Cinema World Views

[USincognito]

With Robert Vaughn playing essentially the same role in "The Magnificent Seven" and "Battle Beyond the Stars."

One of the more brilliant things about an otherwise terrible movie.

 

[durangodawood]

It's not being denied. That implies people are forcibly required to live there.....

Well then by the exact same token, your representation isnt currently being denied, as no one is forcibly restraining you from moving to where your views are shared by the majority.

 

[Resha Caner]

Well then by the exact same token, your representation isnt currently being denied, as no one is forcibly restraining you from moving to where your views are shared by the majority.

That's fair.

 

[durangodawood]

That's fair.

Youre doing it wrong!

Youre supposed to fight me tooth and nail no matter what...

 

[Resha Caner]

Youre doing it wrong!

Youre supposed to fight me tooth and nail no matter what...

You have to understand that no matter the outcome, I can always spin it to say I won:
* If you're accepting the premise you stated in post #82, then you're agreeing with me that people in D.C. are not denied representation.
* If you continue to insist people in D.C. are being denied representation, then you're affirming my lack of representation.

Have you ever seen "Catch 22"? I've not, but it's a movie that is constantly referenced. I wonder what counts as the most oft referenced movie no one's ever seen?

 

[durangodawood]

... * If you continue to insist people in D.C. are being denied representation, then you're affirming my lack of representation....

That one is false, because I assert DC people are denied representation for a different reason than their preferred candidates dont win. (Your reason for claiming you lack representation, which i still reject)

They are denied representation, in my view, because they dont have a representative at all.

 

[Resha Caner]

That one is false, because I assert DC people are denied representation for a different reason than their preferred candidates dont win. (Your reason for claiming you lack representation, which i still reject)

They are denied representation, in my view, because they dont have a representative at all.

'Twas a joke, my friend. But your position does beg the question regarding what you think about lobbyists.

 

[durangodawood]

'Twas a joke, my friend. But your position does beg the question regarding what you think about lobbyists.

Because lobbyists typically have better access to my representative than I do?

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Have you ever seen "Catch 22"? I've not, but it's a movie that is constantly referenced. I wonder what counts as the most oft referenced movie no one's ever seen?

Um, it's a book by Joseph Heller, which gave English the term. Most references are likely about that, not really any movie adaptation.

 

[Resha Caner]

Because lobbyists typically have better access to my representative than I do?

Lobbyists have better access to all representatives, not just their own. As such, it is a de facto method of pressing one's view when one's "representative" doesn't. Not at the moment, but in the past I have financially supported certain lobbies.

 

[Resha Caner]

Um, it's a book by Joseph Heller, which gave English the term. Most references are likely about that, not really any movie adaptation.

I know it's a book, but the thread is about presentation of views in cinema. Further, it's very possible many people have seen the movie but not read the book, and, as such, their familiarity with the phrase is attached to the movie.

Anyway, welcome aboard. What world view elements have you noticed in film?

 

[RDKirk]

Have you ever seen "Catch 22"? I've not, but it's a movie that is constantly referenced. I wonder what counts as the most oft referenced movie no one's ever seen?

I saw the movie when it first came out. I read the book before that while I was in high school.

Apparently a remake is coming to Netflix.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Anyway, welcome aboard. What world view elements have you noticed in film?

All languages and cultures automatically come with a preset worldview. We often don't even notice it. Any movie with a love story plotline centred around the redeeming of a ne'er-do-well character, is rehashing courtly love of 11th century Provance. It is such a normal part of Western culture, that we don't even realise how odd it really is. How you will interpret events, or how it is meant to be taken, are highly dependant thereon. For instance, we look at a story of Anthony and Cleopatra and see Cleopatra as a wily sex-symbol or tinged with pathos (Elizabeth Taylor); to Romans, it would be the story of Anthony's degeneration after losing good Roman virtus, at the hands of a foreign femme fatale (as per Plutarch).

If you want underlying worldviews though, try kids movies (sorry, that is what I am mostly watching nowadays). Frozen is about rejecting the necessary fetters of society, to embrace a pluralism self-defined by each individual. It might as well be subtitled 'Do as thou Wilt' in Crowley style. It is all selfish individualism, as the villains are the guy trying to secure his country's trading rights and the one person giving leadership to the kingdom when its heir and queen both disappear. All the trouble stems from 'not being yourself' as years of hard work by Elsa to achieve self-control is depicted as wasted effort. It is not coincidence that Let it go has lyrics like "no wrong, no right, no rules for me".
Or the deep Taoist elements in the Kung Fu Panda franchise. The very name of the character Po, invokes the concept of 'uncut wood' and his wu-wei (effortless action) of the unthinking taoist sage.
Or the Objectivist critique implicit in the Incredibles; or the 18th century Tory views of the Lion King, where destruction of the class structure by the broadening thereof to include hyenas, becomes tyranny and renders the state a failure (a damning critique of demagoguery and the consequences of a 'wait and see' approach of hakuna matata, and how ruling classes must assert their position, at risk of being devoured by those beneath). Etc.
*Rewatching all these movies I have seen before with my young children, one must keep occupied somehow.*

 

[Resha Caner]

If you want underlying worldviews though, try kids movies ...

I wouldn't be surprised if the writers of those movies subscribed to such positions, but what fascinates me is that they needn't always be taken so starkly. To me it often seems more an issue of degree than kind. I don't see the evil in a "be yourself" message if it means playing the violin rather than baseball. But if "be yourself" is meant to justify alcoholism, that's a different matter.

So, in the end, it comes down to the same subjective spectrum as always.

Regardless, I think it would be fun to move on to Phase 2 of this thread. So, to do that, let me ask this: Is one of the views you noted from a kid's movie particularly objectionable? Let's redesign it.

 

[RDKirk]

All languages and cultures automatically come with a preset worldview.

It should be repeated that languages come with an implicit worldview, and I'm not sure it's possible to accurately translate information from one language to another without understanding and translating the concepts of that world view as well.

For instance, in Spanish, the phrase literally translated, "Between the sword and the wall" conceptually translates to "between a rock and a hard place," but there is a particular world view expressed by "between a sword and the wall" that does not carry through in "between a rock and a hard place."

Why is the phrase about swords and walls? What history particular to that culture brings that phrase to culturally ubiquitous colloquialism? How does that history otherwise manifest itself in the language and thus the way the people think about things?

 

[Dave-W]

Um, it's a book by Joseph Heller, which gave English the term. Most references are likely about that, not really any movie adaptation.

Read the book, never saw the movie.

 

[Resha Caner]

Why is the phrase about swords and walls?

I don't know, but it sounds more militaristic, more actively hostile. A rock is benign. So, in the English phrase it indicates one placed oneself in the bad situation, whereas the Spanish version seems more to make one the victim.

I know there is a love/hate history between Spain & North Africa due to the Christian/Muslim tension surging back and forth across Gibraltar.

But those are all just guesses. So, I don't know. Why?

 

[Resha Caner]

Let's redesign it.

No takers? I'll suggest the movie. Let's go with 'Frozen'.

Frozen is about rejecting the necessary fetters of society, to embrace a pluralism self-defined by each individual. It might as well be subtitled 'Do as thou Wilt' in Crowley style. It is all selfish individualism, as the villains are the guy trying to secure his country's trading rights and the one person giving leadership to the kingdom when its heir and queen both disappear. All the trouble stems from 'not being yourself' as years of hard work by Elsa to achieve self-control is depicted as wasted effort. It is not coincidence that Let it go has lyrics like "no wrong, no right, no rules for me".

Of course this is based on Hans Christian Andersen's The Snow Queen. Is anyone familiar enough with the original to note differences? I do know that in the original, the devil was the source of the problem through a mirror that distorted reality. I wonder if there were Norse influences, though.

Anyway, is there a way to maintain the story but change the message of individualism?

 

[RDKirk]

I don't know, but it sounds more militaristic, more actively hostile. A rock is benign. So, in the English phrase it indicates one placed oneself in the bad situation, whereas the Spanish version seems more to make one the victim.

I know there is a love/hate history between Spain & North Africa due to the Christian/Muslim tension surging back and forth across Gibraltar.

But those are all just guesses. So, I don't know. Why?

I'm just pointing out that language is more than just words with literal meanings but words that in themselves convey a view that the culture speaking that language has on the world.

The experiences a culture has had will influence its language and will reflect its worldview. And not just the vocabulary and idioms but even the structure of the grammar is a reflection of that culture's worldview.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

No takers? I'll suggest the movie. Let's go with 'Frozen'.



Of course this is based on Hans Christian Andersen's The Snow Queen. Is anyone familiar enough with the original to note differences? I do know that in the original, the devil was the source of the problem through a mirror that distorted reality. I wonder if there were Norse influences, though.

Anyway, is there a way to maintain the story but change the message of individualism?

If they didn't say it was related to Andersen's fable, no one would have guessed it. A lot of changes were brought in. Essentially in the original, the devil and his trolls make a mirror that depicts all good as ugly and bad, which shatters and fragments get lodged in people's eyes, leading them to look on everything as bad. This happens to Kai, a boy, who then gets abducted by the Snow Queen and made to try and solve a puzzle. His friend, Gerda, sets out to save him, eventually melting the mirror fragments, etc.

Nothing here is even remotely the plot of Frozen. They have elements in common; no longer plot. The trolls are even good figures.

The problem isn't individualism, but self-worship and denigration of external categories of behaviour, with a deep distrust that social accomodation is possible or even desirable. This is especcially clear in the Coronation and fall of Elsa, before she runs away from responsibility to a fabulous Ice Castle.

Introducing a 'mentor character', something like Responsibility personified, that Elsa reconciles to, would help. Like a Privy Counsellor or Regent or something. He would need to be an ambigious ally of Hans and Weselton though, before rallying to the Crown. The Deus ex Machina ending where she suddenly knows how to control powers she has been struggling with her entire life, also needs to go. It could end with signs of the thaw setting in, melting snow and such, while Elsa and her counsellor sets to work running her country, or presenting Anna as her heir to the people - before the ice-skating ending. Thus we would reconcile the tension between sisters, between duty and desire, between tradition and the individual.

But would that have been as commercially successful? I don't know. Disney's only real goal is selling merchandise, theme parks and the like, after all. Frozen is a clear-cut celebration of 'being yourself' at all costs and that those that really love you, would do so regardless what you get up to. My version would be far more ambivalent.