Saturday, March 11, 2017

"Europa Report" versus "Elysium" in Sci Fi Cage Fight

Where "Europa Report" is immaculate, "Elysium" is filthy, physically dirty.  There are resounding differences between each of the movies as the aesthetics are only part of the contrast.

"Europa Report" seems it unfolds as an actual science mission to that moon would work.  There's nothing supernatural nor is there any gratuitous horror heebie jeebie and the result winds up a surprisingly good story in which we get to know each of the astronauts.

The Rockhouse rating for "Europa Report" is high and it's not tremendously exciting since it doesn't go at all for any gee whiz kind of thrills but the story is compelling anyway.

While "Europa Report" offers heightened realism, "Elysium" is highly stylized relative to Haves versus Have Nots in portrayal of the current age but carried out to an extreme it could conceivably achieve and in not so long.

Note:  the idea for the Elysium model was blatantly stolen from Robert Silverberg in "Ringworld" but that sort of thing never stopped Hollywood.  If you're of a mind to Google it, you will find a tremendous number of physicists and colleagues have gone to great lengths to validate whether a Ringworld type of planetoid could actually exist.

The squalid nature of the wasted Earth is contrasted repeatedly with the idyllic life of the richie beauties on the orbiting Elysium and Jodie Foster plays the Queen Fascist up there.  From that we see the Future replaced James Clapper with her and that's certainly an aesthetic improvement if not so much one in function.

"Elysium" is essentially an adventure movie but it sustains interest because of the notion the state is not us and that's been said several times in the last few days on Ithaka.  The proof is Washington has neither intention nor plan to save you from death in a nuke war.  If that's not true then please do tell me the last time you ever heard anything about Conelrad radio, construction of bomb shelters, or even so much as telling kids to duck and cover in the event of attack.  Now they don't do anything.

As I say, the state is not us and, what's more does not give one flying fuck what becomes of us.  After they're elected to Washington, they become part of the Survivors Club and nothing matters to them after that except preserving it and their status within it.

The reason for multiple references to this thinking is I don't think people fully appreciate the fact of they will survive and we won't.  What's more, they plan for that.

Ed:   the chance of anyone surviving a nuke war is zero!

Fair enough but the point of this isn't so much the science as the psychology.  There's never been a time in human existence when less than one percent of the world's population was prepared to wipe out the rest of us just so they can survive.  They say do it for us and for country but the idea is nothing more than patronizing crap when we will all be fucking dead.

I'm not sure people really get that.  All the talk of patriotism and flag waving doesn't mean anything since the patriots will end up potato chips and the heroes of the nuke war will be in some hardened bunker underground.

For me it's relatively easy to accept any idea the state regards me as an enemy since I have never thought the state regarded me as anything else.  However, it may be more difficult to accept when coming in from suburbia but keep in mind all of suburbia melts in the first round of the nukes.

All of this is a question since I really don't understand why you put up with it.  Amazingly, it doesn't make me feel safe and never has when they give the knowledge I can be fried into dust with fifteen minutes notice or less.  The military talks constantly of safety but we're fucking not safe and specifically from them.  They're the ones who own all this shit and they're the ones who will fire it.

Some of them from the Pentagon will even get to go to the hardened bunker ... but we won't.

Note:  I'm not angry or wild-eyed but I'm mystified as to why you're not.

No comments: