3 ms·

The trailer looks like an OWS supporter took every 1 percenter and anti-immigration trope in the book, added a bunch of explosions and called it a "film". I re

• Zikes 13y ago
  Class warfare is not so uncommon a plot device. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, just sit back and enjoy the ride.
  • cantankerous 13y ago
    That's a pretty sweet expression. I may have to borrow it for myself. Do you know who said it originally?
    • Zikes 13y ago
      Apparently the origin is somewhat contested, but generally it's attributed to Sigmund Freud.
      • MartinCron 13y ago
        As a quote, it really only works when attributed to Freud.
• wetmore 13y ago
  Your comment makes it quite clear you haven't actually _read_ the article. > The director finds it unfortunate that observers are already drawing parallels between Elysium and the Occupy movement, a phenomenon that he says wasn’t even a consideration. Blomkamp identifies as neither liberal nor conservative, which doesn’t stop people from ascribing all sorts of agendas to him and his films. and > But Blomkamp insists Elysium isn’t some sort of filmic Paul Krugman op-ed piece. It’s important for him that his movies grapple with things that matter, in this case economic disparity, immigration, health care, corporate greed. But he disdains prescription-happy “message” movies—that’s what documentaries are for, he says—and intends Elysium to be first and foremost a mass-appeal, summer popcorn flick. Allegory, satire, and dark humor interest him; providing pat answers to society’s woes does not. “Anybody who thinks they can change the world by making films,” he says, “is sorely mistaken.”
  • crusso 13y ago
    Your comment makes it quite clear you haven't actually _read_ the article. No, it makes it quite clear that I didn't just nod my head and agree with whatever came out of his mouth.
• cobrausn 13y ago
  He actually addresses that in the interview. He says he was not influenced by OWS in any way when making the film. But Blomkamp insists Elysium isn’t some sort of filmic Paul Krugman op-ed piece. It’s important for him that his movies grapple with things that matter, in this case economic disparity, immigration, health care, corporate greed. But he disdains prescription-happy “message” movies—that’s what documentaries are for, he says—and intends Elysium to be first and foremost a mass-appeal, summer popcorn flick. Allegory, satire, and dark humor interest him; providing pat answers to society’s woes does not. “Anybody who thinks they can change the world by making films,” he says, “is sorely mistaken.
  • crusso 13y ago
    He says he was not influenced by OWS in any way when making the film. Yeah, and I say I'm the King of England. There's a reason why he was asked the question. It's because at very least the trailer makes it look like he's doing some pretty heavy axe grinding.
    • cobrausn 13y ago
      Seriously, go read the article. You might find him more likable and his reasons for the story a bit different from what you are envisioning.
      • crusso 13y ago
        I did read the article. I also watched the movie trailer. As with politics, I tend to take actions more into consideration than words. The right words are too easy to fabricate. The right actions, not so much.
        • TrevorJ 13y ago
          The trailer isn't the movie, I would reserve judgment till you watch the film.
          • 13y ago
• rayiner 13y ago
  Yes, because class conflict totally started with OWS. Moreover, you don't have to be an OWS-supporter hippie to understand that different groups of people have different incentives and that the interests of different groups of people can come into conflict. One of the greatest fantasies perpetuated on our generation is the idea that there are simple policy prescriptions that are "good for everyone."
  • crusso 13y ago
    Yes, because class conflict totally started with OWS. I wasn't aware that I had to mention the entire history of class conflict in order to note a strong similarity with a recent movement. fantasies perpetuated on our generation is the idea that there are simple policy prescriptions that are "good for everyone. Ironic that you say that since in political threads you generally defend a one-size-fits-all, overpowering American government. If you really believed what you said then I'd think you'd be all for Freedom and individual Liberty. Instead, I view you as an opponent of those things in favor of the State.
    • rayiner 13y ago
      Democracy is emphatically not a "one-size-fits-all" system. It a system designed to maximize the prosperity of a majority of the people, often to the detriment of this or the other minority group. I like freedom and individual liberty just fine, but I think the "default rule" should prioritize executing the will of the majority through the popularly-elected government. I think every instance in which a court holds unconstitutional some validly passed law of Congress or some program of the President that enjoys popular support is an instance of the courts telling the majority what it can and cannot do, and I think such events should be the exception, not the rule. The courts should seek to give effect to the will of the democratically-elected branches if it is possible. There is nothing inconsistent with that view and the recognition that a minority of people who hold a majority of the wealth have incentives that do not necessarily align with the interests of the majority. Indeed, it is entirely consistent with that view, based on the basic belief that the purpose of government is to maximize the prosperity of the majority, with the protection of the rights of individuals being an important but secondary concern.