Review of Silence (2016) by Kelly B — 16 May 2017

Maybe I missed the point. Maybe. But it almost seemed like it justified the killing and torture of innocent ppl. It blamed the priest for it because they tried to preach in a land where the government didn't want those ideas spread.

So it implied the priests were to blame. If we'd reverse the rolls, make the Buddhist visit England at this time and have priest/the government torture and murder those monks and those who converted, which obviously many "Christians" did do those things too, we wouldn't see the Buddhist demonized as the ones who caused the torture.

Anyone who tortures and murders ppl over their beliefs are the one who are wrong. No one else. The film didn't change my mind on that. Crazy ppl who reviewed this are justifying torture and murder becaue, because, because, because, because - bs .

Every faith, every government and every individual that murders and sadistically tortures ppl because they don't like another's perceived hokey ideas are the terrible ones. not the ones with the ideas.

Ideas should be free. Some ppl in their reviews said things like well the Buddhist were scared that if Christianity took over there would be torture and murder so that's why they were torturing and murdering innocent ppl(note the priest were innocent as far as what was shown even if you think their faith is hokey).

How would this sound if we reversed this idea and said this justified why many Christians have done similar things? Maybe I'm getting the meaning of the movie wrong but somehow I don't think I am - especially after reading all the sadistic reviews justifying the torture and murder of the priests and village ppl.

Sick ppl. Just sick.