Hollywood's Struggle to Portray the Quiet Threat of Autocracy
The latest wave of movies to hit the silver screen often rely on explosive confrontations and action-packed sequences to draw in audiences. However, a new film, Anniversary, has sparked debate about whether this approach is sufficient in conveying the complexities of autocratic regimes.
Anniversary tells the story of a US in which an evil right-wing genius, played by a beautiful young woman, talks the country into ditching democracy through the medium of a stirring book of essays. The film's portrayal of this threat to democracy is commendable, as it presents a nuanced exploration of how language can be used to sell plurality as hostile to "togetherness" and "unity". Nevertheless, the movie falls short in its failure to provide detailed explanations of how the author's book leads to the collapse of the electoral system.
This oversight raises an important question about the role of creative industries in conveying complex issues. In the past, films like The Handmaid's Tale have effectively joined the dots between the bureaucracy that underpins such threats and highlighted their impact on society.
More recently, Alex Garland's Civil War has sparked a new wave of debate. Set in a US where three states have seceded against a strongman president in his third term, the film provides a bleak portrayal of the country's descent into chaos. However, despite its grim tone, the movie fails to fully capture the nuances of this reality.
In contrast, Paul Thomas Anderson's One Battle After Another offers a more realistic portrayal of life under a brutal military establishment hell-bent on chasing down "illegals". The film's attention to detail and commitment to exploring the complexities of such a regime make it a standout in this new wave of films.
So what can be learned from these movies? Firstly, they highlight the need for a more nuanced approach to portraying autocratic regimes. Rather than relying solely on action-packed sequences, filmmakers must delve deeper into the complexities of such threats and explore their underlying mechanisms.
Secondly, they demonstrate the importance of creative industries in conveying complex issues to audiences. By providing detailed explanations of how events unfold, these films can help shape public discourse and raise awareness about the dangers posed by autocratic regimes.
Finally, they underscore the need for a more sustained effort to explore the quieter threats that lurk beneath the surface of contemporary politics. Rather than focusing solely on explosive confrontations, filmmakers must strive to capture the subtleties of life under autocracy and convey their impact on society in a way that resonates with audiences.
The latest wave of movies to hit the silver screen often rely on explosive confrontations and action-packed sequences to draw in audiences. However, a new film, Anniversary, has sparked debate about whether this approach is sufficient in conveying the complexities of autocratic regimes.
Anniversary tells the story of a US in which an evil right-wing genius, played by a beautiful young woman, talks the country into ditching democracy through the medium of a stirring book of essays. The film's portrayal of this threat to democracy is commendable, as it presents a nuanced exploration of how language can be used to sell plurality as hostile to "togetherness" and "unity". Nevertheless, the movie falls short in its failure to provide detailed explanations of how the author's book leads to the collapse of the electoral system.
This oversight raises an important question about the role of creative industries in conveying complex issues. In the past, films like The Handmaid's Tale have effectively joined the dots between the bureaucracy that underpins such threats and highlighted their impact on society.
More recently, Alex Garland's Civil War has sparked a new wave of debate. Set in a US where three states have seceded against a strongman president in his third term, the film provides a bleak portrayal of the country's descent into chaos. However, despite its grim tone, the movie fails to fully capture the nuances of this reality.
In contrast, Paul Thomas Anderson's One Battle After Another offers a more realistic portrayal of life under a brutal military establishment hell-bent on chasing down "illegals". The film's attention to detail and commitment to exploring the complexities of such a regime make it a standout in this new wave of films.
So what can be learned from these movies? Firstly, they highlight the need for a more nuanced approach to portraying autocratic regimes. Rather than relying solely on action-packed sequences, filmmakers must delve deeper into the complexities of such threats and explore their underlying mechanisms.
Secondly, they demonstrate the importance of creative industries in conveying complex issues to audiences. By providing detailed explanations of how events unfold, these films can help shape public discourse and raise awareness about the dangers posed by autocratic regimes.
Finally, they underscore the need for a more sustained effort to explore the quieter threats that lurk beneath the surface of contemporary politics. Rather than focusing solely on explosive confrontations, filmmakers must strive to capture the subtleties of life under autocracy and convey their impact on society in a way that resonates with audiences.
movies like anniversary are trying to show us how autocracies can creep up on us without us even noticing 
the problem is, they need to do more than just tell us that something's wrong 
they gotta show us what actually happens behind closed doors 
and how language gets twisted to control people's minds 
we can't just watch a pretty girl read from a book and expect it to be enough 
. Let's tell stories that resonate on a deeper level, you know?
Instead, these movies are all like "oh wait, let me show you the complexities of this threat" and I'm just over here like... can I just have my popcorn back? 
But seriously though, I think what's cool about Anniversary is that it shows how language can be used to manipulate people. It's like, our words have power, right? 
Those books, they're like the real deal right? And how this one US president just kinda makes all these changes on his own without anyone stopping him? 
It's a bit unrealistic if you ask me. They need to be more accurate and show how people actually react under such regimes... 
. The new movie Anniversary does some cool stuff, but still doesn't really explain how things fall apart after one person writes a book that sounds all nice and persuasive... 
. Those action-packed blockbusters might get people pumped up, but they don't necessarily educate or engage audiences on a deeper level.
It's all about creating an immersive experience that leaves viewers with more questions than answers.
. We need to keep the conversation going, especially when it comes to issues that might seem obscure or hard to understand 
.
. It's all so predictable.
.
. Give me something with substance, you know? Like, how does this book of essays actually take down the electoral system? What's the real story behind it all?
. It showed us what life under a totalitarian regime looks like, and it wasn't pretty 
. And then Alex Garland's Civil War, now that was bleak 
. But even those films didn't quite nail it.
. He got into the nitty-gritty of life under a brutal regime, and it showed 
. We need more like that. Let's not just focus on the explosions and the action-packed sequences; let's get real about what life under autocracy looks like. That's the only way we'll truly understand this stuff