I think you got the meaning of the movie wrong. Its not pro progress, there is extensive cinnemanarrative dissonance. Cesar *says* progress is great and will lead to utopia, but what do people actually get? Escalators with sparkles on them and low-density housing for the wealthy. Immortality of course for the rich, progress is certainly good for them, but not for everyday folk. Even the contents of Cesar’s words are often very empty. They quote impressive sounding people and talk a lot and very sophisticatedly, but there’s no real content there, really no better than Pulcher, though unlike Pulcher perhaps Cesar believes what he says. Even the opening of Megalopolis at the end, beforehand a big fence is shown keeping the poors out. They don’t even get the sparkle escalators, they just loose their house & get betrayed by yet another person with power.
Of course this is a wrong model of our world, but it is what I think is meant by the movie.
So it indeed is the opposite of an author tract. The only person saying what the author is thinking is the viewer at home saying “what the fuck are these people doing? They make no sense! This is all just very silly, and I don’t understand the game that’s being played here”.
I like this interpretation. I'm not sure I really buy it though. There is so little of substance in the movie that it's hard to credit the idea that Caesar's words are empty to make the point that they are empty, because there isn't anyone with any words of substance to contrast with that. If one song on an album of genius music is bad, one can argue that song is bad on purpose to make a point; but if all the music on an album is bad, that may just be because the artist is bad! There isn't anything of content anywhere to convince me that the emptiness of the ruler's words is to make a point rather than due to failure of writing.
Likewise, I have no idea if it's true that Megalopolis is low-density housing for the rich. The building is a glowing golden blob... I can't tell what it's supposed to be or what's in it. Maybe that's a super-dense tenement inside, ala the arcologies of Dredd? Maybe it's a marijuana grow house, or a mall dedicated only to Rolexes? No way to know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> it's hard to credit the idea that Caesar's words are empty to make the point that they are empty, because there isn't anyone with any words of substance to contrast with that.
I think cappola is making the same criticism of all simulacra level 3 or 4 level thought and speech, so yes because every character is a simulacra level 3 or 4 archetype they all talk in meaningless platitudes. Everyone else is filtered out of the screen by our modern eyes or turned into a speechless mob.
> Likewise, I have no idea if it's true that Megalopolis is low-density housing for the rich. The building is a glowing golden blob... I can't tell what it's supposed to be or what's in it. Maybe that's a super-dense tenement inside, ala the arcologies of Dredd? Maybe it's a marijuana grow house, or a mall dedicated only to Rolexes? No way to know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I do think the final scene is very clear on this point. Before Cesar’s ending speech there is a big protest just outside megalopolis of a bunch of people in raggy clothing shouting “where is megalopolis”, blocked from entering by a fence, and even blocked from seeing megalopolis by opaque lining over the fence. Inside megalopolis there’s… a press corp and a handful of well dressed people.
Also, another point, the conceit of the movie is its a telling of the fall of the republic, which it claims is “when the people stop believing”, which does sound like a bad thing
The concept you pull apart here is some of my fave writing you've done
I think you got the meaning of the movie wrong. Its not pro progress, there is extensive cinnemanarrative dissonance. Cesar *says* progress is great and will lead to utopia, but what do people actually get? Escalators with sparkles on them and low-density housing for the wealthy. Immortality of course for the rich, progress is certainly good for them, but not for everyday folk. Even the contents of Cesar’s words are often very empty. They quote impressive sounding people and talk a lot and very sophisticatedly, but there’s no real content there, really no better than Pulcher, though unlike Pulcher perhaps Cesar believes what he says. Even the opening of Megalopolis at the end, beforehand a big fence is shown keeping the poors out. They don’t even get the sparkle escalators, they just loose their house & get betrayed by yet another person with power.
Of course this is a wrong model of our world, but it is what I think is meant by the movie.
So it indeed is the opposite of an author tract. The only person saying what the author is thinking is the viewer at home saying “what the fuck are these people doing? They make no sense! This is all just very silly, and I don’t understand the game that’s being played here”.
hmmmmm....
I like this interpretation. I'm not sure I really buy it though. There is so little of substance in the movie that it's hard to credit the idea that Caesar's words are empty to make the point that they are empty, because there isn't anyone with any words of substance to contrast with that. If one song on an album of genius music is bad, one can argue that song is bad on purpose to make a point; but if all the music on an album is bad, that may just be because the artist is bad! There isn't anything of content anywhere to convince me that the emptiness of the ruler's words is to make a point rather than due to failure of writing.
Likewise, I have no idea if it's true that Megalopolis is low-density housing for the rich. The building is a glowing golden blob... I can't tell what it's supposed to be or what's in it. Maybe that's a super-dense tenement inside, ala the arcologies of Dredd? Maybe it's a marijuana grow house, or a mall dedicated only to Rolexes? No way to know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Still, it's a cool interpretation, ty!
> it's hard to credit the idea that Caesar's words are empty to make the point that they are empty, because there isn't anyone with any words of substance to contrast with that.
I think cappola is making the same criticism of all simulacra level 3 or 4 level thought and speech, so yes because every character is a simulacra level 3 or 4 archetype they all talk in meaningless platitudes. Everyone else is filtered out of the screen by our modern eyes or turned into a speechless mob.
> Likewise, I have no idea if it's true that Megalopolis is low-density housing for the rich. The building is a glowing golden blob... I can't tell what it's supposed to be or what's in it. Maybe that's a super-dense tenement inside, ala the arcologies of Dredd? Maybe it's a marijuana grow house, or a mall dedicated only to Rolexes? No way to know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I do think the final scene is very clear on this point. Before Cesar’s ending speech there is a big protest just outside megalopolis of a bunch of people in raggy clothing shouting “where is megalopolis”, blocked from entering by a fence, and even blocked from seeing megalopolis by opaque lining over the fence. Inside megalopolis there’s… a press corp and a handful of well dressed people.
Also, another point, the conceit of the movie is its a telling of the fall of the republic, which it claims is “when the people stop believing”, which does sound like a bad thing