Preferably with themes such as equality, openmindedness, and education.
>>63317116
But if several people from Earth moved to Elysium like at the end of the movie, wouldn't Elysium get overpopulated and become as bad as Earth?
>>63317190
I appreciate the effort, but this is a movie you'll never understand.
>>63317249
>>63317403
You sure showed me.
>>63317116
>he such a retarded hiveminded liberal he failed to realize upon conclusion its a metaphoric essay by blomkaf showing you how wrong things could go if you keep on with your current state of mind
>>63317492
I knew /pol/ deluded themselves daily but this is borderline insanity.
>>63317116
oh youre not aware that the director is a nigger hater from south africa and has watched a country be destroyed by shitskin rule first hand?
its literally an anti-immigration movie and im not joking. youre an idiot if you didnt pick up on that. he also hates spics
http://www.ew.com/article/2013/07/25/elysium-neill-blomkamp-arrest-mexico
>In 2005, a few years before Blomkamp made his feature directing debut with District 9, he was shooting a Nike commercial in San Diego when his exec producer suggested they pop down to Tijuana for the night. So they set off in a rental car and hit the main tourist drag, Avenida Revolución, at dusk, bought a couple of beers in brown paper bags, and started strolling down the street. Suddenly, two Federales (Mexican police) pulled up onto the curb. “They got out of the car, threw me onto the hood, cuffed me, took my passport, did the same to my friend and threw us into the back of the car,” Blomkamp says. “They weren’t speaking to us; they just started driving us out of the city.”
>>63317249
>Doesn't bother to address the critiscism
>>63317584
But he is right, by letting in the shitskins in the cycle is going to repeat it self.
>>63317789
Which should indicate to you any fascist system is fundamentally flawed, rather than simply a question of which race is in power.
Can you faggots stop arguing over Blomkamf and post some liberal core?
>>63317933
How 'bout no?
>>63317933
>liberal core?
so fantasy movies then?
>>63318198
Nice try faggot, I'm a liberal in the sense that I believe in freedom. Feel free to carry whatever fucking guns you want. It's when you commit a crime with your gun (or you gun is used to commit a crime) then you better watch out
>>63318307
>then you better watch out
For what? Liberal Man?
>>63317730
>>63317789
>this /pol/ delusion
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/aug/17/elysium-neill-bloomkamp-interview
>"That's good, that's what I wanted people to think," he says. "We have biological systems built into us that were very advantageous for us, up until we became a functioning civilisation 10,000 years ago. We are literally genetically coded to preserve life, procreate and get food – and that's not gonna change. The question is whether you can somehow overpower certain parts of that mammalian DNA and try to give some of your money out, try to take your wealth and pour it out for the rest of the planet."
>>63318198
The fantasy genre can qualify as long as it's revolves around equality and education.
>>63317116
I understand it perfectly, you think conservatives think only the good guys are allowed to win?
>>63317190
I think the endings supposed to be sort of bittersweet like that anyway. The film works better if you think of poverty as an all consuming disease that will spread endlessly leading to the end of humanity altogether annd that no matter what we do this fact will never change
>in universe stated reason things are shitty on earth is overpopulation
>no evil disease, not war, no unfairness, no racism, no sexism, no evil white man
>its stated things are shit because white people dont rule things anymore
>dude its totally a liberal movie
its basically the movie version of the niggers in africa attacking the ebola clinic and destroying it
http://futurism.com/mob-destroys-ebola-center-in-liberia-patients-flee-into-city/
>>63317116
can't tell if troll or not. either way, works for liberals too.
>>63317459
You sure showed him.
>>63318948
reported
>>63318557
>this /pol/ delusion
This isn't a /pol/ meme, I worked on the post-production marketing for elysium, large majorities of the screening audiences when questioned about the ending pointed out that Elysium was just going to be "ruined", "overcrowded", "overpopulated" etc like Earth was. This was the number one response across all quadrants. It was such a glaring flaw that the studio changed the ending from spaceships heading up to the station, like we saw earlier in the movie, to medical ships going down to Earth.
The /pol/ reading of the film is based on the idea that Blomkamp intended that message of the negative consequences of immigration to be the actual theme of the movie, and they endorse the movie on those grounds.
>>63319155
This sounds made up.
>>63319359
It's fact, nigga. I did not attend the screenings, but I worked on the cards.
>>63318557
>redistribution of wealth
God Liberals are so obsessed with free shit on the basis that someone merely exists.
And when the money runs out?
>>63317376
absolute shit
>>63319155
how does that ending change anything? the STATED reason in the movie for all the problems was over population not sickness. having less people die only makes the problem even worse
>>63317116
Elysium is literrally: I went to Mexico and saw hordes of immigrants, this is how your future will look like - the movie"
Hell, the director was even accused and pretty much correctly for it being a statement about the negatives of immigration.
And the end?
Society's sole solar outpost is destroyed because of fat women with bad backs.
>>63319413
Your word vs Blomkamps, forgive me if I don't believe you.
>>63319460
Less sickness actually normalizes population growth, it doesn't increase it. People have tons of kids in shitstain parts of Africa because there's a good chance you'll lose half of them to diseases.
>>63319460
>how does that ending change anything?
It changed the audience's perception that Elysium was about to overrun.
>the STATED reason in the movie for all the problems was over population not sickness. having less people die only makes the problem even worse
Most people don't make malthusian calculations like this. You can read in this thread, from OP on, the opposing view that this was a positive film about sharing wealth.
>>63319547
I don't believe I've contradicted Blomkamp, including your quote that he intended this to be a morality play about wealth. All I said was his original ending flopped hard so hard in the screenings that they changed it.
>>63319596
no industrialization normalizes growth. less sickness very much increases population because all those kids they are having are suddenly living
this is some of the most basic population statistics you could get. have you never attended a school?
overpopulation in shitskin countries in real life is literally caused by western nations importing advanced medication and health services.LITERALLY
on a completely unrelated topic. would you describe yourself as a liberal?
>>63319536
Its not about immigration though, its about the inevitable consequences of automation of production and concentrations of wealth that are currently ongoing in almost every civilization across the globe.
>>63319675
Why did it flop?
Are people so scared of movies these days that studios actually change endings all the time?
I know that I am legend also changed its ending.
Big industry hollywood needs to crash hard.
>>63319779
Eeeeeh hardly considering Europe had aristocratic regimes with a vertical power structure and still had a relatively high standard of living.
Interesting thing is that the idea of the displacement of wealth is quite similar to classic Feudal era Europe or russian collectivism and those systems failed.
Its precisely because of automation that we allow people "liberties". In the past you WERE the machine as a serf. Roman emperors banned certain philosophers from research because they were afraid that new technologies would lead to hordes of unemployed slaves.
>>63317116
>let hordes of third world savages into los angeles
>it turns into a shit hole
its perfectly understandable by conservatives
Conservitards will never truly be able to understand the beauty of this film
>>63319790
>Why did it flop?
Because after the reset of Elysium's computer system, when everyone on earth was declared a citizen, the original ending showed spaceships ascending to the station. Go back earlier in the movie and recall the ships full of sickies that were being sent up there and "homeland security" shooting them down and rounding them up. The audiences realized immediately upon viewing that if everyone on Earth has access to this place that it's just going to become an overcrowded mess like Earth below it.
>Are people so scared of movies these days that studios actually change endings all the time?
Yes, it happens all the time, if the studio intends for their film to be profitable they put it through this wringer.
>>63320003
so essentially anything deemed even remotely uncomfortable gets scratched?
No wonder movies seem so bland, they are just so cowardly.
>>63319908
>Eeeeeh hardly considering Europe had aristocratic regimes with a vertical power structure and still had a relatively high standard of living.
It doesnt matter since they arent immigrating to europe, are they?
The point of the movie is that Elysium is a bunch of greedy wealthy people who have cordoned themselves off in the ultimate gated community while wealth is drawn upward away from the unwashed masses on earth. The movie is resolved not by everyone immigrating to Elysium, but by making everyone a citizen of Elysium, thus freeing up the resources being restricted to Elysium's citizens to everyone. The movie is not about immigration.
>Its precisely because of automation that we allow people "liberties".
Its not anyones place to allow anyone else liberties, liberties are inherent in life, you can technically do what you want. The reality is your liberties are restricted by society, not allowed, and depending on how the society is arranged your liberties can be acceptably restricted (i.e. necessary protections of essential liberties at the cost of some liberties which are harmful to others), or unacceptably restricted (i.e. you are used as a farm tool by some dickweed who needs to be murdered in his sleep).
>>63320000
i hate to burst your bubble but the group that hated that movie the most was the liberal crowd
>muh yellow-face
>white people still exist in the future
also any movie with asian females tends to trigger non-asian sjw women
>>63320094
>so essentially anything deemed even remotely uncomfortable gets scratched?
hollywood will willing lose money if its to push sjw ideology (star wars is a great example)
its just when it doesnt fit the modern liberal propaganda narrative that it has to be changed
>>63320094
>so essentially anything deemed even remotely uncomfortable gets scratched?
Not necessarily. For example The Break-Up went through something like a half-dozen endings, but the ending the audience wanted and that the studio refused to give them was one where the two main characters reconciled. Presumably some of this was Aniston's doing since she was at the time going through a very public divorce with Brad Pitt, but the studio was also milking that personal tragedy in the press rounds so who knows.
>>63320200
>implying star wars will lose money
>>63320200
Just imagine
these girls
can actually cook.
And they go for everyone who isnt form their slavistan.
>>63317116
Don't even give a shit about the political "subtext" there.
The script and story was just pure shit and ruined an otherwise visually impressive film
>>63317116
Every liberals favorite.
>>63320243
lose money as in not make as much money as it could if it made some very small and minor changes like casting attractive white people
how much money movies COULD have made is actually the main things hollywood cares about since its pretty hard/impossible for a stupid to have a net lose on a movie
>>63319972
I'd give it another watch if I were you.
>>63319675
Idk, I have a hard time believing anecdotal evidence from /pol/
>>63317190
Exactly what happens. Immigration to first world countries isn't a solution to fixing poverty in the 3rd world, it is a hinderance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE&sns=em
>>63320295
But republicans are societies keks.
>>63320113
First of, no. If everyone was a citizen then they should have a right of movement as a citizen, right? Well, then if one in a million decides to go to elysium for a better life it still gets flooded. Their own choice as free citizens guarantees the demise of elysium.
and second, liberties are not inherent in life, if they were you would ask a pig for her approval to eat her which you clearly dont.
Third, if liberties are inherent then by simple statistical difference, no matter how minute, some people are naturally born more free than others therefore making them naturally more prone to acquire wealth and to stop them would be to stop their free practice.
I'm off, have to go to class.
Start using a brain for start.
Also read Adorno, Machiavelli, Friedman, Kruger, Avicenna and Averroes.
You are not capable for anything else for now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaHMgToJIjA
>destroy everything
>kill lots of people
>anything successful is by definition evil
>liberals call it ~progress~
I'll never understand a liberal
>>63320271
They're brit slags, you tourist.
>>63320295
But liberals are societies keks.
>>63320389
pathetic
>>63318307
>I'm a liberal in the sense that I believe in freedom
Believing in freedom in 2015 means you are a nazi
Since freedom inherently involves a right of self-determination of nations, cities, states, communities, etc.
The Act Of Killing / The Look Of Silence. There's been some pretty retarded threads on this very board about the subject.
>>63320366
>from /pol/
He never said he was from /pol/
Does the idea of a disagreement from a third party sit that badly with you?
>>63320436
liberals think of solutions as win-lose situation. ie feed the poor, eat the rich
conservative think of solutions as win-win situations. ie minorities would benefit and whites wouldnt be treated unfairly because of race if you got rid of affirmative action
>>63319779
Wealth has been concentrated to the few in the entire history of mankind. It's nothing new.
>>63317116
Half of those who made this film live in gated communities.
>>63320528
And it's nothing permanent either.
30 years ago the list of the top richest had several Rockefellers, now there's only 1.
Why does this movie trigger /pol/ so much?
>>63320597
Indeed. It's self adjusting. No empire last forever.
>>63320603
It's an exemplary template of Marxism.
>>63320516
liberal
>european society must pay for shitskin problems and artificially support them while not addressing the actual problem
conservative
>europeans would be better off if they werent overrun but shitskin criminals and every shitskin would be better off if we actually tried to address the root of the problem ie their shitty country
improving their own country would help every single person living in it whereas taking refugees only helps those you take and hurts everyone in both countries to some degree
programs like the peace corps seek to improve conditions in the host country and discourage shitskins from running away from their problems to get gibsmedat in white countries
>>63318307
>you better watch out
From what faggot? Whatcha gonna do about it fuckboy?
>>63320418
right of movement is a suicidal western idea
It's not a universal thing
Them being citizens of elysium doesn't automatically follow that they can all flood elysium & take advantage of the welfare there.
This state of affairs continues because the elites wish to destroy our countries/nations.
>>63320624
You Road to Serfdom brah?
brokeback mountain
>>63320653
What's wrong with Marxism?
>>63320774
>Gay cowboys
>>63317116
>Magic machine which cures all diseases
Earth was already a shithole in Elysium. What's gonna happen now that nobody is going to die?
>>63320867
It's tribalism against prosperity.
If you have 2 rocks and I have 5, technically I am the Bourgeoise. Marxism demands that instead of you just bending over to pick up 2 rocks, that I must relinquish a rock, by force if necessary.
Also the millions of dead people.
Why do americans generally think liberalism is some egalitarian left ideology? It's literally about ensuring the survival of captialism and inequality. American liberals are some of the most right wing people in the world
>>63317376
I refuse to watch Creed solely because of this uppity nignog.
>>63317601
A simple google about Blomkamp's life shows him to be a typical faggot liberal
Flees from south africa to vancouver
Marries a hideously ugly woman
No kids
Only has one "good" movie, anyways. Just an irrelevant dipshit who got lucky once.
>>63321079
Because the terms liberal and conservative are used in contrast to eachother, not as rigidly defined ideologies. That the US is further to the right than a lot of other countries is a separate issue.
>>63317601
You're a fucking idiot if you think that's the case. He probably apologized for his white privilege the whole time.
>>63321079
The Socialist Progressives hijacked the word at the turn of the century.
>>63320867
It's a denial of economics, a denial of reality, denial of how wealth works, denial of the bonds that hold peoples together, denial of the building blocks of civilization
All marxist thought is rooted in a delusion that, if only we achieve communism, we'll magically have some post-scarcity paradise
>>63321206
Nah m8, progressives maybe but they ain't socialist
>>63321185
ok maybe i did underestimate how delusional and brainwashed liberals are
>>63317116
It's an anti immigration flick, famalam
>>63320370
Well shit, now I want some gum.
>>63321292
They were simply Populists then.
>>63320418
>and second, liberties are not inherent in life, if they were you would ask a pig for her approval to eat her which you clearly dont.
Without your interference the pig would live with all its liberties intact, free to do whatever it wants to do. You are not asking the pig for approval, you are removing all of its rights by killing it and eating it. The difference is, people who believe rights are allowed by the state are bootlicking shitheads or ignorant sheep, whereas people who believe rights are inherent and voluntarily should be restricted to a certain extent for everyone's benefit are members of a social contract and ready to be responsible members of society.
>>63320528
This fact has no bearing on what the movie was about.
>>63321424
The movie wasn't "about" anything other than gimmedats being a legitimate motivation for any & all crime/violence.
They cast matt damon as the protag, to put a white face on it.
In reality, blomkamp is advocating for non-whites to murder whites + take what they own.
Of course, being a hypocritical faggot, he moved far away from where that could take place.
>>63321079
>american imperialist trying to act to make us think he is not an american
Look up John Ralws, the favorite philosopher of Bill Clinton and his anti-pareto principle. Americans are capitalist trash even when they are leftist.
Oh, and before you think you can lie that you are european, just know that classical liberal parties haven't been popular here even before the Wall fell.
>>63321424
The entire movie's premise was retarded and forced. Unless the wealthy guys in space were doing charity by not automating the assembly of robots. There was no reason outside wanting power to even have ties with earth. If they can build a space habitat I'm quite certain they can build space farms.
>>63317526
fuck yeah, mah nigga!
>>63317526
I'm a conservative and i totally understood this movie.
it wasn't exactly a subtle marxist metaphor.
>>63322815
>it wasn't exactly a subtle marxist metaphor.
are you sure you understood?
>>63317116
Elysium was a blatant liberal pro socialist healthcare, pro immigration piece of shit. The obvious political message was so heavy handed it was almost unbearable to watch.
>>63322844
the train was literally structured according to marxist theory with the proles in the back, the bourgeois up front, and the military in the middle as a buffer.
>>63322815
>>63322964
To leftists, understanding=agreement, and vice-versa. The idea that someone might understand the issues but disagree, or agree with them but not really understand why, is incomprehensible to them.
The narrative is truth and truth is the narrative, all wrapped up into one unified concept.They're convinced that they're 100% right not because the facts align with their views, but simply by virtue of having those views in the first place.
>>63322964
did you understand the role of the korean guy opening the doors?
what you describe is the "order of things" the leader at the front and the leader at the back and all people between them decided to believe. tilda swinton is kindalike blatant about it in her 7 minute speech at the beginning....
it's about pure anarchism.....
