America it is going on. These are also the Americans that say things like “Why don’t you old people just hurry up and die so we can build out perfect society…” Or what Cory Booker and a few others have said what will happen to Republicans and others that disagree with the Democrats when they get power next time. Well, 96 Million people have firearms and some of them are CRAZY and should you try to take said firearms away from them… we are going to have a few EVENTS that make the news.

    1. Nothing new from the LEFT as they have been killing those that disagree with them in large number since Stalin Lenin

      FTFY

    2. It’s just a movie. You can perhaps holster the desire to mass murder your fellow citizens.

      As for the pissing in your pants over insane conspiracy theories or an obscure movie, there are always adult diapers.

      1. I’m glad you’re promoting the movie. I think everybody should go out and see it. It portrays people just like you (only a lot wealthier and more successful).

        1. And guess how I’m not pre-reacting to it because some tits on TV told me how to think?

          1. Your comments, as usual, have nothing to do with the movie at all. You’re just trolling Reason because that’s what you do.

    3. Are we still doing no civility until dems are elected?

  29. So a bad movie with a plot that’s been redone to death has been cancelled? Actually I am outraged, I’m outraged that Hollywood thinks the same mindless claptrap sells to us rubes because we are too stupid to realize we’ve seen all this before.

  30. “This is stupid snowflake nonsense from right-wing pundits—and probably just the pundits. ”

    How many of them are actually offended in the snowflake sense vs how many are pointing out the rank hypocrisy of Hollywood liberal elites making a movie were blue-staters are shown to enjoy planning and murdering red-staters (original title was Red State, Blue State) while blaming Trump for mass shooters because he supposedly uses coded speech to supposedly activate his supposed white supremacist minions or something?

  31. This has the feel of some sort of stupid PR move; Was there actually a movie even made?

    1. It may be a real version of the producers. Get lots of investors spend a little to make crap that no one can see and walk awAy with the difference

  32. Does anyone remember the Ice-T movie “Surviving The Game”? Story line seems a bit familiar.

  33. Progressive Hollywood insists on showing the public how hip it is to slaughter and kill. Out of a show of solidarity to El Paso and Dayton, need to immediately ban the use of assault rifles in movies and TV shows. Where are these young men getting these ideas?

  34. It’s the “Hunger Games” for always sated people.

    Release it.

  35. You know what Mr. Shackford? Bullshit! If the roles were reversed in the movie, you might very well have not taken the same position as above. But it is clear that almost no one in the film industry would have been sanguine with the release of another hunting party film targeting liberals. Yes indeed it is an old device; not the first time we’ve seen it. And not the first we’ve seen elites (usually implied to be rich conservatives) hunting some poor down and outer. But what is different is the climate and backdrop for the film with liberals everywhere calling for gun control or confiscation. Their hypocrisy is frankly even more disturbing than usual. Frankly, I don’t care what the movie is about. I’ll defend the right to make it. But to argue it is meaningless to have made it is at very best disingenuous.

  36. Get Out was also a critique of elite liberals. The Purge was partly about the indifference and selfishness of elite liberals in the face of horrors they claim not to like.

    The inability of FOX News junkies to detect irony or even get their facts straight does not support their demand for maximum gun ownership rights. They’ll shoot themselves in the foot plenty, but think of the collateral damage of so much fucking stupidity.

  37. Yet somehow, thanks to Fox coverage and some subsequent tweets from President Donald Trump, the movie’s concept was twisted into an idea that Hollywood wanted us to be rooting for murderous elites.

    And this is bad… how? It means TDS will kick in and the Hollywood elites will push and defend it.

    1. Why don’t you fucktards even try at being elite? Elite is a good thing. Elite is Trump’s entire fucking brand.

      It just reeks of insecurity. Of the small dick kind. The sad kind.

      1. Why don’t you fucktards even try at being elite?

        We did. It resulted in Obama and Hillary, hundreds of thousands of dead, racist federal policies, and jerks like you. Obviously, “Elite” doesn’t work with you, and neither does “rational” or “polite”. One needs to use your own rabid anger and ignorance against you. Thanks for the object lesson.

        1. Does the guy calling me an AIDS-ridden faggot count as a jerk too? Or is he just one of the salt-of-the-earth poor farmers who are so put-upon by elite TDS Hollywood and their big words and book-learnin’ and stuff?

          1. Did you accuse him for no good reason of “having a small dick”, like you did above? Then don’t be surprised if people react in kind. I won’t call you names, Tony, but the fault is clearly with you

            1. Only after he accused me of being an AIDS-ridden faggot about 10 times.

              This isn’t the forum if you are a snowflake about name-calling. I should know.

              No go back to complaining that Hollywood won’t let you into any of the cool parties because their TDS prevents them from acknowledging that Trump isn’t actually in the middle stages of dementia playing with the economy and human lives as if they were his golden choo-choo train set.

              1. Tony, you’re professional troll; you deserve all the verbal abuse you’re getting.

                And where did I complain about not being invited to Hollywood parties? At my age, “parties” means that you get together with friends at their place or ours. Obviously, if you don’t grow up and don’t have friends, that’s a foreign concept.

                1. Why do only the deaths that happen under Democratic presidents count to you?

                  Why do you think it’s inappropriate to be upset that the president is a demented orange racist moron?

                  1. You’re confabulating again.

              2. If you keep hearing dog whistles, you are probably a dog. If you keep getting called an AIDS-ridden faggot,…..

      2. “”Of the small dick kind.””

        Not for nothing Tony, but when you are a touch offended because people are calling you gay, perhaps you shouldn’t make judgments about dick size or dicks in general.

        Just sayin.

        1. I’m not a size queen. I think anxiety over dick size is pitiable. And I wish it would stop informing global politics that affect my life, for god’s sake.

  38. Did you accuse him for no good reason of “having a small dick”, like you did above? Then don’t be surprised if people react in kind.

    I won’t call you names, Tony, but the fault is clearly with you.

    1. Actually I had a good reason. The only thing that seems to get these guys to shut up is to accuse them of having tiny penises. Not fucking their cousins. Not being educated by red-faced frat brahs and walking tits on FOX News. Just the penis thing.

      I have a whole hypothesis going that conservatives tend to have small penises and that their politics stems from penis-related anxiety, but that’s for another day.

      1. Tony, it’s not a “conservative” thing. It’s simply that you’re contemptible and rude. That’s why people want you to leave. That’s as true of Reason as IRL.

        1. But you’re not saying that to Tulpa or Sevo or any of the other obnoxious foul-mouthed cretins here. You just don’t like that I’m not a conservatard.

          1. They haven’t been obnoxious or foul mouthed to me. The are just reacting in kind to you.

          2. Tony, we’re mean to you because you’re so awful, dishonest, and believe and support such horrible things and people. This has been explained to you many times

            You might notice I’m completely civil to people who are not evil.

            1. But you regularly call for the genocide of your political opponents and the suicide of me and others in particular.

              Define “awful things.”

        2. It’s actually a clannish thing.

          1. It’s actually a clannish thing

            What is? That you can be counted on to rush in and defend your prog brethren?

            Duh.

      2. “Walking tits”. Could be be a band, or a new coffee creamer. I like it!

        Speaking of walking tits, I have a crush on Martha McCallum. And she is about 50 years old. Still gorgeous.

      3. I have a whole hypothesis going that conservatives tend to have small penises and that their politics stems from penis-related anxiety,

        Despite being completely wrong this is still your best political theory. For you zero is an improvement.

        1. “For you zero is an improvement.”

          That’s what she said. Referring to penis inches. And what we in the business call a “sinker.”

  39. So leftists won’t be able to see the movie for a while. They can still go kill some babies if they need something to do.

  40. If they released this, if would be a catastrophic political backfire, they didn’t pull it because of Fox News. Everything the left and their donors is doing is backfiring. Russia, Muller, Kavanaugh, Green New Deal, reparations, free everything, infanticide, open borders welfare state, donor Weinstein, Modern Monetary Theory, Intersectionality, being born white is racist, dog parks are racist, suburbs are racist, donor Epstein, Castro’s hit list, now Kavanaugh again……… and latin america socialism!

    1. And where did you learn that?

  41. It would be difficult to imagine more perfect example of knee-jerk liberalism than this column and the subsequent comments defending a “satire” about hunting humans. That the “satire” was to be released in the aftermath of two mass killings makes it and its defenders all the more mindlessly loathsome.

    1. I was gonna say there’s nothing more pathetic than a bunch of commenters getting upset about a movie.

      1. What about commenters upset that others are upset that others are upset, etc. ad infinitum?

  42. That movie with Ice T where he gets hunted and gets revenge was good. What was it?

    Surviving the Game.

    1. Was it Ice Cube who was hunting him? Surely, instead of fighting, they could have joined forces and created a refreshing cool beverage.

      1. O’Shea Jackson Sr. had no part in the making of the film and declines to mention any beverage rights.

        Calvin Cordozar Broadus Jr. is chillin as we speak.

  43. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this – four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily……. VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE
    >>=====>>>> payhd.com<<=====<<<<

    1. Epstien lives!!

  44. Yeah, somehow a movie about liberals unleashing deadly violence against the people who elected President Trump got green-lighted in Hollywood. It must be because the studio execs wanted us to cheer for the rednecks just this once.

    1. I can’t help but feel like the quickness of the cancellation is related to the realization that the “good guys” of the movie were the wrong ideology

  45. Much as liberals got Roseann fired from her own sitcom because they didn’t like something she said elsewhere, which had far less justification….

  46. Perception of cause and effect.

    “After outraged responses from Fox and Trump, Universal yanks The Hunt from its schedule.”

    Universal claims it was because the El Paso and Dayton mass shootings were too fresh and raw in the public mind.

    Not that I would accuse Reason.com of knee-jerk prejudice against Fox News or Donald Trump, mind you, but perception of cause and effect between two events is often colored by bias.

    For various reasons, movie distributors delay releases of films.

    One possibility is that Universal’s surveys of test audiences showed the movie stirred up antipathy for blue state coastie elitists (progressive liberals) and had audiences identifying with the deplorables (traditional conservatives) that were targets of their hunt.

    ” … inane as blaming video games for real-world violence …”
    When the 1950s Kefauver/Seduction of the Innocent Congressional hearings established juvenile delinquency was caused by comic books (because juvenile delinquents were noted for reading comic books it had to be the cause), yeah, inane. Inane became a well-used adjective in MAD Magazine when William Gaines, freed from publishing Vault of Horror comics by Congressional reformers, turned to satirizing pompous authority figures. (That’s where I saw the word and looked it up in a dictionary.)

  47. Scott thinks the movie is Satire the rest of us are not so sure

  48. In general partisans are too dumb to recognize satire.

    1. Let them make a movie about rednecks hunting down gays for sport and let’s see what Shackford things then. He will have kittens but that will be difference because REASONS!!

      1. There are dozens of movies about rednecks hunting down gays for sport. Except they’re not satire, they’re either documentaries or historical fiction.

        Because, and I think I do have to spell this out for you, rednecks actually do hunt gays for sport. It’s, like, this whole thing that gays have to deal with in the real world.

        1. cite?

          They made a movie about Matthew Shepherd getting hunted down for sport, when he really was part of a drug deal gone bad by longtime acquaintances/ drug barterers

          1. Is the upshot of your argument merely that gays are not a historically oppressed minority, or that straight white men are the most oppressed of all?

  49. Reason really has become a bunch of racists against Europeans

    If a movie was made about hunting black people would it be described as “satirizing”? No, it would be described as evil and racist. But hunt white people? That’s A-OK.

    1. If a movie was made about hunting black people would it be described as “satirizing”? No, it would be described as evil and racist.

      There have been plenty of movies made about white people hunting, raping, and killing black people, usually for the purpose of portraying the white people as bad.

      I strongly suspect that a movie in which progressives hunt conservatives is attempting to portray progressives as bad.

  50. Have you ever noticed that free speech here in America is a never ending battle?

  51. Note to all of the liberal posting here – it doesn’t matter to most of we conservatives that the premise of this piece of crap was that the ‘deplorables’ win in the end. We don’t give a damn. We would have been just as offended had the storyline been reversed, with conservatives hunting liberals. WE DON’T BUY INTO THIS SHIT. It’s wrong.
    You jokers bitch and whine about the state of the country, that everyone is fighting – well, maybe we should agree, liberals and conservatives, that this kind of movie is just wrong. Period. Exclamation mark!
    Most of you dems won’t get what I’ve just said, and that is what is really sad here. You just don’t get it.

    1. I don’t get what you are objecting to. How do you feel about depictions of the Holocaust? About depictions of the Nanjing Massacre? About depictions of My Lai? Are you objecting to depictions of any cruelty of humans against other humans? Or just fictional or hyperbolic depictions? Or what? And how does turning a blind eye to human cruelty square with conservative principles?

      1. Political violence is active in USA.

        Earning money about a fresh wound ought be illuminating, not gratuitous.

        Do you think Hollywood had an insightful take?

        I say let them release whatever they want. But my opinion is that it’s bad taste, and that it’s release was stopped because it made moviegoers identify with conservatives.

        Irrational NPCs will say it was #cancelled by the Right. No. That is a false narrative entirely. NPCs just want a chance to virtue signal about freespeech when it punishes the Right, as if they aren’t entitled to opinions which don’t violate NAP.

  52. I thought the film was cancelled because of the back-to-back mass shootings, not the stupid Fox commentary. Why would they cancel a move because Fox didn’t like it?

  53. NOW they’re saying the film was intended as satire. The only problem with that is, liberals don’t get satire.

  54. The movie was cancelled for the right reason — the theme was a bad business choice. And it was cancelled not by government or threatened violence, but by public outrage.
    Hollywood routinely makes anti-conservative movies. The most common villains in their movies are evil business people (all conservatives).
    In this latest case, the progressive producers simply “jumped the shark.”

  55. A lot of comments so I do not know if anyone else pointed out the fact that things that are “banned” such as films is a publicity campaign in disguise. Just look how many comments there are. No such thing as bad press when it comes to entertainment. I am sure that those involved making the movie were quite aware of how inane the premise was, especially the director.
    The flick does sound like a complete loser as most are anymore. And if studios and producers yanked everything they created that might offend then there would be nothing from Hollywood

  56. This movie could be the tactic equivalent of Tucker and Dale vs the Evil Hostel Elite a movie I’d pay to see in the theater with buttered popcorn.

    Or the execution of the final product could suck as badly as the Marlon Brando Island of Dr. Moreau.

    It would not be the first time a studio saw a finished product and said, We wasted money producing this? We can’t afford to lose even more money promoting it!

  57. NOW they’re saying the film was intended as satire. The only problem with that is, liberals don’t get satire. Fore This Movies Todaypk

  58. NOW they’re saying the film was intended as satire. The only problem with that is, liberals don’t get satire. Fore This Movies Todaypk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.