Skip to comments.Nineteen Eighty-Four (Special Edition)
Posted on 10/14/2020 7:27:35 PM PDT by Making_Sense [Rob W. Case]
I dont think its unusual to say that author George Orwells dystopian story of 1984 is the most intriguing, thought-provoking, frightening, and influential political work of fiction to ever hit bookshelves, media, and film. I think the reason as to why this is so, is because as human history continues to advance, we see numerous elements depicted within this story, play out in our society and in our everyday reality.
1984s Influence in Politics:
Some of the terminologies used within both the book and the film are words that have seeped into our political discourse, so much so, that they have become mainstream, regularly used, and have a lasting impression on people when one becomes acquainted with them, and observe their realities play out in the political world. Think, for example, how often you hear the terms Big-Brother, group-think, thought-crime, and newspeak discussed in our society describing a political dynamic at play. When a person observes these, and other characteristics like these in the book or the film play out in reality, it is common to describe these attributes as Orwellian. When you describe something as Orwellian, people know what you are talking about.
(Excerpt) Read more at makingsense.proboards.com ...
I remember seeing this version on TV as a child. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpGThhWTW2E
I’ve been re-reading the book, hadn’t read it since high school (wonder if any high schools still assign it?)
If an updated version were written, Oceania would be the Americas and formerly Great Britain would be part of Eurasia. The book would be set in DC rather than London In Orwell’s Anglo centric world, tying Britain to the Americas made some semblance of sense, but not today. Amazing how quickly the Brits fell from world leadership to mohammedan cucks.
The rat party desires to be Amsoc and turn the US into Oceania. The physical torture and brainwashing inflicted on Winston Smith would be commonplace here. All that stands between is Donald Trump and the 2nd Amendment.
Just read the book.
This looks like a theatrical production (seeing that it comes from Columbia Pictures). There was a BBC TV version of the story, but it, for me, was difficult to watch, mainly because the production values were so cheap and basic, that I couldn’t get into it from a dramatic standpoint. The cheapness of everything was way too distracting. The Michael Radford film has a much different feel to it. I could actually get into the drama. Suffice it to say, I bought the Blu-Ray and in its restoration, the film looked a lot “newer”. Is the 1956 version your favorite version?
I like Edmund O’Brien as an actor, but the John Heard version is more bleak and startling.
So very true in many ways. So very “on track” to the ultimate outcome. So current in regards to the dominating hardline forces within the party.
The Blu-ray of the 1984 film version features the washed-out bleak look the director wanted. You can also watch it without the Eurythmics music (which is heard in the trailer) which the director did not want. Great film. Great visualization of the novel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.