Thread Manager
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 1
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]337989[/split]
Looking up tickets and it seems the movie is 109 mins. Are you sure it is 2+ hours?
I won't be adjusting my expectations for this, but I will definitely wait until I see the film to consider and dissect it.When you have a movie that shows you the world, has all of these sweeping camera movements to give the world scale and depth, and they show that the entirety of the population is ONLY Hispanic or Latino, it's safe to assume that their intention is just that. Then you have a main character whose name is Hispanic, who has tattoos in Spanish, who acts like a barrio kid around his barrio friends, who speaks Spanish.. wouldn't you assume that he IS Hispanic or Latino? It's the duck/duck/duck analogy. Just because Matt Damon is playing the character doesn't mean anything. Maybe Bloomkamp didn't know what the hell he was doing?
I will say this, Elysium is as borderline racist as you can get for a big summer movie. Can't remember any other one being so overt since Transformers 2.
I know I sound like a broken record but wait till you see the movie. I know what it's like to want to call bulls**t because you WANT stuff like what I'm saying not to be true. Just adjust your expectations accordingly.
I can understand it feeling longer then it is. I have sat through more then a few films like that. But as a general rule, I feel like there is a significant difference between a 2 hour film, and one that runs 10 mins longer or shorter.10 minutes shy of 2 hours is pretty much the same thing. It felt way longer than 2 hours though. I can't count how many people in my row at the IMAX theater were snoring.
But is there enough Kruger?I'll put it this way, Elysium could have been an 80 minute movie and it would have lot nothing in terms of storytelling. That's why those +/- 10 minutes don't matter in this context. It's dead air.
Poniboy said:Nope. I don't need to read it. Intent and action are two separate things. His intent can be whatever he wants it to but if the action (the movie) shows something else then that is what I will critique. Why should intent have anything to do with how you judge what is presented to you?
But is there enough Kruger?
Dude, RACE and ETHNICITY are two different things. I don't care if you are in the U.S. or Canada or Antarctica. The words define two different categories.
It doesn't matter if one is archaic or if you don't like that it exists. They are two different words. They define two different things. That's fact.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethnicity
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race
Viewership is a collaborative effort. You bring your own understanding and context to the material and are of course free and encouraged to rate the film on that basis but I do not agree it is the only context that matters when constructing a reading of the material.
From your links:
Race
a class or kind of people unified by shared interests, habits, or characteristics
Ethnic
of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
Explain the difference.
Also, where you live, U.S. or Canada or Antarctica, "Race" and "Ethnicity" are not scientific terms. They are layman terms that are often used interchangeably that have no scientific definitions. Also, if you believe in your definitions, why are you calling this film "racist" and not "ethnicist"?
I refuse to believe such a thing is possible.For me there was too much. It just got ridiculous. And Copely went off the rails with it. I don't want to divulge spoilers.
Actually, you judge a movie on how you interpret its merits. It is the same for everyone really.You can feel however you want but I judge a movie on its own merits. A story has to stand up completely independently without the help of interviews, press notes, prequel comics, featurettes, etc, etc to expound on the story presented on the screen.
You can feel however you want but I judge a movie on its own merits. A story has to stand up completely independently without the help of interviews, press notes, prequel comics, featurettes, etc, etc to expound on the story presented on the screen.
From your links:
Race
a class or kind of people unified by shared interests, habits, or characteristics
Ethnic
of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
Explain the difference.
Also, if you believe in your definitions, why are you calling this film "racist" and not "ethnicist"?
Just remember that the viewer also brings their own baggage to a film.
If someone is bored by the Godfather, is that the Godfather's fault?
But I understand what you mean. Sucker Punch flounders no matter what Zach Snyder has to say about it though it doesn't help that he can be nausiatingly inarticulate about his own work.
I refuse to believe such a thing is possible.
Because I don't think the director did a good job of portraying ethnicity. He went the racial route, segregating ALL of a people as one thing and ALL of another people as something else. Like when you put South Americans, Hispanics and Latinos all together and pretend there isn't a difference. That's what they did in this movie. That's why it felt racist to me.
I don't know what you could possibly mean. Sucker Punch was full of deep and thoughtful meaning. It was cool, and very cool. Not to mention the cool.Just remember that the viewer also brings their own baggage to a film.
If someone is bored by the Godfather, is that the Godfather's fault?
But I understand what you mean. Sucker Punch flounders no matter what Zach Snyder has to say about it though it doesn't help that he can be nausiatingly inarticulate about his own work.
Oh absolutely people bring baggage in. I'm not disputing that. What I guess I didn't explain properly is what you say in that last sentence.
I don't know what you could possibly mean. Sucker Punch was full of deep and thoughtful meaning. It was cool, and very cool. Not to mention the cool.
Really this doesn't surprise me given Blomkamp's problematic treatment of Nigerians in District 9.
That isn't cool man.It is full of attempted deep meaning.
Really? You are just going to leave that out there?To be honest I heard about that controversy but didn't really pick up on it until this week when I rewatched D9. If you're looking for it, it's very noticeable.
The thing that D9 had that this one doesn't is aliens. Because the aliens are foreign to everyone that makes them relatable to everyone. Different people can in their own way relate to them. In Elysium there are no aliens. It's basically Latinos/Hispanics on Earth and Caucasians on Elysium. And the only reason we're given to relate to the people on Earth is they're poor. Rich white people went to elysium because they could afford it, and we're supposed to fault them for it. I don't understand that mentality.
Really? You are just going to leave that out there?