Posted on 03/25/2012 4:19:00 AM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32
The Hunger Games" is a rarity -- a Hollywood blockbuster that inspires political discourse. Is it a liberal movie? Is it a conservative flick? Is it both? It all depends on who you ask.
An article from the Hollywood Reporter explains how folks can see their own beliefs reflected in the story. For example, people who back the Occupy movement note that the movie and the book it is based upon feature a world divided into rich and poor. The rich are viewed as layabouts and the poor are hard-working and put upon.
Actor Penn Badgley, best known for his work on "Gossip Girl," attended the premiere with girlfriend Zoe Kravitz. Badgley remarked to New York Magazine, "It's the 1 percent (killing the kids)... I think you'd have to be blind to not see that. I was shocked to see all that in there."
-- snip --
Commenters at Free Republic, a message board dedicated to "independent, grass-roots conservatism," argue that the movie is a conservative message. "Those opposing the big-govt are the heros (sp)," one person writes. Another writes, "I would have to say that the books are essentially conservative, whether the author intended them to be or not."
(Excerpt) Read more at movies.yahoo.com ...
The article claimed the book pushes “global warming.” Is this true of the books and/or the movie?
You can not get an agenda any more communist and oppressive than the “solutions” to the false claims of man-made global warming. To give the UN and National/Regional governments control over energy and land use is to give the government total control over all income, property, industry and human life. It would figure hollywierd would name a movie anti-government while pushing Algore’s global warming agenda, too. LOL
Reading it now. The only “warming” reference is a vague note of global catastrophe (rising seas, along with other non-AGW disasters) to set up the sociopolitical context.
I am looking forward to the sequel, The Fatty Games.
The Plot: America has been destroyed by electing a totalitarian president, who is both incompetent, overspending, and fanatically embraces really stupid ideas. And while America lies in ruins, deeply in debt, the president decides to use “circuses”, if not “bread” to keep the rest of the country in line.
So he asks his equally dictatorial wife to create a games based on her equally bizarre ideas. And this is what she comes up with:
“Since everyone may only eat the ‘healthy’ food that we decide they can eat, leaving them starving weak and emaciated, what we call ‘healthy’, we will arrest those who have been traitorously eating food they want to eat instead. This will not be easy, as they will be strong, muscular and violent.
“Then we force them to fight each other, and force the winners to eat the losers! This will teach them to defy the elites, who only want what is best for everyone equally. Because we are kind, gentle, fair and much, much smarter than everyone else.”
Hollyweird is run by some very sick puppies.
Thanks for letting me know that.
The same thing happened with the movie “Children of Men.”
It was, to me, the movie clearly showed multiculturalism and post-modern thinking run amok.
leftists somehow were still able to fit their warped world-view into it regardless
Thank you! I just purchased all 3 books for under $3 for my Kindle Fire! After spending 20 minutes figuring out how to install the kobo app, I finally have it working and am able to read them. Thanks again!
I find it interesting that Spartacus was written by a communist.
When I first heard that I thought about it and didn't find it surprising.
It glorified the poor and imprisoned and preached an overthrow of the whole "system". Right up the OWS alley.
I kept thinking “This is the result of CWII, if the statists win.”
The Games are the collective punishment for rebellion that lost out to tyranny. The two Districts that are filled w/Capitol supporters (1&2), have special elite schools where selected youths (Careers) are trained intensely to win the Games and most winners for 74 years have been from these Districts. Even wilderness survival is officially denied to the Districts, with their Agenda 21-type barriers intended to keep the subjects from hunting, gathering or escaping. Katniss and Gale are essential revolutionaries, just for crossing the Barrier to find food. By doing so, they also find self-sufficiency.
I saw it as Statists vs. Individualists. The Donald Sutherland character is chilling when he states that “hope controls better than fear.” (paraphrase). That is why they have a winner, instead of just reaping 24 young people every year and putting them to immediate death.
Who owns us? Ourselves or the State? Katniss owns herself. She forces the State to expose itself, because if both tributes die and there is no winner, everyone is forced to realize there is no hope. She manages to manipulate the manipulators which is why she becomes a heroine.
Today, our youth knows which ideology is represented by Big Government. That they are so taken with this book series is encouraging. The Statists may try to spin the politics as 1% vs. 99%, in the cliched tropes of Ocuupy, but the 1% is not corporate at all. Notice that there was no commercial advertising for the televised Games. Viewing was also compulsory. The entire exercise was one huge advertisement for the power of the State.
I read Book 1 and saw the movie last night. There was no climate ideology.
However, there were Agenda 21-type barriers around the producing Districts to keep large tracts of land as wilderness. The contestants had to be schooled in basic wilderness survival techniques that Katniss had already learned by defiantly crossing the barrier to feed her mother and sister. The *arena* was a different geographic area each year. In the present Games, the arena was a hilly, forested area, one that favored Katniss, who already had experience hunting and foraging in her home District. Ironically, the Capitol, the oppressive central government, had no problem destroying the land by fire when they needed to manipulate the movements of the heroine.
The Games were collective punishment on the Districts for losing a Civil War. The Districts, except for 1 & 2 (which were urban government enclaves), were slave labor enclaves that existed to provide the central state with essentials. The visuals of District 12, Katniss’ home district, were reminiscent of Grapes of Wrath and the most poverty-stricken areas of Appalachia.
Thanks for the info. :)
Sparticus actually existed. The movie had absolutely no pro-communist message.
I presume that you have not read the Hunger Game series of books, nor are you even loosely familiar with the story line. Am I correct there? If so, I would suggest that you read them. The governmental control in the series is a mix of ancient Rome and North Korea. The final message in the end is a twist, that points out that any government with too much power will be abuse the individual, not just those with bad intentions.
The books say zip about global warming. There has been a worldwide calamity as some point that has reshaped North America, but that is all that is stated. There is a related map that was put out, and tall mountains are now under the sea, but lower areas are not. Al Gores biggest fibs would not explain that.
Yes, very similar to the running man concept, but the children of the subject districts are used and chosen from a lottery. The purpose is to reinforce the price of rebellion and the sense of helplessness.
Rome allowed representation in their Gov't.Our founding fathers looked to many Roman institutions when they wrote the Constitution.
N. Korea is the opposite.
Howard Fast belonged to the Communist Party which loves to bash all Western institutions and history (including Rome). He was called before the House un-American Activities Committee and refused to cooperate. He won the Stalin Peace Prize. The making of the movie "Spartacus" was intended to help the communists blacklisted in Hollywood to find work again.
No, I haven't read Hunger Games yet but I probably will see the movie.
I don’t think the books are conservative; they are not liberal. The books are interesting though, and can make you think about how a society can get so messed up.
The movie was unfortunately little more than a teen romance movie, cutting all the subtlety and doubt that the book revealed. The movie also made the girl a “stronger” character, more in charge of her actions, and more the heroine. They weakened the boy’s part.
In the book, the girl is more lucky than good, except she happens to have some skill with a bow.
Very limited representation during the height of the Republic. After the introduction of dictators, even that was gone.
I presume that you could say that black slaves in pre-1863 Georgia also had representation of sorts.
And, if you are in the select group in N.K., you also have some representation.
Given your ability to see a communist message in the movie Spartacus, I highly recommend that your read the books, versus the movies. Frankly, I have little hope that Hollywood can follow a plot line that makes them look bad.
And at the time, that was about as much freedom as one would have. The Spartacus rebellion was during the time of the Republic.
The Founders looked up to Rome for a reason.
Given your ability to see a communist message in the movie Spartacus, I highly recommend that your read the books
Howard Fast was a dyed in the wool communist and he had an agenda. The tearing down of western civilization and its history is the MO of such people.
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.