[removed]
Comments
[deleted] t1_iy9cmcb wrote
[deleted]
fart-debris t1_iy95n8v wrote
Yeah, the movie ain’t that complex, and is just more of a takedown of specifically Elon Musk and is another musing on how cravenly awful rich people are by Rian Johnson, which I’m more than fine with.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iy994l1 wrote
It's not a mystery movie and has no "hidden" messages. Its agenda is shouted at you. What Johnson lays out plain for you to view in the first movie and this one is his Hollywood-style loathing for rich White people. So it was easy to know just from looking at the cast list that Norton, the only White man in the new cast, and playing a rich man to boot, would be the killer (same thing with this year's Scream and the alpha White male villain in Eternals to name two other examples). Anybody who thought that he would make a female or a minority a murderer was deluded. The film devolves into nothing more than characters yelling and smashing. It's neither interesting nor clever.
The film exists only in the realm of racial politics and class hatred, not quality mysteries. It follows the exact pattern of the first movie - Blanc mentoring a female minority in a quest against a rich White force. Is this now considered quality moviemaking, where the base of most movies rests on race and class hatred?
doobur OP t1_iy9argp wrote
Do you think some of the blatant-ness of the "agenda" was actually just a self-aware nod to the fact that people will accuse the movie of having more of an agenda than it actually does?
I mean... Now that I know the meaning of the term Glass Onion... You'd think that it was a cognitive design choice to use all those archetypical elements you mentioned in the story to drive you to think it had an actual agenda... When it was actually just your pre-supposition
Throwaway_Codex t1_iy9d4ge wrote
No, it has a crystal clear racial/social agenda, as did the first movie and most movies today, for that matter. This is just shouting it at you with the glass onion metaphor. The obvious thing, the center of the onion, was Bron being the bad guy. Johnson is saying "Of course he is the killer" and dumping in tired racial victimhood tropes as well. It is not clever. It's a dreadful movie just like the first. I wonder what Johnson could do with the third movie. Now that he has followed the exact same pattern, it would be easy to figure out his plots.
The current stranglehold that racial politics have on movies means that murder mysteries or any movie with a surprise villain almost can't be done. Movies of the past few years have "diverse" cast quotas by mandate (i.e., putting Whites in the minority in ensemble casts), and anybody with sense knows that the makers will not make a minority truly evil. So in Scream 2022 for instance, they had I believe four White people in the new cast. Two were killed early and the other two were the killers.
poop-ball t1_iy9doob wrote
The only thing I’ve seen you say to back up its “racial agenda” is that the villain is white. Lmao OK. Maybe do some self-reflection if this raises your hackles so easily.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iy9e8ln wrote
Do you understand what optics in film are? The purpose of the film is to show a rich White man shutting out from his company and eventually killing a black woman who is depicted as more intelligent. Those are the racial optics that Johnson wishes to convey. Same thing with the first movie - a rich White family is dismissive of the poor hispanic nurse who is shown to be superior/cartoonishly honest. She ends up being gifted their house and fortune.
Did you even pay attention to these movies?
poop-ball t1_iy9enc6 wrote
You’re upset that minorities are portrayed in a positive light, understood.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iy9f7uc wrote
Do you think that this type of predictable "woke" racial formula is a quality base upon which to make movies?
poop-ball t1_iy9g13k wrote
I don’t know what “woke racial formula” you’re talking about. You could swap Edward Norton with Idris Elba and it wouldn’t affect the plot in any way.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iy9gldu wrote
Then you truly don't pay attention. The purpose of both movies is to show rich White people in a bad light. Do you honestly think that making Idris Elba the Miles character and, say, Matt Damon the Andi/Helen character who is portrayed as smarter than Idris would be what Johnson wants to convey?
poop-ball t1_iy9i6vu wrote
The point of the movie is that many “creative geniuses” are charlatans and that often people with exorbitant wealth didn’t earn it. So yes, I think you could make the same movie with Idris Elba and Matt Damon lmao. The fact that Helen is black and Miles is white adds subtext but it’s not the point of the film.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iy9lqww wrote
Incorrect. The racial aspect is indelible to what Johnson is doing with these movies. The idea of creative geniuses being charlatans doesn't even have a real-world reference. What super rich White techno dude is a charlatan? People jump on stupid bandwagon hate for Musk, but he's not a charlatan.
With the first one, he wanted to show White people being replaced in their home/standing by a hispanic alien, a metaphor for the larger immigration issue.
poop-ball t1_iy9qdne wrote
If you don’t think Musk both A) takes credit for creating things he didn’t create and B) attempts to manipulate society and the market for his own prosperity, then I’ve got a bridge to sell you. And it really doesn’t take much searching at all to read a litany of articles about similar charlatans. I mean, for fuck’s sake, even ignoring the Musk thing, the downfall of fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried literally just happened.
I agree the first movie clearly deals with the plight of immigrants in the United States. The threat of deportation, which is explicit in the film, is a daily real world concern for many people. But again, more than race, it’s also very clearly about the dynamics between labor and inherited wealth.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iy9vuwl wrote
At least you acknowledge the agenda of the first film (except illegal aliens should be deported, not welcomed as they currently are; it is the country that is in a plight). Maybe it'll take time for folks to recognize and call out the agenda of this latest even though it is plain as day.
poop-ball t1_iy9xuw4 wrote
You can have the last word, if you wish. But I’m asking you to really think about what it takes for someone to uproot their life and leave their home to come here. Would we not try to provide for our families if we were in their shoes? Look into the histories of the countries people are emigrating from, and specifically look at how the United States has interfered with their self-governance. I think it’s ignorant and disrespectful to dig our fingers in their proverbial pie and then swat them away when they look for crumbs.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iyaletr wrote
Tough shit. The U.S. is allowed to have a border and a culture, and cannot support this. They are being encouraged to come by not being stopped. They should be immediately turned around and those currently squatting should be removed. If they truly need to leave their country, they can go to another country that fits their culture more; the U.S. should not be the default.
poop-ball t1_iyalmqk wrote
Well, at the end of the day, at least we can both agree that you’re a fucking moron.
Throwaway_Codex t1_iyalpq0 wrote
Right back at you, shithead.
doobur OP t1_iy9mlr8 wrote
Yeah but... I kinda think that was the point. They're doing all of those things to rustle your jimmies. It's literally a joke on you haha
olddicklemon72 t1_iy96iwm wrote
As a huge fan of that particular Beatles song (primarily for the reasons you pointed out) I spent much of the runtime looking for imagery with deeper ties to the song as opposed to the quite obvious intent that you’ve discovered here.
Benoit never looking through bent back tulips was resoundingly disappointing to my dumb little brain.