The first-bad-guy-that-turns-out-not-to-be-the-true-bad-guy in Incredibles 2 is literally Guy Debord.
It's typical right-wing boomer mentality : "All those critical analyses and books with big words coming from the left, that can't be *real* reflection, it's not *real* people actually thinking, there's nothing to get from it so I don't have to think about it. They're just being manipulated by some lone individual behind the scenes who just wants power and money, like Soros and Clinton."
The Screenslaver interrupts this program for an important announcement. Don't bother watching the rest...
Nolan Young
Other urls found in this thread:
patents.google.com
ibtimes.co.uk
google.com
twitter.com
Elijah Diaz
So is he actually the bad guy or what? What Nolanesque twist do they use to make this one a shitter?
Julian Foster
he was just a manipulated nobody all along. all his stuff and speech was created by someone else.
the point is he's just a front for an individual behind the scenes, therefore all he says is irrelevant, so you don't have to think about it. even if it *sounds* like it makes sense, it's just a trick, you shouldn't fall for it. the writing is literally the boomer mentality when faced with widespread activism, such as in the 60s, or even today (even though a lot of it today is liberal).
it's not people being legitimately angry, it's just Soros funding rabble-rousing for his own agenda, and confused people falling for it because they're young.
Asher Turner
Just like when Bane was actually a spooky cult man. Who knew there would be such a twist?
Another film NOLANED.COM
Jeremiah Hall
Uphold Bane First Worldist Thought
Caleb Sanders
Every man a big guy!
Levi Robinson
Nicholas Jones
That would make sense if the person controlling him was just using him to accomplish power or something, but she actually believed all that stuff too. He was more of a proxy to avoid getting caught then some pretext to cover up an ulterior motive.
Luis Cook
This thread is such a terrible mis-representing scream for damage control…
NOWHERE in this speech is their the implication of being manipulated by some lone individual behind the scenes. The Movie has this twist, but only because it's a superhero movie where the superhero has to win.
The screenslaver's speech was correct even if the guy who said it was a mouth-piece in the final twist of the film (what are you expecting?). Americans are hung up on this idea of a super-hero, someone who'll magically save the day, and this reflects in the voting process, Many Trump fans see him as that superhero who'll magically fix all the country's problems. That's why people support him even when he's a prick, they don't think about doing it themselves and instead have a massive case of Bystander Syndrome. That's why people say socialist movements will never gain a foothold in the USA; because a socialist movement requires the support of the people, and the people are too busy with their petty squabbles and the "it doesn't affect me directly so it doesn't matter" mind-set.
This idea is not new, it's simply shown with a modern context of screens, people are just glued to their electronic devices
This same idea has been stated time and again.
Technology has surpassed our human interaction, and the world is immersed in a population of apathetic ignoramuses, too flooded with information to know what's right and what isn't.
"Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbors, films, football, beer and above all, gambling filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult.” ― George Orwell, 1984
Not only that, but "Screen-slaving" is also a patented concept: patents.google.com
And electronics do fuck your head up in general: ibtimes.co.uk
Lincoln Fisher
I didn't make the movie.
NOWHERE did I say that.
I agree. That's the point.
I'm not denying it.
Benjamin Jackson
Oh, sorry then, my misunderstanding, I thought you were claiming that screenslaver was a boomer or some shit.
Daniel Lee
Jordan Cooper
bumping this
Brayden Sanchez
The villains in the Incredibles are capitalists and the heroes are feudalists. It's the most reactionary capeshit ever excreted.
Connor Fisher
who is alexander warbucks?
Carter Ward
Alexander Warbucks doesn't exist as far as I know, frankly it's not him I care about so much as what the quote itself says.
Not really, I mean the main cop-out twist villain is, but the original screenslaver visage (the masked guy) was basically a "fuck corporate brainwashing" guy (in other words an anti capitalist), but since the Lego Movie did that and got attacked for it in the media, they copped out at the last moment with the shitty twist villain.
Hardly, most DC and Marvel comics in the past 20 years are easily far more reactionary
I agree with the feudalist assessment here actually
Dominic Jones
He dies in jail. Elastic girl is a villain all along.
Landon Miller
It's like Disney execs watched it, figured it was too woke and grimdark, and re-wrote the entire second arc of the film into dumb slapstick.
I came in thinking it would be forced feminist SJW garbage, then it turned into the best movie of the year, then it went downhill but still surpassed my initial expectations. I need to torrent it and rewatch it sometime.
The plot would be good if instead of a 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧foreign entity🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧, the dumb techie sister, being responsible for everything going wrong they actually explored the implication of a megacorp deliberately creating crime and havoc in order to sell superhero merchandise to the public, instead they went the other way and made it just a publicity stunt for superheroes to get bad rap later. But the good version of the movie probably exists as a 90s anime already.
Gabriel Jenkins
...
Jason Sullivan
Bored the hell out of me, they had a chance to make it so much more and just made it into the most illogical angsty teenage dramas yet. They just threw a bunch of references inserts in it and thought people wouldn't notice how fucking dumb its plot is. I'm going to stop before I revert into a rant because of how this movie infuriates my sense of logic.
I frankly didn't like the other spin-off films, but the Lego Movie itself was interesting to watch, at least for me, because I reflected on myself and my own imagination games as a child. The difference was that I started off with a few dozen action figures I found or got on Christmas, and had to imagine a lot harder to make up for a lack of setting setting scenery (like play sets and shit).
Wreck it Ralph is pretty decent, the second film was just fucking cringe tho, and full of Idpol. The only good thing I got out of it was pic related as a reaction image.
PS
Fuck no, you're thinking of that shitty Adam Sandler film, Pixels
PSS
Toy Story and Toy Story 2 are objectively the best "inanimate objects come to life" feature length films made.
Juan Clark
Don't forget that Syndrome from the first movie was a capitalist that wanted to seize the inborn power of heroes and supplant them with mass produced power alternatives. His revenge scheme was really an attempt at a mercantile capitalist revolution to depose the cape aristocracy.
Only through sheer publishing volume, but even then, the dominant messages of DC and Marvel are merely liberal. They're reactionary, but in the expected way for any form of mass media produced under capitalism. Their villains are anarchists and socialists, and their heroes are capitalists and cryptofascists.
The Incredibles, on the other hand, is even more reactionary because in that world even the liberals are villains. Screenslaver is a mere front for liberalism, because the main dialect is between liberalism and feudalism. Unlike DC and Marvel, anarchists and socialists don't factor in at all because the setting is SO reactionary that it can't even conceive of them.
Chase Gomez
Explain to me how the system the superheros are fighting for is feudalism? Explain how the villains are capitalist?
Is this supposedly a allegory for the peasants revolt or something?
Xavier Peterson
True, but most of them are just stereotypical baddies, that is what made Syndrome Unique, and that is the same reason that the twist ending in Incredibles 2 is so annoying, because it kills the whole point of Screen slaver and makes it a discount Syndrome.
Nope, take the Justice League Comics, just one comic is already chock full of reactionary elements on the level of class-collaborationism and "shtoopid civilians" the same goes for Suicide Squad, or Avengers, even the X-Men which had once stood for diversity and oppression of minorities has turned int oa reactionary idpol fuck-fest, far out stripping this film
No, not really. Syndrome is a Robber Baron capitalist with a false sense of equality in ability "once everyone is super, no one will be"
But he is not similar to most of the villains who are playing super-powered cops and robbers with the heroes.
I disagree. The final twist was probably created only because, to quote, "Disney execs watched it, figured it was too woke and grimdark, and re-wrote the entire second arc of the film into dumb slapstick."
And then shoved in the repeat of the Syndrome story with that unmemorable techie girl.
Had they not done this dumb twist we would get a communist.anarchist villain out of screen-slaver.
DC and Marvel haven't had those in a damn long time, especially the latter. They have some parodies of those, but only to the extent of "muh soviet nazis" and other dumb shit like that.
Superheros are like feudal knights. Syndrome, and the cop-out twist villain of Incredibles 2 are robber-baron capitalists, covertly using terror, and then using that terror to make themselves look good and thus sell their shit.
The rest of the villains are mostly just stereotypical cartoon villains who want money/fame/evil.
Isaac Bell
I want literary film analysis, not some circular logic explaining why these superheros are fighting for feudalism because they are.
Blake Ortiz
that's not what I said, all I said was that the Superheroes acted as enforcers for the rich 'lords' by being the knights and taking down the villains who were largely just people either looking to steal money or blow shit up up, in other words anarchist and leftist terorism.
watch the film, consider the idea, we're not your servants and frankly it's just a mild discussion, don't be a prick.
Joseph Gomez
Your fault for not knowing for absolute certain in your bones that a hack like Spielberg was going to do exactly what he did.
That's because it was kind of original with Toy Story, but that doesn't change the fact that "inanimate objects come to life" is commodity fetishism / spectacle realized extra literally.
Oliver Bennett
W E W
Blake Thompson
The most significant thing about this ideology IMO is the self-defeating belief that the little people can't have opinions or take actions on their own, that only through somebody with means funding them could such a thing happen.
Oliver Howard
You are falsely assuming that the writers have a materialist worldview like you do.
Honestly, the movie just fails as social commentary, even if it succeeds as mindless family entertainment. The writer himself is le enlightened centrist and likely too Burgerized to see his own ideology.
Ryan Morgan
How? I didn't go to the theatre to watch, it or pay to watch it either, it's free online.
No, no it isn't… at all. It is a multi-faceted and deep film that one can approach from several directions, but not that one. The fact that it has been commodified with films like Emoji Movie and Lego movie and shit like that doesn't make the idea itself a spectacle, you're misunderstanding the term of spectacle here.
Not entirely. If they hadn't had that cop-out in the 2nd half of the movie (likely caused by porky execs from the Disney Empire) then it would be a pretty damn good film.
Considering that it takes a fairly skilled and knowledgeable writer to write out a quote like I would think my assumption is mainly correct.
There is more than one writer and the writer cannot decide everything on their own, the producers, executives and others have final call. I would know, I've worked on that stuff before. Unless you're the guy at the top, i
Samuel Stewart
Damn that's an ugly character
Jayden Smith
subjective. Though I think that the wreck it Ralph films fucked up the face of the original Merida (as they did with every disney princess there.
Ian Baker
I don't see his they are rich lords. Do they have serfs in which they extract a tithe and a large portion of thier crops/product from the serfs? Show me where in the film they presented that characteristic of feudalism. How is the material conditions in the film is presented. Exactly how is the superheros feudal nights and are different from cops in capitalism where they get paid a wage.
So far you have presented 0 evidence where the setting is a feudal system.
Camden Robinson
it is tho. Trump visits the UK, mass protests and outrage. King Saud visits the UK, not a peep.
Thomas Turner
Brayden Campbell
Wouldn't this be more Saudi funding though? Doesn't really matter though, its all obfuscation. Every president, including Trump, has been close with the Saudis.
Andrew Wood
Charles Rodriguez
What are you responding to me for? Its well known the Saudis lobby hard in other countries and have close knit connections with corporations that either station themselves there or are financially intertwined with them. Many countries also depend on Saudi Arabia to keep oil in the middle east under control and open to them, and in exchange those countries provide arms and funding to Saudi Arabia so they can crush any surrounding opposition that conflicts with their interests. The result is that you don't hear much outcry against the Saudi's when they visit because the media and government not only suppresses it but has no interest in reporting it in a negative fashion if at all. I know I'm probably preaching to the choir here, but I'm just clarifying what I was saying
Evan Parker
Oh I know I was posting some generic corporate stuff that was semi-relevant