It truly is all hands on deck time.
As theaters continue to drop “Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer” (roughly 500 to date), it is imperative that pro-lifers and all those people who are fair-minded about abortion hear and see the true story of the West Philadelphia abortionist who murdered hundreds of full or nearly full-term babies by delivering them alive and severing their spinal cords. You can find out where Gosnell is still showing at gosnellmovie.com/theaters.
Here’s what we learned:
#1. [Shepherd] “During its second weekend, Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer took the 14th spot at the box office. It brings the independent film’s total take to $2.4 million.
“Gosnell also earned enough positive press reviews to get a ‘fresh’ rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It has a 99% positive audience rating. Yet an estimated 150 screens dropped Gosnell last weekend, bringing theater count down to around 500. Filmmakers claim viewpoint discrimination may have played a role.
“’We were in the top ten within [certain] L.A. and New York theaters, which had between 16 and 30 screens,’ says producer John Sullivan in a statement to The Stream. ‘We can see from individual theater box office that we were dropped.’”
#2. [O’Neil]”’This movie really exposes something that the Left does not want to report about,’ Nick Searcy, the film’s director, told PJ Media in an interview Tuesday. ‘They’re basically trying to ignore this movie. They’re trying to say that it doesn’t exist because they don’t want to have a discussion about abortion.’”
“Searcy argued that abortion is tantamount to a ‘sacrament’ on the Left, so any story that paints it in a bad light must be silenced. Gosnell “tells the story of Kermit Gosnell, an abortionist in Philadelphia who was sentenced to life in prison for first degree murder of three babies he killed after birth and involuntary manslaughter of one of his patients. His disgusting clinic has been dubbed a ‘house of horror.’”
Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.
#3. In a recent interview, Dean Cain, who portrays detective James Wood, said, “They say it was dead silent through the credits,” adding, “Then it sparked conversation, with people talking about it for days afterward. It sticks with them. It’s the kind of film that makes you think twice.”
#4. [Shepherd] “Producer John Sullivan is optimistic about how Gosnell will play in its third weekend. ‘I’m hopeful there will be curiosity of this true story that attracts an audience from the typical Halloween horror crowd,’ said Sullivan.
“‘Kermit Gosnell is the biggest serial killer in history, as he operated under government protection for nearly two decades,’ he continued. ‘This film would expose the horrors of what he did to a group that may not typically pay attention.’”
Here are two closing thoughts—beginning with go, go, go to Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer. As Shepherd, O’Neil, Searcy, and Sullivan all pointed out, the movie has really done well the first two weeks. This is an Independent film, not some Hollywood Blockbuster with a $150 million budget. The $2.4 million take the first two weeks is very impressive.
Let’s not give theatres, already looking for an excuse to drop the film, any grounds for doing so.
Second, the objective is not only to tear away the veil shrouding abortion in general, hideous late-term abortions/infanticide in particular. It is “never again.”
Here’s what Searcy told O’Neil:
He argued that abortion clinics must be inspected regularly to prevent the horrors of a clinic like Gosnell’s. His abortion factory “wasn’t inspected for 17 years because the Left doesn’t want to ‘impose’ upon women’s reproductive rights. But if you don’t inspect these clinics, a Gosnell is what occurs.”
While the film arguably undercuts some key arguments for abortion, Searcy insisted that he did not intend to make a pro-life movie.
“If you’re too obvious about your message, the film is boring,” he warned. “You’re just making an argument, not telling a story. If we had made it overtly a pro-life movie, it would have been dull.”
“I had no interest in making a movie that was purely preaching to the pro-life side of the argument. I wanted to reveal the facts about both sides in this case. I thought that this could be some kind of common ground we could agree on, but the Left won’t agree with you on anything.”
LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared in at National Right to Life News Today —- an online column on pro-life issues.