Elysium kinda sucked.

I finally got around to seeing Elysium, so forgive me if this is old, but I have to say it kinda sucked.

I know that you have to suspend disbelief a bit, and just accept that in the future, science has figured things out. Like how to live exposed to the crushing blackness of space without an enclosure. Or how to use simple jet engines to fly in the atmosphere and then just fly to outer space. Or to re-arrange your atoms to repair bodily damage. There were about 10,000 implausible things going on at any minute...but OK. I can overlook that.

But you expect me to believe that in the future, all of humankind become complete, unfeeling A-holes? Sure sure, I get that it is commentary on our current immigration and health care policies, but give me a break. A group of people have a technology that heals people 100%, as easily as making popcorn in a microwave, and they won't share it? In fact, they build giant, autonomous hospital ships full of the machines, complete with robot doctors, and they just keep them parked. For what? Why go to the expense and effort?

Even today's 1% donate and fund charitable organizations. And even if philanthropy dies, keeping workers healthy and happy has financial rewards..which the rich certainly care about. I'm calling BS on this one. The Muppet Movie was easier to accept. And it had talking puppets!

pinchvalve wrote: Like how to live exposed to the crushing blackness of space without an enclosure.

I haven't saw this movie yet, but this is completely possible for a short period of time. Highly NOT recommended, but it is possible.

HiTempguy wrote:

pinchvalve wrote: Like how to live exposed to the crushing blackness of space without an enclosure.

I haven't saw this movie yet, but this is completely possible for a short period of time. Highly NOT recommended, but it is possible.

Yup. It's actually pretty much the exact opposite of 'crushing blackness'. You can survive for a limited amount of time (estimated around a minute or two), but it's certainly not encouraged...

pinchvalve wrote: I know that you have to suspend disbelief a bit, and just accept that in the future, science has figured things out. Like how to live exposed to the crushing blackness of space without an enclosure.

Actually, they weren't exposed to space. The idea is that the toroid rotates and a it rotates, the atmoshphere is held in (notice the high, curving side walls to keep teh atmopshpere from spilling out the sides?) by centripedal force. Basically, Elysium is a smaller version of Ringworld, from the Larry Niven novel.

Or how to use simple jet engines to fly in the atmosphere and then just fly to outer space.

Probably weren't actually jets.

But you expect me to believe that in the future, all of humankind become complete, unfeeling A-holes? Sure sure, I get that it is commentary on our current immigration and health care policies, but give me a break. A group of people have a technology that heals people 100%, as easily as making popcorn in a microwave, and they won't share it? In fact, they build giant, autonomous hospital ships full of the machines, complete with robot doctors, and they just keep them parked. For what? Why go to the expense and effort?

Possibly due to having been built in an earlier era when the ruling class did help out the underclasses, before new Apartheid type laws came into being, or more serious population explosions happened. healing everybody makes populations live longer, adding to the population problem in an overcrowded area.

Remember, this movie was done by the same person who did District 9, and being from South Africa, probably remembers the effects of Apartheid, and how the "ruling class" absolutely did try to crush the working class by treating them less than human, and not caring about their safety and well being, and indoctrinating them on how lucky they were to even have jobs (and that they could easily be replaced with the other inexpensive labor).

Ruling class humans have, in this century, treated working class humans as expendable labor. As non-citizens, as non-human, in fact. It's not a stretch to think that at some point in the future, they might do it again given the opportunity. As such, the movie is more of a warning that we still have it in us to treat each other this way.

I think it's called 'fiction'.

I saw it recently. Thought it was OK. I've heard a lot about how the film is commentary on one issue or another. I didn't particularly detect any commentary in this movie.

Chris_V wrote: did try to crush the working class by treating them less than human, and not caring about their safety and well being, and indoctrinating them on how lucky they were to even have jobs (and that they could easily be replaced with the other inexpensive labor).

Ouch. As worker drone of some sort or"mart," this hits a little close to home.

mattmacklind wrote: I saw it recently. Thought it was OK. I've heard a lot about how the film is commentary on one issue or another. I didn't particularly detect any commentary in this movie.

Did you detect commentary in District 9 , or was it just a futuristic alien tale?

pinchvalve wrote: But you expect me to believe that in the future, all of humankind become complete, unfeeling A-holes?

Why not? Just take a walk around town and you will see most people are exactly how you described

Chris_V wrote:

pinchvalve wrote: I know that you have to suspend disbelief a bit, and just accept that in the future, science has figured things out. Like how to live exposed to the crushing blackness of space without an enclosure.

Actually, they weren't exposed to space. The idea is that the toroid rotates and a it rotates, the atmoshphere is held in (notice the high, curving side walls to keep teh atmopshpere from spilling out the sides?) by centripedal force. Basically, Elysium is a smaller version of Ringworld, from the Larry Niven novel.

True but the walls would have to be 100kft high (which in this case, would close in the station completely). In the movie they appear to be a couple thousand feet high at most. That would only create pressure similar to the uppermost part of Earth's atmosphere...practically none.

As for the shoulder-launched space missiles and single stage to orbit stuff, all that could be possible with a super-energy-dense fuel...so I'm willing to overlook that.

Now presumably it takes some resources to run the hospital ships, resources that could be used to maintain the space station and build more goodies for the inhabitants. So that behavior is right in line with present-day reality.

I thought it was a good action movie but a let-down as a sci-fi movie.

pinchvalve wrote: Like how to live exposed to the crushing blackness of space without an enclosure.

Crushing is not a good word for that. More along the lines of sucking, or exploding from the inside.

Regarding social commentary: Sci-Fi has always been very big on social commentary. Take a look at almost any old Star Trek or Twilight Zone. In many cases, the whole point of Sci-Fi is to play out social situations to a theoretical extreme (e.g. the half white, half black aliens from one of the original Star Trek episodes)

Regarding the hospital ships: I haven't seen the movie, but one possibility is that the ships are very expensive to operate, and there is no way to use them on everyone (on the surface) who needs them. Opening up that possibility creates yet another social situation / problem (i.e. who lives, who dies)

stuart in mn wrote: I think it's called 'fiction'.

This.

GameboyRMH wrote:

Chris_V wrote:

pinchvalve wrote: I know that you have to suspend disbelief a bit, and just accept that in the future, science has figured things out. Like how to live exposed to the crushing blackness of space without an enclosure.

Actually, they weren't exposed to space. The idea is that the toroid rotates and a it rotates, the atmoshphere is held in (notice the high, curving side walls to keep teh atmopshpere from spilling out the sides?) by centripedal force. Basically, Elysium is a smaller version of Ringworld, from the Larry Niven novel.

True but the walls would have to be 100kft high (which in this case, would close in the station completely). In the movie they appear to be a couple thousand feet high at most. That would only create pressure similar to the uppermost part of Earth's atmosphere...practically none.

This actually points out one of the design flaws in the movie. From a distance, teh station is HUGE, easily making the4 walls high enough, as you see it poking over the horizon:

But when they get close up, the size is actually tiny, and shoulld have had houses and structures that were MUCH smaller to fit the scale of the station when seen over the horizon:

Surprised that Matt is acting in a film has a political undertones? He's been doing it as long as I've been aware of him....go back and re-watch Good Will Hunting.

^Good point on the size thing. The sizing of the station seems to be inconsistent from scene to the next. I based my size assumptions from the scenes where you can clearly make out buildings on the surface.

I haven't seen the movie, but what I've heard about it reminds me of the anime "Battle Angel Aillita"

mattmacklind wrote: I saw it recently. Thought it was OK. I've heard a lot about how the film is commentary on one issue or another. I didn't particularly detect any commentary in this movie.

Those that want to see commentary, will find commentary.

That doesn't just apply to this movie.

but the producers and actors and director and other people involved said that there was no social or political commentary going on... and if they say then, them dagnabbit, there's no political or social commentary going on...

so just pay your money, sit down, turn off your brain for a couple of hours and watch a bunch of people that claim to abhor violence in all it's forms make stuff 'splode for your entertainment.. and always remember the wise words from the MST3K theme song:

If you're wondering how he eats and breathes And other science facts, Just repeat to yourself "It's just a show, I should really just relax"

Scientific inaccuracy and political commentary in sci-fi movies? Say it ain't so!

Wayyyy back in the Dark Ages Isaac Asimov wrote the 'tie in' book for Fantastic Voyage. After the furor had died down (i.e. after the book and movie made him a ton of money ) he wrote one of his famous essays on the inaccuracies. Well worth reading.

Curmudgeon wrote: Scientific inaccuracy and political commentary in sci-fi movies? Say it ain't so! Wayyyy back in the Dark Ages Isaac Asimov wrote...

Swank Force One wrote:

mattmacklind wrote: I saw it recently. Thought it was OK. I've heard a lot about how the film is commentary on one issue or another. I didn't particularly detect any commentary in this movie.

Those that want to see commentary, will find commentary. That doesn't just apply to this movie.

A bunch of rich people who are of European descent spit on a bunch of Mexicans and kill them when they try to cross the border while keeping all the luxurious medical technology to themselves.

You're right... no political overtones could possibly come from that plot

My biggest problem with the movie was how egregiously awful Jodie Foster was in that role. Not only was every one of her words dubbed over because she couldn't do the accent, the dubbed over stuff was terrible too. Her attempts to act with the accent so consumed her performance that her mannerisms and actions left me physically embarrassed for her.

Keep in mind, we're talking about the same woman who acted THIS triumph: What the hell happened to her talent?

curtis73 wrote:

Swank Force One wrote:

mattmacklind wrote: I saw it recently. Thought it was OK. I've heard a lot about how the film is commentary on one issue or another. I didn't particularly detect any commentary in this movie.

Those that want to see commentary, will find commentary. That doesn't just apply to this movie.

A bunch of rich people who are of European descent spit on a bunch of Mexicans and kill them when they try to cross the border while keeping all the luxurious medical technology to themselves. You're right... no political overtones could *possibly* come from that plot My biggest problem with the movie was how egregiously awful Jodie Foster was in that role. Not only was every one of her words dubbed over because she couldn't do the accent, the dubbed over stuff was terrible too. Her attempts to act with the accent so consumed her performance that her mannerisms and actions left me physically embarrassed for her. Keep in mind, we're talking about the same woman who acted THIS triumph: What the hell happened to her talent?

she's a minority now- lesbian- so i think it's technically hate speech to say anything bad about her performance..

curtis73 wrote: What the hell happened to her talent?

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:

Yup. LOLing right now.

Jesus GPS, that's funny.