Elysium - grade/review and spoilers - also controversy

[DarthTom]

I'm looking forward to seeing Elysium. I really like Matt Damon and Jodi Foster as actors and most of the time both of them don't get involved in poorly developed ideas.

There has been quite a controversy among conservatives about this film over the last couple days - labeling it, 'Hollywood socialism.' I have to agree though that Director Neill Blomkamp denying there are political messages in the film is an outrageous lie.

The critics are giving it a 72% and the audience a 79% which is on par with many of the top films this summer.

Rotten Tomatoes

The Hollywood Reporter calls it a “politically charged flight of speculative fiction.” Newsmax refers to it “sci-fi socialism” and “political propaganda.”
Variety said its one of the “more openly socialist political agendas of any Hollywood movie in memory, beating the drum loudly not just for universal healthcare, but for open borders, unconditional amnesty and the abolition of class distinctions as well.”
But the director of “Elysium,” Neill Blomkamp, begs to differ, as does the film’s star, Matt Damon.
Blomkamp, who rose to fame with the Oscar-nominated sci-fi hit “District 9” in 2009, said his highly-anticipated film has no agenda whatsoever, and claims he isn’t a political filmmaker.
“’Elysium’ doesn’t have a message,” Blomkamp told Wired Magazine, saying he found it unfortunate that critics were drawing parallels between his movie and the Occupy movement, a phenomenon he says wasn’t even a consideration.
The film’s star Matt Damon, too, insists that “Elysium” is not trying to push any political buttons.
“I don’t think it is trying to say anything. It just presents the issue – the distinct difference between the haves and the have nots,” he told FOX411 while promoting the flick. “A science fiction film will work if it is a whole new world, but speaks to the world that we live in, but not in a heavy-handed way. The first order of business for a big summer popcorn movie is to make a kick-ass movie with great action.”

​

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...eny-movie-has-political-agenda/#ixzz2bNgotdqu
​

 

[Mister Fandango]

Why is it so hard to believe he didn't have an agenda? Just because a bunch of college professors and other professions, desperate to rationalize their education, see all that crap in other people's work, that doesn't mean the creators of those works schemed to advance some hidden agenda as part of a massive world-wide conspiracy.

Just like Shakespeare didn't set out to say even a minute fraction of the shit he supposedly said in his works.

"Ooh, someone's telling a story! It can't just be a story, though! There has to be an agenda because I seeeeeeeeee one! Burn him! Burn him!!!"

 

[bigdaddy]

Why is it so hard to believe he didn't have an agenda? Just because a bunch of college professors and other professions, desperate to rationalize their education, see all that crap in other people's work, that doesn't mean the creators of those works schemed to advance some hidden agenda as part of a massive world-wide conspiracy.

Just like Shakespeare didn't set out to say even a minute fraction of the shit he supposedly said in his works.

"Ooh, someone's telling a story! It can't just be a story, though! There has to be an agenda because I seeeeeeeeee one! Burn him! Burn him!!!"

This.

I argued with my English teachers all the time, they wouldn't go "What do you think it means?", they would go "This is what you means! Everyone else is wrong!", like they knew the author or something. Fucking useless.

And the truth is sometime in the future I can see rich living on the Moon and everyone else living on an overcrowded planet. That isn't a political view, just a very real possibility. Why can't that be part of a story? Every story ever written has some kind of point that someone could find as political.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Sure looks like there's a message. Most stories have a point, don't they? So what is the point of this one? Seems pretty obvious.

 

[DarthTom]

that doesn't mean the creators of those works schemed to advance some hidden agenda as part of a massive world-wide conspiracy.

While I think that the neo-conservatives are way over reacting to this piece of fiction nonetheless, Blomkamp also directed District 9 and anyone claiming that wasn't an illeration to apartheid would be a liar.

In otherwords, he has a history of being involved in politically charged films.

That said - based on how the world is today and where it is headed it isn't a stretch to believe that one day the rich would live off world leaving the poor to live down here.

Shit - that is pretty much how it is today on planet earth.

Sure looks like there's a message. Most stories have a point, don't they? So what is the point of this one? Seems pretty obvious.

The director of the film is denying there is any, 'point,' - claming that it's pure fiction. I'm not sure he's being completely forthright about that.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The director of the film is denying there is any, 'point,' - claming that it's pure fiction. I'm not sure he's being completely forthright about that.

Well, yeah, of course he's not. If he came right out and admitted the message of the film, it might drive people away. So he claims there is no message, viewers know there is one anyway, and there are butts in seats.

 

[DarthTom]

Well, yeah, of course he's not. If he came right out and admitted the message of the film, it might drive people away. So he claims there is no message, viewers know there is one anyway, and there are butts in seats.

Meh, conservatives and the film makers of Atlas Shrugged weren't denying there was a message in the film - in fact they tried to advertise the fact.

 

[theenglish]

Why is it so hard to believe he didn't have an agenda? Just because a bunch of college professors and other professions, desperate to rationalize their education, see all that crap in other people's work, that doesn't mean the creators of those works schemed to advance some hidden agenda as part of a massive world-wide conspiracy.

Just like Shakespeare didn't set out to say even a minute fraction of the shit he supposedly said in his works.

"Ooh, someone's telling a story! It can't just be a story, though! There has to be an agenda because I seeeeeeeeee one! Burn him! Burn him!!!"

This.

I argued with my English teachers all the time, they wouldn't go "What do you think it means?", they would go "This is what you means! Everyone else is wrong!", like they knew the author or something. Fucking useless.

And the truth is sometime in the future I can see rich living on the Moon and everyone else living on an overcrowded planet. That isn't a political view, just a very real possibility. Why can't that be part of a story? Every story ever written has some kind of point that someone could find as political.

It's called allegory. Something that science fiction has always been fond of.

 

[Sindatur]

I'm confused? I haven't seen the movie, but, tthe previews lead me to believe this movie is about an upper class living in a Utopia on a moon or in orbit or something, while the rest of society lives in the Ghetto called Earth, right?

How does that in anyway send a message of Socialism, lack of classes, Universal Healthcare, and every other liberal "Wet Dream" agenda?

 

[DarthTom]

How does that in anyway send a message of Socialism, lack of classes, Universal Healthcare, and every other liberal "Wet Dream" agenda?

It's the anti-capitalism message [hyperbole] where capitalism has gone out of control - a muck. In other words, ' this is what will happen if we don't flatten the gap between the have's and the have nots.'

 

[Trekker4747]

I'm confused? I haven't seen the movie, but, tthe previews lead me to believe this movie is about an upper class living in a Utopia on a moon or in orbit or something, while the rest of society lives in the Ghetto called Earth, right?

How does that in anyway send a message of Socialism, lack of classes, Universal Healthcare, and every other liberal "Wet Dream" agenda?

DEVIL'S ADVOCATE: From the previews it seems the movie wants to "criticize" those who live in wealth and privilege while everyone else lives in a society where things don't come easy or cheap. The "ultimate liberal dream" is one where I, a person making $40,000 a year, can get access to cheap, good, health care as a person making $400,000 a year. Now, granted, I CAN get good health care thanks to insurance but I still end up having to pay $100s in bills from what insurance doesn't cover, not to mention I hardly get "the best doctor."

Meanwhile that richer person snaps his fingers, gets the best doctors in the country and can either pay the bills off out-right with the money in his couch cushions or can afford great, 100% coverage insurance.

That seems to be what the movie is "attacking" Matt Damon's character needs doctorin' but can't get it living as a poor person on Earth. Meanwhile the rich live in a paradise in the sky with cancer-curing machines in their living room.

I can "see" the message. I don't necessarily think it is there or as obvious as some make but I think I can see where they are coming from.

On the movie itself? I see almost no reason to see. None of the trailers and such I've seen have quite motivated me to see it.

 

[DarthTom]

That seems to be what the movie is "attacking" Matt Damon's character needs doctorin' but can't get it living as a poor person on Earth. Meanwhile the rich live in a paradise in the sky with cancer-curing machines in their living room.

Damon is another hot button in terms of the 'Hollywood Hypocrites,' with conservatives. Damon is a big time advocate for public education yet sends his own children to private schools.

 

[JarodRussell]

So a filmmaker expresses a political opinion in a film. Holy shit.

Could we please start to distinguish between a piece of entertainment and politics?

A successful science fiction film is not going to ruin anyone's election campaign, which is what FoxNews is apparently afraid of and why they criticize it so vehemently.

 

[Sindatur]

Oh, OK. I also got the impression from the trailers that something goes horribly wrong in the "upper Class Community", so it didn't really make sense that they were showing "This is what will happen if we don't become Socialists", but, alright, I haven't seen the movie, so really can't judge (Even though I have an extremely high confidence that many of the Establishment Conservatives who are critizing it for it's message know even less about the movie than I do, they're almost certainly parroting the daily Talking Points)

 

[Star Wolf]

I can "see" the message. I don't necessarily think it is there or as obvious as some make but I think I can see where they are coming from.

On the movie itself? I see almost no reason to see. None of the trailers and such I've seen have quite motivated me to see it.

I think they did everything short of calling the people on earth the 99 percent in the ads.

However the film will win or loss on the strength of the cyborg fight

 

[theenglish]

I'm confused? I haven't seen the movie, but, tthe previews lead me to believe this movie is about an upper class living in a Utopia on a moon or in orbit or something, while the rest of society lives in the Ghetto called Earth, right?

How does that in anyway send a message of Socialism, lack of classes, Universal Healthcare, and every other liberal "Wet Dream" agenda?

Right, it does not seem to be much different than many science fiction dystopian settings.

Star Trek has had similar stories multiple times. Blade Runner or the Alien series have similar settings. Robocop and Gattaca also come to mind immediately, as does the Matrix. I am sure there are plenty of other, more appropriate, examples.

Also, this is the same guy who did District 9 which was an allegory for apartheid but still a suspense thriller.

 

[BillJ]

Damon is another hot button in terms of the 'Hollywood Hypocrites,' with conservatives. Damon is a big time advocate for public education yet sends his own children to private schools.

Can't say I blame him though. His kids would be an easy target for unsavory types due to his fame.

Any wide-release movie that makes rich people/right-wingers sweat is a good thing in my book.

 

[DarthTom]

On an unrelated note, unless Elysium does well - really well - and I was a movie executive at Sony - I'd start to polish my resume.

Elysium” is here. The Neill Blomkamp sci-fi release premiered last night in New York. If you love sci-fi, you’re going to love this intensely stylized movie starring Matt Damon in his most physical role yet. Will it do well? The jury is out. But if “Elysium” is considered a failure, this may spell serious trouble for Sony Pictures chiefs Amy Pascal and Michael Lynton. They’ve had a bad summer with “After Earth” and “White House Down.” Normally, it wouldn’t matter. But two days ago rebel stockholder Daniel Loeb of Third Point investors issued another one of his veiled threats against Pascal and Lynton. He wrote: “We find it perplexing that [Sony CEO] Mr. Hirai does not worry about a division that has just released 2013’s versions of Waterworld and Ishtar back to back, instead giving free passes to Sony Pictures Entertainment Co CEO’s Michael Lynton and Amy Pascal, the executives responsible for these debacles…”

 

[davejames]

From the reviews so far, it seems the main problem isn't so much the message, as it is the extreme heavy-handedness. Apparently the rich on the station are all being portrayed as cruel and evil and uncaring, and the poor on the planet are all pure and noble and good. Which, if true, I can definitely see as being a problem.

Even as liberal as I am, I would hope both sides would be presented in a slightly more balanced and realistic way than that.

 

[DarthTom]

Even as liberal as I am, I would hope both sides would be presented in a slightly more balanced and realistic way than that.

Also, talk about a stereotype - Foster's character has a very German accent.