|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The imagery at the end of the film is of a host of angels descending upon the Earth. In addition to the fact that there's no reason to anticipate their failure - we see them effortlessly subdue some corrupt liberal cops - the point is that they should win. Why shouldn't they? It is fairly clear that there still many counter-revolutionaries like President Patel that will have to be dealt with, so it's not an 'instant-win button'. The tone is upbeat not because everything is instantly solved, but because things are on the right track. Yes, but in real revolutions it's the establishment of a new government (that functions at all, let alone delivers socialism) that is difficult. In the film this is reduced to 'press butan', and the long term challenge is to Essentially, the real stumbling block of political change is handwaved away and replaced with more fighting the good fight against The Enemy. It's practically a revenge fantasy. Elysium's message seems to be that utopia itself is easy to build, and all we need to to is remove bad people who stand in its way for no reason (not even selfish ones, really). And it's damaging; some people genuinely seem to think you can just apply revolution to problem and let that tedious 'governance' stuff sort itself out.
|
#
¿
May 11, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 10:10 |
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Elysium's solution is a radical appropriation of the state apparatus. That assumes that the state apparatus is capable of supporting worldwide healthcare. In Elysium it can, because it's practically a post-scarcity society and because the writers said so. A real revolution isn't going to have that benefit. The sci-fi 'what if' of the film changes the playing field so radically that it undermines the political message. Though I will admit that this way lies sperging about star destroyer reactor outputs and god knows what.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 15:49
|
|