After watching this movie yet again, it struck me how the movie is tugging at your heart strings. You want everything to be all right, so you root for the pinkos. It's like a fairy tale--everybody lives happily ever after.
The movie is said to be about today, not the future. Of course it is. It is the socialist viewpoint versus the capitalist viewpoint. The good guys in this movie are the socialists. The capitalists are the bad guys.
The main difference between the two systems is economic. Do you know what economics is? It is the "dismal science". It is dismal because it is about the rationing of scarce goods. There's just so many good things, and not enough to go around. How do you divvy it up?
The socialist model requires an authority to divvy it up. The capitalist system uses a market system that divvies it up according to a price. Those who can pay can receive the goodies.
This seems unfair to those types who'd prefer a way to get those goodies for themselves.
That's the heart of the entire argument. Who gets to divvy up the goodies? In the socialist system, merit has nothing to do it. Invariably, it gets to be whose closest to the power structure that does the divvying up. In that case, it is who you know as opposed
to what you know.
I think that is why socialism doesn't work. When merit leaves the system, there is less
merit. Less merit means fewer goodies. In a capitalist system, you need to know what you
are doing. In a socialist system, you need only to please those in charge. Those in charge may not know what they're doing. They are more concerned about staying on the top of
the political heap.
Only poor and ignorant people's fall into the trap of socialism. That's why the left wants to always dumb down the population. A society of morons won't know any better.
Now this movie is on Tubi. No need to pay to see it! Whatever anyone pays for it, they've paid too much. What a dreary concept. The creators of this had a very pessimisstic view, but a touching faith that things could get better... somehow.
You can analyze the crap out of this movie if you want. It's like all movies... a bad guy and a good guy. In this movie, the good guy wins. People like it when the good guy wins. Why not? Who wants the bad guys to win, eh? The bad guys do. But they don't really believe that they're bad, you see. What makes for a conflict is an argument about what is good and what is bad. Somebody has to be right, or so it would seem.
Whatever I wrote about it before won't matter though. If people knew and understood what they should do, and if people did the right things, then we'd have perfect lives. That's rather profound if you think about it. It implies that there is a good and there is a bad, and that you need to follow the good. The trouble is stupidity. I"ve tried to deal with that concept previously, but there's the problem. People insist upon doing what they're doing, and that breeds conflict, which breeds suffering.
You can't fix what's inside people's heads. Or can you? Can you end stupidity? Stupidity is nothing more than enforced ignorance. If you KNEW, then you wouldn't be ignorant anymore. Certain people want others to be ignorant though. They've become attached to what they believe is true. But there's not much excuse for ignorance as long as there's freedom to find the truth. When others try to prevent the discovery of truth, this must mean that the enforcers know that they're wrong. And that would have to be evil.
Ignorance is enforced, so that stupidity can reign. Try wrapping your head around that one.
Updated,
6.18.19:
It's amazing. I just rented this flick yet again. Why keep coming back to it? Unfortunately, the flick seems to demonstrate something active in the culture right now. It may explain the attempted coup.
The Marxist paradigm requires class conflict. Thus it requires an oppressor and the oppressed. This movie is based upon that paradigm. It is rather unfortunate that so many people fall for it. Not only that they fall for it, but those who should know better, don't seem to know any better themselves.
The movie had a coup in it, you see. These people may end up attempting a violent coup here, in this country, in the real world. One of these days, there will be an attempt. That is assuming that they don't succeed in a peaceful coup.
3.14.16:
I just watched the video and I have reconsidered my review here. Yes, there is possibility of people who would and do mistreat their fellow human beings. But that doesn't jibe with vast material progress that is depicted in the film. Instead of what's in this flick, you would get the decay of a civilization, not unlike Rome. As Rome didn't spin off another civilization that became even more advanced and "privileged", neither would any other civilization that mistreats a significant segment of its own population be capable of spinning off something better. It would destroy itself first, as Rome did.
This is what I've been trying to warn people about for the longest time here. If the powers that be won't allow basic material progress, and punishes anybody for coming up with an invention that would enhance human well being, it cannot continue for long.
The powers that be today are holding back the progress of humanity. They are doing it on the misguided notion that is depicted in the flick. The notion is that the resources of Earth can be depleted.
Those who think Earth's resources can be depleted do not understand basic concepts in science. Matter is not destroyed when you use it. It is simply put into another chemical state. That state is not permanent, as any chemical bond can be broken. You only have to supply sufficient energy to it.
Once the bonds are broken, they can be reassembled into useful items again. In other words, with sufficient energy, you can recycle everything an unlimited amount of times.
The trick is the energy. Where would you get it? Why from nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is a million times more powerful than chemical energy. It is easily seen then, that the altered chemical bonds mentioned can be restored to useful function with the enormous energy from the atom.
The problem is that the powers that be have decided that we cannot have nuclear energy. By taking this position, they are holding back the progress of humanity.
They'll say that they are doing it because radioactivity is dangerous. It's dangerous only if mishandled. Lots of things are that way. If everything that was potentially dangerous were to be banned, we would have to live at a much lower standard of living.
Ironically, the powers that be are the ones posing as our benefactors, but they are our oppressors. They are like the people of Elysium in this flick. They'll pose as good people, who bring us such ideas that are presented in this flick, but are evil instead because they are the same people who ban something like nuclear energy that would benefit mankind. I think the flick is such a pose, and it fools many.
The original review follows:
I went to see the movie last night at the IMAX on the west side of Houston.
The theater was about half full and there was a smattering of applause at the end. Some people seemed to like it.
As for me, it seemed to be entertaining, with plenty of action and things that go boom. If you accept the premises of the movie, you can enjoy it. If you don't, the movie looks rather flawed.
The main premise is that there can be such a place as this space station called "Elysium", at the same time that the Earth is really bad shape. For to construct such a place would require a technical competence far beyond anything that we have now. If such competence existed, why could it not be used to solve Earth's problems? It is that premise, that such competence would NOT be used for the greater benefit of humanity, that is the major premise of the movie. If you accept that, you can like this movie. If you don't, there's no doggone way that you can like this movie.
It has been said that the movie reflects our present more than it predicts the future. I would agree. It is basically a rather ignoble view of humanity that is offensive here. That there is something righteous and good about being poor, and something evil about being rich. That, by being rich, you can only take from others, or withhold from others, and not contribute something of worth for your prosperity. The movie doesn't even demonstrate that, it just presumes that people are that way. Again, I would agree that there are some people like that, but I would hope that it doesn't define humanity. For if it does, nothing like the technological marvel that is Elysium could ever be possible anyway. Why? Why invent something if you can steal it?
So, my verdict is this: If you want to be entertained, go see it. If you want to be informed, there are better ways to spend your time.
