Things you like that have..."questionable" messages

TheIceQueen

New member
Sep 15, 2013
420
0
0
jademunky said:
Harry Potter

Basically, the whole plot revolves around stopping magic-Hitler from enacting genocide against "mud bloods" (that is those who can use magic but have at least one non-magical parent). Okay so far so good, we also find out that the good guys in that universe consider the term "mud blood" to be a horrible, bigoted slur against those who, by no fault of their own happen to have non-magical ancestry. Also good, really off to a great start in terms of having a moral message in the story.

Oh, so that means that folks like Hagrid, Dumbledoor and Maggie Smith's character are paragons of tolerance that believe in mutual coexistance and understanding between magic and non-magic folk? No! Not even a little bit. They derisively call them "muggles", keep their world hidden from them, even going so far as to mind-rape those that stumble upon them by accident. Even when it becomes clear that the non-magical world is also in danger, at no point do our heroes suggest warning the other 99% of humanity about what is coming.

I know that the story attempts to justify it with "oh but look at how Harry's uncle treats him because he is different and this means that the wizards are totally in the right about keeping themselves apart" but really, this is an argument FOR mages coming out of the enchanted closet and trying to integrate with the rest of the world. It highlights the problem of secrecy building mistrust.

Maybe the books go into greater detail and have at least one character call out the others on their bullshit. I am only familiar with the films.


Also, just about everything ever written by Robert Heinlein.
The movies are quite awful when it comes to the world lore. The books are slightly better and at least have some justification as to what's going on, but the world itself is still pretty silly. But here I go:

Wizard-Muggle relations had already reached a peak amount of distrust in the 17th century as both groups saw themselves culturally shifting away from each other along two different lines, magic and technology. Neither understood the other. Several people on both sides lashed out. Eventually, muggles started killing wizards and wizards started killing muggles as the tensions between them grew to a boiling point. It even got to the point where muggles started killing other muggles because of accusations being thrown around. For everyone's safety, as things only continued to get worse, the International Confederation of Wizards enacted a law stating that wizards have to go into hiding. Breaking this law can bring about heavy consequences, too. Some people have even gone to Azkaban, UK's wizard prison, for it. Generally, both people are also quite happy to have had this happen and both groups are now pretty isolated from each other, culturally. These shifts only continued to happen, to the point where, in the books, comedy relief in one form comes from the wizards just not understanding a single thing about technology, which is understandable. They don't need technology in any single way and often it just doesn't plain work in their world anyways. The same goes for muggles, who don't understand magic either.

It's now been quite a few centuries since the passing of this statute of secrecy and there have been several attempts to overthrow it, most notably by Voldemort. Voldemort's plot isn't to enact genocide over muggle-born wizards and muggles, though he most certainly will. It's to overthrow this secrecy law and propel the wizard world into dominance over muggles. This isn't the only attempt either. Another notable example is Grindelwald, whose initial planning stages were helped along by none other than... Dumbledore.

Yeah. Dumbledore's temple of tolerance is subverted at the final book where he admits to his weaknesses he had at an early age and that he seeks to atone for his actions, that he's a man filled with intense amount of regret. He's a champion of muggles and muggle-borns, supporting many legislation to fight for their rights and especially the latter's equality in a world that tends to treat muggle-borns as second class citizens. Championing their rights doesn't mean breaking international law and getting severely punished for it - and several people have been punished for unlawfully breaking the statute for the purposes of protest. Several exceptions are made and the muggles are warned, too, in the books. The muggle prime minister of the UK is told about what's going on and warned several times throughout the course of the timeline (and it is written in the main portion of the series). This warning, though, isn't something that can really be acted upon. It doesn't even help wizards defend themselves properly, let alone muggles. Indeed, by the middle of the final book, all of Britain's wizard population has fallen under Voldemort's regime.
 

cojo965

New member
Jul 28, 2012
1,650
0
0
So I really wanted to participate in this thread but couldn't come up with anything. Fortunately I now have one:

Godzilla 2014: sometimes to have the best results in a bad situation, you have to let it happen.

How the hell did I come to this conclusion? Any time humanity in the film tries to directly affect the monsters they make it worse. Never is this underlying message more apparent than in the climax. They constantly underestimate what all three creatures are capable of, and are punished for it. The only things humanity in Godzilla 2014 solved were the problems they made themselves.
 

generals3

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,198
0
0
I guess Lord Of War comes into mind. Where the message is basically "if i don't do it someone else will do it anyway".
 

jademunky

New member
Mar 6, 2012
973
0
0
Ice queen, I am having some trouble with the quote functions on this site.

Anyhoo, that's pretty helpful. There having been previous butthurt feelings between magic/nonmagic people actually explains quite a bit. Still seems a bit one-sided what with the wizards being able to jump back and forth at will but "muggles" being kept in the dark (plus aforementioned mind-dickery).

Personally I would like it if they expanded more on that whole "technology doesn't work" angle. What? Do electrical currents just not flow on electronic devices? But electrical currents in, say, the human brain and nervous system work just fine? What about a device like a Grand Piano? It is also technology after all. Or maybe, just maybe, I am thinking way too hard on a series meant for kids.
 

Sutter Cane

New member
Jun 27, 2010
534
0
0
Batou667 said:
Daniel Janhagen said:
Old James Bond movies/books.

Examples:
There's no such thing as a lesbian, only women that haven't met a real man.
Homosexuals (male) are evil, and cannot whistle.
Women are hysterics and need to be slapped around once in a while. Also, they're kind of useless (except for sex - see above!).
Smoking, drinking and gambling are about the coolest things you can do.
That's a bit of a cynical reading and mostly applies to the older films. The novels themselves and the Daniel Craig era films don't fall into the same category of pantomime silliness - sure, the novels are very "of their time" regarding attitudes to women and drink, but not cartoonishly so: they're not the endless romps of drunkenly backhanding women that they're sometimes described as.

My pick is Disney's Dumbo, which I re-watched for the first time since childhood about a year ago. Ye gads, it doens't stand up well to adult eyes. The plot is disjointed, it's only about half a flamin' hour long (I exaggerate, but hey), and the "moral" of the story is "You don't need to be normal to achieve success - you just need a lucrative and exploitable talent to win the respect of your former tormentors!"
Actually I would like to dispute the claim that the attitude toward women in the james bond series isn't cartoonishly awful at times. As evidence I would like to present this quote from Goldfinger

?Bond came to the conclusion that Tilly Masterton was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and 'sex equality.' As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits--barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.?
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
jademunky said:
Anyhoo, that's pretty helpful. There having been previous butthurt feelings between magic/nonmagic people actually explains quite a bit. Still seems a bit one-sided what with the wizards being able to jump back and forth at will but "muggles" being kept in the dark (plus aforementioned mind-dickery).
kids.
when you actually think about the world of Harry Potter its messed up on so many levels

-racism
-socially and technologically backwards
-lack of job prospects
-putting children in mortal danger is par for the coarse

honestly being a Muggle seems a far better deal
 

jademunky

New member
Mar 6, 2012
973
0
0
The constant endangerment of the kids is particularly hilarious. Like they have a tree who's first instinct is to demolish anything within striking distance. No fence, no nothing, just "dont' go near the tree, it'll smash you." Also, "hey you hormonally charged teenagers, gather round, lemme show you how to brew magic love potions that are morally equivalent to date-rape. But just do not use it."
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Entitled said:
Then the movie has chosen an extremely unfortunate context for itself. It's not like the writers NEEDED to tell their rant against attendance awards specifically in the form of a superhero story.p

Casual Shinji said:
Again, are we going to gloss over the fact that he killed off dozens of superheroes, sold the most dangerous weapons to any country who could buy them, put thousands of people at risk just so he could play the hero, .

I actually agree with entitled here...Syndrome is no doubt evil and I can get the message the filmakers are trying to get across

but the super hero thing and the way its handled (somone could have given Syndrome a "you were "super" all long" speech but that might have been a bit ham fisted) gives it a lot of unfortunate implications, which stand out more to some people
 

Skatologist

Choke On Your Nazi Cookies
Jan 25, 2014
628
0
21
I'm going to link something first just to add it to the conversation, because a lot of you are getting completely different morals than me on many things:
Now, I may have to go back to a lot of things to get if I got the message right, but since I played ME1, which I do think is a good game, there's just a handful of things that irk me. Extra Credits did a video on exploring the controversy on the Geth decision later in the series and which decision should actually be good or bad, but I think I can argue many things I wanted to do were Paragon but considered Renegade, or at least it being more grey than they thought. I can't name specific examples at this moment, and the ones I'm thinking of could be considered very vague, but I'm probably going to replay it within this upcoming week to say what I will.
 

Dragonlayer

Aka Corporal Yakob
Dec 5, 2013
971
0
0
Any Gears of War novel by Karen Traviss: all civilians are worthless, two-timing, shiftless scum who at best, are apathetic about the COG's heroic efforts to keep humanity alive and at worse are criminals who'd bury a blade between a soldier's shoulders to steal his rations.

I mean, I get the context of the universe is that humanity is fucked without an ultra-militaristic dictatorship and even then they are barely hanging on against the Locust, but there is not a single decent civilian character in any of the books!

Also: to hell with your family, the military is your only real family!

Captcha:LOOK AWAY

You want me to look away while on enforced COG sentry duty Captcha!? You'll get us both shot at dawn!
 

Batou667

New member
Oct 5, 2011
2,238
0
0
Sutter Cane said:
?Bond came to the conclusion that Tilly Masterton was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and 'sex equality.' As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits--barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.?
Haha, wow. I hadn't read Goldfinger, but that's a gem.
 

OneCatch

New member
Jun 19, 2010
1,111
0
0
Vault101 said:
somtimes when you think about things (songs/movies/whatever) the message...or at least the messge you seem to get seem a little...iffy
Oooh, good thread! I've got loads of these:

The Chrysalids - Ok, so you got horribly repressed by a theological and extremist society as a side effect of it's efforts to fight back against rampant mutation and radioactivity at all costs. But it's ok because now the tables are turned, you are the future, and you'll naturally displace and kill those retrograde non-telepaths!

28 Days Later - Man must overcome compassion and kill outgroup. Woman must learn compassion and romance man.

Limitless - You've been endowed with hyperintelligence? Yeah, your default state will now be that of a bloody yuppie. Fuck original intellectual endeavour.

Foundation - We are an advanced scientific foundation tasked with bringing order, science, and civilisation back to the entire galaxy. You ask if we practice critical thinking? Nah, we rely on this old dead guy who doesn't feel the need to explain himself *at all*, and whose work is completely unverifiable.

Source Code - Yeah, you've completely screwed up various other multiverses, but never mind, you get the girl (even if you've stolen the body of someone who, in that universe, would have survived anyway).

Inception - Screwing with someone's psyche is great! I mean yeah it's grossly invasive, but the guy's dad was a bit of a dick. It's helping him! I'm sure there won't be any unintended consequences - it went so well for the last person [http://xenlogic.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/inception-mal.jpg], right?

Starship Troopers:
--------------
Women can be better military pilots than men!
...It's because they're lithe and have faster reflexes and are naturally more empathic than hairy manly men

Also all the militaristic antidemocratic stuff.
--------------
Star Wars, Tolkien, etc - Moral Absolutism!


Reading through this you'd think that I really disliked all of the above, but most are among my favourite films/books - they manage to bypass any dubious message/moral input on strength of other qualities.
Here's two that I wasn't keen on at all: Never Let me Go and The Lovely Bones

In the former it just pissed me off no end that the main characters make only the most feeble effort to actually escape. The entire film seems to revolve around how much the characters supposedly love each other and blah, but apparently not enough that they'll actually, y'know, try to save each other from fucking mandatory organ harvesting. And this whole idea that they should be grateful for this 'pure' experience that they had together ('better to have loved and lost' etc) and make the most of the time they have/had? No.

The latter was a little different, but much the same general thing. The character learns, through the course of events, that anger, sadness, fear, jealousy are all somehow undesirable reactions to being brutally assaulted and murdered, and that it's far better to transcend such petty mortal impulses in favour of fleeting saccharine teen romance.
And yeah, it doesn't matter if Mr Serial-Paedo-Rapist-Murderer gets away, he'll *probably* get his comeuppance. In fact sod it, let's do away with the Police and Judiciary as well!
It's not even got the benefit of being self-sacrificing or something because she also chooses to
ensure that her remains will never be found and her killer will never be caught, something probably just a little bit upsetting to her family
.
 

jademunky

New member
Mar 6, 2012
973
0
0
Dragonlayer said:
Any Gears of War novel by Karen Traviss: all civilians are worthless, two-timing, shiftless scum who at best, are apathetic about the COG's heroic efforts to keep humanity alive and at worse are criminals who'd bury a blade between a soldier's shoulders to steal his rations.

I mean, I get the context of the universe is that humanity is fucked without an ultra-militaristic dictatorship and even then they are barely hanging on against the Locust, but there is not a single decent civilian character in any of the books!

Also: to hell with your family, the military is your only real family!
Karen Traviss is kinda weird like that. I did not read any of the Gears of War novels but if you read her Star Wars stuff, it follows a similar pattern. "Fuck those Jedi, the Mandalorians and their misunderstood ultra-militaristic society are really where it's at"
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
OneCatch said:
The Chrysalids - Ok, so you got horribly repressed by a theological and extremist society as a side effect of it's efforts to fight back against rampant mutation and radioactivity at all costs. But it's ok because now the tables are turned, you are the future, and you'll naturally displace and kill those retrograde non-telepaths!
.
is that how it ends?

I started reading but stopped about halfway when it seemed something bad was going to happen
 

Someone Depressing

New member
Jan 16, 2011
2,417
0
0
Pokemon has told me, "Drop out of school, run away from home, cram animals into tennis balls, and do all of that at the suggestion of a scientist you don't know."

"And if you're under 15, dress in what a hooker would consider tacky."

Dawn is ten. Pokemon's fanbase loves Dawn's ass. She got a panty shot. Dawn is ten.

This is some other girl. I think her name's Hilda. She's not ten, She's 18. Which is slightly better. But still. What the hell, Japan?
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,482
4,103
118
Someone Depressing said:

Dawn is ten. Pokemon's fanbase loves Dawn's ass. She got a panty shot. Dawn is ten.

This is some other girl. I think her name's Hilda. She's not ten, She's 18. Which is slightly better. But still. What the hell, Japan?
Depending on the weather, Hilda's outfit makes sense, though. Dawn is sorta rugged up, but with her legs exposed, which is weird.
 

OneCatch

New member
Jun 19, 2010
1,111
0
0
Vault101 said:
OneCatch said:
The Chrysalids - Ok, so you got horribly repressed by a theological and extremist society as a side effect of it's efforts to fight back against rampant mutation and radioactivity at all costs. But it's ok because now the tables are turned, you are the future, and you'll naturally displace and kill those retrograde non-telepaths!
.
is that how it ends?

I started reading but stopped about halfway when it seemed something bad was going to happen
Ooops, spoilers - I always assume people aren't that interested in my fairly obscure 50's science fiction!

Bad things do indeed happen - the entire second half is rather more active and fast-paced than the first.
I haven't given away any actual plotpoints though - I was more referring to the attitudes expressed in a conversation with a newly introduced character (who Wyndham uses to expound on morality and evolution), rather than the actual events.
The Chrysalids is actually my favourite Wyndham book, but I can certainly see why people object to/are disappointed by the ending - it is basically the definition of a deus ex machina, with a bit of transhumanist arrogance thrown in.
 

beastro

New member
Jan 6, 2012
564
0
0
ExDeath730 said:
MarsAtlas said:
JimB said:
Hm, what else...I guess we could say the original Star Wars trilogy, which apparently takes place in a galaxy populated by only three women (Princess Leia, Mon Mothma, and Aunt Beru) and one black dude, but that seems like kind of a low-hanging fruit, and I'm not sure it counts anyway since "Hooray for white men!" is not the message but just something he ends up saying with his casting choices.
Ironically, the Empire is supposed to have this whole "master race" thing going on, but most people never notice it because there's no real racial diversity among the Rebellion either - both diveristy among the human race, or just general sentient races. Then again, if the WWII allegory is being consistent, it kind of makes sense, given that many of the "Allies", as they're called, from WWII were pretty damn racist themselves.
Just one correction about the Empire. The "Master Race" for them is the Human Race, they are prejudiced against aliens, not against other humans.
This is why I love the EU being thrown out, now there's no canon examples of this because none are shown in Lucas' work.

Championing their rights doesn't mean breaking international law
Hehe, as if you can break something powerful nations ignore when they're not convenient.
 

Sutter Cane

New member
Jun 27, 2010
534
0
0
Batou667 said:
Haha, wow. I hadn't read Goldfinger, but that's a gem.
Yeah you might want to skip over that one for multiple reasons. On top of passages like that, there's also the fact that the villain's plan in the book version is the very same plan Bond ridicules as impossible in the film adaptation, to steal the gold from fort knox. It's probably best if you just skip ahead to Thunderball once you reach that point in the series.
 

Unia

New member
Jan 15, 2010
349
0
0
I sometimes get this feeling from works that are supposedly satire. It creeps up when I'm not sure where the satire ends and the cigar is just a cigar. It's especially true when I find the protagonist of a story appalling.

I remember reading Nikolai Gogol's Dead souls (or whatever it's translated as in English), and near the end it reveals the protagonist is a prick like it was some sort of a plot twist. My reaction was a confused "wait, were we supposed to NOT think this guy is a selfish creep from page 1?".

Then there was this book by Frederick Pohl where the protagonist cheats on his girlfriend, then viciously beats her when she gets upset about it and says something mean. He justifies it because "wolves show subservience by rolling on their backs and she should have done the same. Instead she let out a sob and shoved me on the chest". Later he intends to propose to her and thinks she will say yes. There are other points in the story that paint the guy as kinda thick but eh... Like someone already said, how many authors actually tell a story through a character they would personally despise?