this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
88 points (92.3% liked)

Fiction

514 readers
1 users here now

Solarpunk themed fiction. Books, short stories, movies, games... pretty much anything you can dream of!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Elysium depicts a near-future Earth in which the majority of rich and privileged humans have migrated to an orbiting space station which gives the film its title. The city-state hogs the advanced medical resources of Earth, leaving the people on the planet below in a perpetual state of lawlessness and impoverishment. Matt Damon stars as Max Da Costa, a former criminal who, while doing dangerous work, is exposed to a lethal dose of radiation, giving him just five days to live. He soon obtains an exo-suit to augment his failing body. It’s then discovered that Max has data hidden in a chip in his brain that can, in theory, alter the computer systems running Elysium, which will benefit all the people who don’t live there.

top 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 29 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Too bad the movie was so bad. You didn’t really care about the characters and it was just, comically evil space capitalists? I really wanted to like this one since District 9 was so good. Unfortunately every movie afterwards by Blomkamp has been a flop.

[–] badbytes@lemmy.world 7 points 4 weeks ago

Yeah, it was bad enough I can't really remember much about it. District 9 was tight.

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 10 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Is the space station an O'Neill cylinder?

[–] sturlabragason@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

Bobiverse all the way!

[–] shadowedcross@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 weeks ago

No, it's a von Braun wheel. An O'Neill cylinder is straight, whereas the Elysium station is toroidal.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 8 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Of the Century? Anybody seen Robocop?

[–] SteveKLord@slrpnk.net 11 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Different century. We’re in the 21st century. Robocop came out in the 80s which was the 20th

[–] exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago

There was a forgettable remake though.

[–] maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone 7 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Are there that many anti-capitalist science fiction films in the past 25 years?

[–] superkret@feddit.org 30 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (4 children)

Snowpiercer, Wall-E, Transcendence, Blade Runner 2049, The Hunger Games, Children of Men, District 9, Sorry To Bother You, City of Ember, Spaceman

[–] reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net 15 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Wall-E always annoys me because it promotes the absurd assumption that without having to work people become fat and lazy. I am of the firm belief that people want meaning in their lives and that, freed from worries about subsistence, they fill their time with meaningful (to them at least) activities. Though, gravity did play a role in the immobility part if I remember right.

Love the environmental stuff though.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn't think it was the absence of work that made people fat and lazy, but blind consumerism. Those people could have used their time pursuing knowledge, creating art, or even just building a community with their crew mates, but instead, they engaged in the same type of mindless consumption that killed their planet. They lived in a post-needs society, but they had been so conditioned by capitalism (or more accurately, an AI that had no framework for human happiness beyond capitalism) that they couldn't think of anything to do but consume.

[–] reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 weeks ago

It’s been awhile since I watched it, I’ll watch with your more charitable reading next time and see if I can accept it!

[–] smokin_shinobi@lemmy.world 10 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

The author must not have seen Children of Men right?

[–] superkret@feddit.org 8 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] SteveKLord@slrpnk.net 9 points 4 weeks ago

District 9 is mentioned as one of the director’s other films

[–] exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] superkret@feddit.org 2 points 3 weeks ago

Good one! My personal fan theory is that Moon is set in the Blade Runner universe.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 weeks ago

Yeah, that's some Cunningham's Law amount of clickbait BS. 🙄

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 9 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Andor isn't explicitly anti-capitalist, but it is revolutionary, so I'd throw that in there. Very well made to boot.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Anti-fascist you might say

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 weeks ago

Very much so :)

[–] dellish@lemmy.world 7 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Netflix add and remove stuff without fanfare all the time. What do you mean "quietly added"? Are we expecting announcements?

[–] SteveKLord@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 weeks ago

Is this question rhetorical? Articles are shared for discussion but I didn’t write the article or its headline

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I feel like altered carbon had the same vibe but did it better

[–] exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 weeks ago

Only the first season unfortunately

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Sounds like any kind of "guy with special maguffin takes down patriarchal organization" kind of movie rather than anti capitalist.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

What's really the difference between the two, besides the motivation of the main character?

In the movie, Matt Damon gets lethally injured while working because his boss wants to save money, and is left to die alone afterwards. He uses his remaining time to try and save his life by fighting against the oppressive structures that caused his injury. How would you make the film more anti-capitalist?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

You think any of that is specific to capitalism? Money is just a substitute for any other kind of institutional control. He was injured because someone in charge didn't care, but the means of them being in charge can be anything. It doesn't have to be "because he was the rich business person".

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

He wasn't injured because his superior didn't care, he specifically was injured to make his superior more money. He is left to die because he doesn't have any economic worth left.

In that case, how can a movie be anti-capitalist? Capitalism doesn't have one defining feature that's not present in any other system, it's defined by the interactions of its features. No matter what features any movie focuses on, you can always say that that's just a substitute of a similar feature in other systems.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

Economic value of a person isn't something that runs out and gets left behind only in capitalism.

There are some defining traits of capitalism that a movie could probably attack. I'd start with the obnoxious responsibility haven of the stock market. It's inherently detrimental because it incentivises people who make the companies they represent do worse. I'd also take some shots at IP trolls, though I'm not really sure if that's inherent to capitalism.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not 100% sure what responsibility you're referring to regarding the stock market, but if you're pointing at short-term profits at the cost of long-term status - that's not a capitalism-specific issue. It's worse because of the reach of investors, but that's more related to technological advancements.

So that's also not good enough. Any other ideas? Or can anti-capitalist movies just not exist?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Ahh sorry, I had a typo. Haven became haven't.

It's worse because of the reach of investors

That's actually exactly what I mean! The mechanisms of influence will always propagate themselves. You can use control to expand your control, so you have a power grabbing feedback loop! That is a failing of every economic model, but especially so with capitalism. In the US, we can vote on what the government does itself, but most of what is done is done privately or by corporations. Therefore having money means your vote decides more of what happens in the world. That's self propagating control.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

But that's my point - under different economic systems, investors have a similar reach. Since you're requiring the anti-capitalist message to be unique to capitalism, and capitalism has no unique features, there can't be any anti-capitalist art, right?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Well there's definitely unique features. There just aren't any in the description of the movie that I read.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Can you list some? As I've already said, I am not aware of any features that define capitalism which aren't also present in some other economic system.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I think it might have been in another thread where I was trying to come up with some. I think the stock market's way of giving more vote to people with more money is a particularly capitalist fail.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Isn't that arguably how every system has worked? Say we're going back a couple centuries - power mostly lied with banks and those who already had money, since their loans were important for many businesses. Look for example at the Fugger family - incredibly rich bankers with control over much of the European economy, and they were literally venture capitalists in the 15th & 16th century. Money has always given people leverage, the stock market is just a codified form (that still isn't fully equal due to different kinds of shares, so really no different from previous power structures).

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, I pretty much agree. Every system has a manner of "be subjected to the process or the weather".

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So there literally can't be anti-capitalist art, as capitalism has no unique defining features, and only art focusing on those features can be anti-capitalist, right?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

I mean, you can attack capitalism with an irrelevant argument and call it an attack on capitalism, but it won't be a very good attack. It's like me trying to say Johnny Cash songs are bad because he's ugly.

Saying capitalism is bad because the people in charge are abusive doesn't help in pointing out why we shouldn't use capitalism. Kings and whatever communist leaders are called can also be abusive and it's not because their system is inherently bad.

My point is that a weak argument can hardly be called "the greatest anti capitalist movie".

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I think you're confusing anti-capitalism with socialist. There are plenty of people who criticize capitalist excess without being aware that the excess is fundamental to the system.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Idk how you come to that conclusion.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

You're the guy who thinks Elysium didn't have an anti-capitalist message, man, we're just trying to figure out the malfunction.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

No no no, I haven't seen it. I'm remarking about the description of it here.

The malfunction is that people with influence will always abuse it selfishly. There are ways each and every economic model exaggerate that. Addressing those problems is only really good for patching up that system rather than replacing it with new problems.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 4 weeks ago

-_________________-