40 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 80.1 ms ] thread
how long until science fiction set in the slums of south africa gets recognized for being formulaic?
The slums in the movie are supposed to be Los Angeles, circa 2154.
I believe it was a reference to the director's previous movie, District 9, which was set in the slums of South Africa.
And his next film Chappie, "a $60 million contemporary sci-fi movie due to begin shooting in Johannesburg in September" according to the article.
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 really hope the actual movie is more nuanced in the politics it looks like it's trying to shove down our throats.

Class warfare is not so uncommon a plot device.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, just sit back and enjoy the ride.

That's a pretty sweet expression. I may have to borrow it for myself. Do you know who said it originally?
Apparently the origin is somewhat contested, but generally it's attributed to Sigmund Freud.
As a quote, it really only works when attributed to Freud.
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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.
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.

The trailer isn't the movie, I would reserve judgment till you watch the film.
Hence the reason I explicitly mention "trailer" in every reference and hoped that the full movie was more nuanced.
Keep in mind Blomkamp is South African, and his last major film (District 9) had similar themes. It was also released in 2009, well before OWS came into existence. It's clear that whatever politics Blomkamp holds, it comes from from growing up in apartheid South Africa. His first work featuring the themes of poverty, wealth disparity, and racial inequality predate OWS by at least six years (see: the short Alive in Joburg, which is basically the direct predecessor of District 9).

So while Blomkamp may share some politics with OWS, it's silly to suggest he borrowed them from OWS or the recent politics of the last couple of years.

Side note: the fact that his sci-fi allegories of apartheid-era South Africa has enough in parallel with present-day America to inspire suspicion, is troubling.

it's silly to suggest he borrowed them from OWS

What does it matter where the tropes originally came from? They are what they are and they're easy to identify regardless of whether from OWS or his own personal experiences.

Jeez, just commenting on the actual movie trailer itself and the politics that it seems to be pushing pretty hard. Seems like I pushed some buttons to get the straw men and heavy negative moderation hammers thrown at me.

You're the one that stood the Occupy strawman up, you shouldn't be surprised that someone came along to light it.
Class warfare is a fantastic plot device. As is the "evil corporation". Regardless of politics, these devices don't preclude films being damn good.
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."
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.

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.

In a parallel, HG Wells too imagined a society with two diverged class of human species. One serves as the prey and other as predator.
a) District 9 was a great movie both as entertainment and as something to think about

b) having grown up in South Africa, Blomkamp may have some unique insights about human nature.

it's certainly interesting to contemplate what's going to happen.

Still looking forward to the movie.
The future as described in 2312 by Kim Stanley Robinson I think is more likely, perhaps scarier even, and taken to levels beyond Elysium (though don't get me wrong, I'm very excited for Elysium).

2312 is a future where many generations of people have lived on colonies on Mercury, Venus, Mars, hollowed-out asteroids ("terraria"), the outer moons. The spacers live in a new paradigm, not a rich paradise like Elysium, but a very pleasant, long and happy life, while those who inhabit the Earth live in a warring, diseased, overpopulated and climate-change-disaster struck Earth.

I think the crowd here would like this book. You should read it.

I tried getting into it, but found it a little on the slow side. Perhaps it was because I had just read Leviathan Wakes directly before it, which is a lot more fast-paced and similarly covers human colonization of the inner solar system and asteroid belt (aka "Belters")
Reading the Mars Trilogy first is probably a good idea, because it sets the pace: the hard science fiction nature of these books means you get long technical descriptions and character analysis. It's awesome, I think, but you definitely have to get in the right zone.
If current systems and economics stayed the way they are, then I imagine that it has a higher probability of being true. I foresee those economic structures shifting / changing though.
I don't really care for the story line, but finally somebody worked a high-quality render of a full-scale rotating habitat into a movie! Always wanted to see how that might look since Rendezvous with Rama and Hamilton's books.
Elysium doesn't sound too different from the book Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood. They both do sound like very possible futures for the human race.
Way back in 1984 (starting with Neuromancer), William Gibson wrote about an orbiting space station owned by the super-rich.[1]

(WARNING: Spoilers below)

"Tessier-Ashpool is a fictional family appearing in William Gibson's Sprawl trilogy novels. The family owns Freeside, a space station shaped like a spindle Bernal sphere constructed in high orbit. The family resides in the Villa Straylight, which occupies one end of the spindle.

The family is organized and run as a corporation, Tessier-Ashpool S.A.. Family members are kept under cryogenic stasis and thawed out periodically so that governance of the family is cycled between members. According to "orbital law" they are legally dead while cryogenically preserved.

...

The Tessier-Ashpools were founded with the marriage of scions of two powerful families: Marie-France Tessier, who was Swiss and John Harness Ashpool, an Australian who inherited a Melbourne engineering company. After the two were married, Ashpool began construction of Freeside in high orbit due to the relatively relaxed laws governing construction.

The family became extremely successful financially, developing the attached space station, sponsoring human colonization of space, and acquiring a number of other firms which subsequently flourished.

...

However, following the death of Marie-France, the family became extremely reclusive. Family members, including Ashpool, tended to place themselves in cryogenic sleep. At any one given time, only one or two of the children would be awake. They are also known for cloning their own assassins, "vat-grown" ninja who follow their orders without question.

...

By the time of Neuromancer the family has become extremely degenerate and dysfunctional. The patriarch Ashpool spends almost all of his time in cryogenic stasis. A dissolute alcoholic and heavy drug user, when he is awakened for the final time he has sex with and subsequently murders a clone of his daughter prior to committing suicide."

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tessier_Ashpool

Please, NO SPOILERS! A lot of people haven't seen it yet :)
I highly recomend http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beggars_in_Spain

You can find there rich and poor, genetic modifications only rich can afford, one (lack of the need to sleep) so special that it reshapes world. You can find there universal income as payment for voting. You can find philosophy of exchange through voluntary mutually beneficial contracts promoted by such influential inventor that it raises to the same eminence buddism has. Awesome read.

The picture in the article is confusing me. What's going on with his hand?