Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to the Super Champion Film Zone. We hope your visit is dope.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, creating a personal blog, feeding contents, filling the database, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
La belle verte - Movie Club 2018
Topic Started: Feb 7 2018, 10:20 PM (2,466 Views)
javierquintero
Member Avatar
Gifts must affect the receiver to the point of shock. - Walter Benjamin
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
La belle verte (1996)
Dir: Coline Serreau

Posted Image

This is a film made to reach all audiences. It has also been called a family movie. All actions are over-explained and evident. It does not leave much room to the imagination. However it might be interesting to see it as an exercise of sharing and even seeding progressive slogans, and political and environmental questions within a generic movie form.

In any moment of our lives all of us probably have mocked mass media or consumerism or any lack or eco-friendly behaviors. Some situations in the movie can be instantly called “a commonplace criticism”. However the virtue of La belle verte is to have an inventory of plenty of such elucidations even when some of them are more significant than others.

I chose it for this movie club because it deals with issues that go beyond countries and require us to take a stance in regards this planet’s future. Some reflections and thoughts on the reception process are needed. The reason why I consider it to be interesting is that through it we can have the opportunity to re-think categories and probably go beyond taste or our own academic film formation. Some movies can be labeled as “good”, “bad”, “necessary”, “unnecessary”. Some others can also be informative and/or “propagandistic” in spite of being fables. In my opinion this movie fits in the latter by trying to convince and persuade us to “do” something with it. In my case, here I am sharing it with you in the first opportunity I found. As someone said, if not for this movie club, maybe you would not stumble across this film.

Posted Image

If we all can agree that every film displays some particular politics of representation and ideology, with this specific movie I believe we can also identify a genre and a tone; there is also a series of (indirect or direct) statements, given-for-granted facts or normalized behaviours that are subverted by questions, witty dialogues, visual comedic gags and weird gestures or situations of estrangement (like the simple act of walking around a city and its institutions as if this were the first time we do it). The movie invites us to compare between a planet called The Beautiful Green that functions as a perfect and self-sustainable eco village (utopia) and Planet Earth (dystopia). But more than planet Earth, it openly questions the economic and political system by which western society is conceived and ruled. Rumor has it that this movie is banned across the European Union because of its clear stance of indignation towards politicians and institutions. Could a movie like this have the potential to become an hymn or spark for non-conformists to demonstrate or to furiously rally in the streets against politicians and bankers who have turned citizens into automata? Could a movie convince you that your country has a perfect democracy and is a paradise for Human Rights with 0% poverty?
What would a hungry average unemployed Joe from a country in default and excluded from international financial markets think about this movie?

Posted Image

As a matter of fact this film was recommended to me by a friend who actually lived in a few eco-villages and specially mentioned one called Auroville that is located in India. Maybe some of you already know it. According to him, eco-villages are ruled by similar fundamental precepts as the utopian society portrayed in the movie. As such projects of new societies really exist in our planet, this movie can also be interpreted as a manifest and a declaration of principles as an example on how our civilization should be rethought in infinite ways.

Posted Image

Posted Image

In my personal experience I took the movie as a fable to question what we already know and take for granted. It does not mean that I would like to become a farmer overnight or to go to live at an eco-village or a commune. No, but I do want to keep wondering about different types of societies and organizational systems if we artists keep researching and creating experiences of form/contents.




I would like to pose some open questions just in case someone is interested in sharing some thoughts

Do you think this movie is more a call for action and awareness than just a story?
Do you find any connections between this movie and others with a similar spirit whose findings could be as interesting or maybe more than this one?

As an open community whose members have also discussed movies with a heavy ideological and formal weight (For example some by George Cosmatos), what do you think about the content/form representations of ideologies in “La belle verte”?

Edited by javierquintero, Feb 8 2018, 04:37 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
kanafani
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I have zero interest in a collaborative coming-together project to celebrate the wonders of the universe while holding hands. I'm just going to express what I felt about the movie. If I loved it, I'll say why. If I thought it was a piece of shit, I'll try to say why as well. That has nothing to do with the person who chose the movie. We all have movies we adore that others do not care a lick for. If folks think I'm not exhuding enough positive energy and my responses are not helping, I can withdraw from the movie club with no hard feelings at all. But I completely reject the idea that we can't go negative. La belle verte is awful and will probably be the worst movie I've seen all year. No way to sugar-coat it. My apologies to Javier if that annoys him, but I'm sure he'll be fine. We're all big boys and girls here.
letterboxd
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mario Gaborovic
g legs' wife's lover
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
meg
Feb 11 2018, 03:34 AM
Lencho the way you spoke to Javier here is totally unacceptable. You are supposed to be the leader here and you have mirrored behaviour you are objecting to (emotional defensive) then upped the ante by personalising it. Maybe it is you who needs to do a meditation.
Yeah he occasionally takes things too personally, but I don't think it was anyone's idea to insult no less than Javier! I mean what prick would insult him of all persons.

Just wanna know if we're 'allowed' (for a lack of better word) to tell what we honestly think about films, or not. It's better to know. So we'd keep our mouth shut if needed.

As for me, be free to relentlessly trash my pick to any extent you want. That's how one sees what's wrong with the film which faults otherwise can't figure, you just like something from the heart but as we know - one man's treasure is another man's trash.

Edited by Mario Gaborovic, Feb 11 2018, 03:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Holymanm
Member Avatar
moats n groats
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
man, i love trashing treasure! every time i fill in my old ratings on letterboxd and get to give another canon flick a 1/5, i'm filled with glee

kanafani: i completely agree with you, actually. i'm just very canadian and am pathologically afraid of being mean to people :ermm: but as we've both said, it's nothing personal, just trashing some movies
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Holymanm
Member Avatar
moats n groats
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Good things about this movie:

- how absurdly pretty Marion Cotillard is (this positive is somewhat negated by her beauty causing her character to be abducted to another planet by one of the two insufferable idiot twins, but nonetheless, very pretty!)

Le mal:

1. Bad:

This is debatably one of the worst movies ever made, but it is almost certainly the smuggest, and without question the smarmiest. I squirmed like a cat rolling on its back tripping on acid while watching this; FUCK it was smarmy! It made me feel dirty, dirty, dirty. All of the "irony", all of the grotesque straw man setups to make humans and human progress look bad and evil and demented. People yell when someone crashes into their car, ergo all of human civilisation is folly and must be abandoned. Babies must be milked telepathically for ostensibly mutual physical sustenance. Trees must be thanked. What is this movie even trying to say? All technology is evil? But this movie was made with technology, and in the BS utopia of insufferable cavemen flipping around and laughing about how advanced they are this movie couldn't even be seen. Huh? And for that matter, there is the issue of the lipstick... but more on that later. This movie is unconscionable merde and very nearly a war crime!!

2. Hated:

This is one of my most hated movies of all time, and it is just absolutely offensive and insidiously disgusting in its ideological assault. It's very likely the most openly fascistic movie I've ever seen, and I am DISTURBED by the thought of people seeing it and thinking "fuck yeah!" Its fundamental message is simple: we're right, others are wrong, and we will do anything it takes to defeat and destroy them. The running joke throughout the movie is that it is justified to mind-rape and brainwash bad people for their politics (and it briefly mentions a civil war on 'the green planet' which apparently culminated in a genocide against all people who engaged in some of the more, or even mildly, unsavoury aspects of industrialisation). Have these people read 1984? Arendt on Totalitarianism? Any history? DON'T MIND-RAPE PEOPLE! It's not nice and eventually you wind up with a creepy all-white society of dipshit hippies who go around violently spreading their propaganda to unsuspecting victims on other planets.

Oh yes, and the issue of the lipstick... The movie (at least through the happy-go-lucky protagonist) mocks and bewilders one poor woman for... wearing... lipstick. "Are you wearing it to make people love you?" she asks. The women stammers and gives a nonplussed "well I'd never thought of it that way and I am awed by your wisdom in pointing out our hypocrisy" look, and the scene moves on.

Later on in the movie, the insufferable idiot twins see mmes. Cotillard & sister, and immediately fall in love with them, because... they're... beautiful. ...Ho hum. Anyway, this point falls under both 1. Bad and 2. Hated. 1. It's bad because it's just stupid hypocrisy, dreary juvenilia masquerading as serious philosophical critique of society. Don't mock people for trying to look beautiful and then show how it's good to look beautiful! But - and pardon me if I'm making a bit of a stretch with this second point - 2. I hate it because it is still more evil fascism! In this case, our old friend, master-race ideology. What is the message? That either you are born beautiful, one of the (literally) chosen people, and you get to go join the superior race in the utopia -- or else you are born unbeautiful (if not ugly), and you are not permitted to try to beautify yourself because you are simply not a superior individual. Remain at your station, missy! No makeup for you! (And it doesn't matter that the people in the utopia aren't necessarily attractive; totalitarianists frequently tout beauty and strength and intelligence and such while overlooking their own shortcomings...)

Posted Image
The Hitlerjugend frolic in a tribe-affirming ritual

Posted Image
The tribe congregates as one mind - dissenters will be sent to reeducation camp

Yeah I did not like this movie...
0/5
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nrh
Member Avatar
headache
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
it's been a little disheartening that so many of the films selected for this game have gone over so poorly! but it's also really nice that everyone is writing and sharing reactions; it was even more disheartening for me in the cups when very interesting films would get dismissed with a one for this - one for that post and no other writing.
notes
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mario Gaborovic
g legs' wife's lover
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
nrh
Feb 11 2018, 04:41 PM
it's been a little disheartening that so many of the films selected for this game have gone over so poorly! but it's also really nice that everyone is writing and sharing reactions; it was even more disheartening for me in the cups when very interesting films would get dismissed with a one for this - one for that post and no other writing.
Even when a film is terrific, the attention doesn't get significantly higher. Besides people who share thoughts + Ryan who never posts, you other lazybones keep follow your own agendas.

Take yourself for instance - no Indian film is shorter than 2hrs, you watch tons of them but you never find time for us. :joe:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nrh
Member Avatar
headache
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Mario Gaborovic
Feb 11 2018, 05:05 PM

Take yourself for instance - no Indian film is shorter than 2hrs, you watch tons of them but you never find time for us. :joe:
i'm really bad at keeping up with cups/clubs like this one - i really meant to the year i had a director and i totally fucked up and barely watched anything, and after that just sort of realized i'd never do a good job. i always grab and save the films for a later date though.

love that coffee emoji, don't think i've seen it hear before? it at least doesn't show up on normal clickable emoticons sidebar.
Edited by nrh, Feb 11 2018, 05:17 PM.
notes
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flip out
Member Avatar
cryptic
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Lencho of the Apes
Feb 8 2018, 07:34 AM
That word "progress" has become problematic, in the way it conflates two unrelated concepts; technological progress and progress toward a utopian (or improved) society are not the same thing. And now that technological progress in its current form has come to seem entirely unsustainable, it's definitely time to rethink the connection between the two concepts.


Isn't that what Karl Popper was saying 75 years ago? (and Lyotard much more generally in The Postmodern Condition)

Edited by flip out, Feb 11 2018, 08:32 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kanafani
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If anything, Serreau's worldview seems influenced by the writings of Rousseau, in terms of condemning the negative effects of progress and technology, and celebrating "natural man" and "the good savage". There are echoes of Voltaire's Candide and Montesquieu's Lettres persanes in the main character as well, both works where an "innocent" outsider is exposed to Western society and registers absurdities that escape the locals.
Edited by kanafani, Feb 11 2018, 10:08 PM.
letterboxd
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
javierquintero
Member Avatar
Gifts must affect the receiver to the point of shock. - Walter Benjamin
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I had some things to do but I got home again to read the comments.

I would like to make clear that my original intention was to bring this movie here because I thought it could be discussed within the context of a community conformed by world film knowledgeable people. To my surprise I have only found arguments based on taste (I like/ I dislike /I hate) and ad-hominem arguments ("..but the author has said...", "..but the author behaves likes this/that..", etc).

When Lencho asked the question of how this could be a more vibrant and exciting activity, the first thing that came to my mind was to propose curators to write an intro and to have some open questions to encourage discussions.
Bringing this movie here was an experiment on how we are discussing and what kind of arguments we are building. No more, no less. That's why I chose a movie which already deals with facts that are polarizing in "real life". Can you imagine what could happen if we ever discuss the accusations made to Harvey Wenstein or Woody Allen in this website? Of course, the more culturally diverse the more polemical and tense it gets. Would it be based on taste, ad-hominem arguments, actual justice and law, each culture's morals? Is it an exclusive debate for the US or can others have an opinion too?

This thread has been so far a very basic exercise on thought provoking and critical thinking. In that way I wanted to make it different from the matches in the Cups. I tried to make it more similar to the experience in real movie clubs or live forums/fora: you are the moderator with the microphone in front of an audience of 5 or 300 people and you must deal with consent or dissent and question them both as you pass the microphone.

I didn't feel emotionally but intellectually attacked so I demanded respect when I noticed someone was using words and ideas I never stated. That is a fundamental response and I invite everyone to do the same whenever someone modifies your words (or history) in order to state something you never said (or did).

Thanks a lot, Meg and Mario for your support and reflection on the discussion and the way it has been so far.

At this point I would like to invite other readers in this thread to make your own conclusions and judgment. This would be a great moment for start watching the movie if you still haven’t.

*****************************************************

In spite of the rough discussion which takes place in all movie clubs, some interesting ideas have been mentioned in this thread. They should be rescued and highlighted to see if by asking more questions we all have the opportunity to grow more as cinephiles and critics.


Holymann has brought some other aspects to consider. I would like to know if any user has something to comment on his post # 34. I propose these two ideas:

1. Totalitarianism derived from or related to what Holymann calls the ‘mind-rape’ action performed by Mila.
2. The idea of what ‘beauty’ is or should be according to male and female aliens.


*****************************************

Is there any user who wants to comment on Kanafani's references (Rousseau, Voltaire, Montesquieu) in post # 39 about noble men/women, all of them (if I'm not wrong) outsiders in a very strong relationship with nature to be later corrupted by Western societies' versions of 'progress' and technology?
Does any of their former societies resemble the one proposed by the aliens in La belle verte?

Edited by javierquintero, Feb 12 2018, 03:57 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
josiahmorgan11
Member Avatar
g legs' sweetheart
[ *  *  *  * ]
Not going to engage with the entire conversation that precedes this, but I am always happy to have seen any film, even one I dislike, and am always grateful to whomever exposed (unspecified) foreign work to me in the first place...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
josiahmorgan11
Member Avatar
g legs' sweetheart
[ *  *  *  * ]
There's a rather shallow Twilight Zone episode about the "beauty" idea, rather removed from the alien concept but I've always thought it mirrors the question you ask pretty closely - the whole beauty thing is derivative of placing someone as an Outsider in society which honestly is alien enough - at least in the context of Serreau's film which is clearly a parable of sorts (the best fantasy has always constructed its own world, with its own set of rules, entirely divorced from our own - or has directly grappled with the fact it can't be separated from our own), so I've left the link - some kind soul uploaded it to dailymotion - below for anyone interested.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4x2lja
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kanafani
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Javier, I take exception to your 'ad-hominem' remark. I highlighted a passage by the director-writer-star-composer(?) where she talks about the movie you chose to share with us here. The passage reveals something about her intellect and sensibilities that only reinforced my feelings about the movie. To dismiss this as 'ad-hominem' does not hold water. I've tried to engage with this movie to the best of my abilities here, and all I got from you is that I am a hypocrite, and I engage in ad-hominems. I'm a little disappointed. But anyway, let's move on.
Edited by kanafani, Feb 12 2018, 11:55 AM.
letterboxd
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Holymanm
Member Avatar
moats n groats
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
and i should clarify that i don't think the filmmaker was deliberately espousing any totalitarianist views - frankly, i don't think she is very likely smart or educated enough to realise what she is doing in the movie. really, the movie comes off like dumb left wing young people on facebook getting mad at dumb right-wing news stories and wishing they could just kick all the right wing people out of the country, as a simple solution - and don't realise that they're endorsing fascism while complaining about all right-wing people being fascists. that's what i meant. this movie seems likely to appeal to people who completely dismiss people with whom they disagree, and wish they could just kick them out of the country (or brainwash them). i mean everyone feels like that sometimes, but i hope not everyone sees that as a viable long-term practice to adopt....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
javierquintero
Member Avatar
Gifts must affect the receiver to the point of shock. - Walter Benjamin
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
kanafani
Feb 12 2018, 11:37 AM
Javier, I take exception to your 'ad-hominem' remark. I highlighted a passage by the director-writer-star-composer(?) where she talks about the movie you chose to share with us here. The passage reveals something about her intellect and sensibilities that only reinforced my feelings about the movie. To dismiss this as 'ad-hominem' does not hold water. I've tried to engage with this movie to the best of my abilities here, and all I got from you is that I am a hypocrite, and I engage in ad-hominems. I'm a little disappointed. But anyway, let's move on.
Kanafani let's let other people make their own conclusions.
As you say, let's move on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
javierquintero
Member Avatar
Gifts must affect the receiver to the point of shock. - Walter Benjamin
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
@josiah

In the Twilight zone episode besides the title/premise there is also a political aspect: the leader on TV giving a speech about that particular society as a unified society and the delight of glorious conformity. The fact that paying attention to the leader is mandatory and not a free choice also gives the main context for the represented dystopia (evidently Orwellian as a reminiscence of 1984 and Animal Farm). But, why do they mix aesthetics and politics together?
Would the story had worked well without presenting the supreme leader? Why did the show emphasized this was a unified society in regards to thought and physical appearance and many other aspects (as the leader claims)? Is beauty the quintessential manifestation of political hegemony turned into forms?
If I can get permission from Holymann to paraphrase him, in La belle verte Mila's character thinks she is in her right to "disconnect" or de-alienate people from forms and behaviors (that are in fact aesthetics and politics) in order to leave them at the mercy of aliens' aesthetics and politics. In Twilight Zone and La belle verte citizens are controlled either by government power or by mental power/super power. In regards to La belle verte what would then be the lesser of those two "evils" if earth citizens are going to be irremediably alienated and brainwashed by any of both sides anyways? Could "it depends on..." be a possible answer as well?

Edited by javierquintero, Feb 13 2018, 03:35 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mesnalty
Member Avatar
g legs' flame
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
This article about Anna Tsing's The Mushroom at the End of the World reminds me slightly of La belle verte (haven't read the Tsing book, though): https://newrepublic.com/article/123059/foraging-meaning
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
javierquintero
Member Avatar
Gifts must affect the receiver to the point of shock. - Walter Benjamin
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Thanks mesnalty. The cases exposed in the book sound promising.
It will be interesting to see how this political and environmental problems and their media representations evolve in ten or twenty years in the future. I have even heard things like "..protecting water or from water is a leftist thing!" or "..only communists care about trees" and "..only communists don't care about trees". The complexity of this subject also implies its mutability as a permanently changing paradigm in terms of representation. Supporting bullfighting, deforestation or smoking tobacco cigarettes can be as liberating or oppressive depending on representation/perception.
Edited by javierquintero, Feb 13 2018, 03:04 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
josiahmorgan11
Member Avatar
g legs' sweetheart
[ *  *  *  * ]
I don't think anybody has any right to disconnect without a complete understanding of what it would mean to be connected. Which is not to say that LBV is flawed because its character acts against my beliefs, but...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
javierquintero
Member Avatar
Gifts must affect the receiver to the point of shock. - Walter Benjamin
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I believe these are some of the main principles that configure Mila's ethics in regards to the "alienated humans". 1) She thinks she is helping those "corrupted" human beings by disconnecting them. 2) She thinks they don't know better (as if those humans were spoiled children) 3) She thinks she has a "superior consciousness" (in the same way many indigenous groups or so-called "tribes" think of us as western urbanites as "little brothers").

Josiah, I've been thinking about what you say about nobody having the right to disconnect others without the complete understanding of what means to be connected. What you say would be one of the principles from the ethics in the opposite side: 1) The right to know what is going on. 2) The right to choose if the so-called "alienated one" wants to be helped or not. 3) The right to be recognized and respected as a unique creature by any culture in the universe.
That was basically "The Matrix". Neo's character had a choice (or at least he believed he could choose). It seems Mila didn't believe in convincing about changing nor giving a choice about being disconnected or not, but simply acted according to what she thought was the right thing to do. I think I understand your point and also what Holymann refers to as mind-rape when there isn't any possibility of reasoning or negotiation. Let's suppose we are the writers of La belle verte and I have a question for us: Why does "disconnecting" or "mind-raping" seem to be the last resource for Mila in her current situation? Why doesn't she address to the law or lawmakers in order to dialogue, debate or negotiate instead?
Edited by javierquintero, Feb 13 2018, 11:52 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
josiahmorgan11
Member Avatar
g legs' sweetheart
[ *  *  *  * ]
In the context of LBV I believe this lies in a decision surrounding characterization, there's nothing dialectical about this movie at all (not even between form/content)... tbh, I'd have to rewatch the film to answer your question any further in depth. What's your own answer?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
javierquintero
Member Avatar
Gifts must affect the receiver to the point of shock. - Walter Benjamin
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It is stated in the movie that by only talking to Mila a soft-disconnection takes place and then there is the hard disconnection which is performed by the gesture using hands and head. Before leaving her planet Mila is told that after earthlings get disconnected they start to speak and act truthfully (and also it is stated that sometimes those who get disconnected come to advance five centuries as well), so it does not mean that they get mentally disabled just like Jake Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Posted Image

Mila's mission is to disconnect a group of earthlings and that's all. My question was Why not approaching influencers such as lawmakers (or even more powerful people) to dialogue and negotiate?
Well, my theory is that that would have been a much more "Take me to your leader" approach and what makes this movie special is its preference for ordinary people or middle class people and their so-called taken-for-granted and normalized routines if you prefer.

In the moment Mila tries to talk to the doctor and he is such a rude chauvinist male that does not listen to her because of his high status, she is forced to hard-disconnect him. So the first use for this resource is to force insolent and offensive people to listen. It is also a way to shock assholes to see if they get some of the essential and stop worrying about banalities.

Posted Image

Posted Image

The resource then gradually becomes overused when it is used to solve immediate problems like escaping from DDAS inspectors, policemen or to get airplane tickets and passing security without having a passport. Even some musicians from an orchestra get disconnected because of Mila’s irresponsible behaviour and clumsiness. And just as we expected the musicians to not to be able to play again and to behave like lobotomized zombies, they suddenly play virtuously and give a fun and subversive presentation. Harmless people that are only doing their jobs get disconnected yes, but then we are reminded there are no big consequences.

Posted Image

However at the end Mila insinuates that her disconnection program only brings what was asleep or forgotten inside you. So disconnecting is not about brainwashing after all, but about rescuing your old essential former self.

Posted Image
This was stated at the very end, for those who finished the movie.


About Racism

Posted Image

There is the ambiguous statement made by one of the speakers in Mila’s planet about Earthlings not overcoming hierarchies and one of them is race. As a matter of fact all people La belle verte seem to have just one race of humans. Then it’s not clear if throughout the years they suppressed races and became a single one by being a final combination of all races or by elimination of the different races. What do you viewers think about it?

Posted Image

What is clear is that the idea of “racism” exists and Mila points out that there is racism against earthlings.
Is Mila a racist? Is the movie a racist movie?


Meanwhile on Earth


Some diversity for aliens
Posted Image
Posted Image

There is the commentary about the baby whose Bosnian mother was raped by Serbians. The nurse conclusion is that neither mother and baby will be accepted by Bosnian family.

Posted Image

In just some lines there is an aggression against a woman, racism, politics, wars between neighbors/brothers. Do you viewers think this movie is exposing that reality, exploiting it, supporting those crimes or criticizing them or just referring?

Edited by javierquintero, Feb 15 2018, 12:44 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · Movie Club · Next Topic »
Add Reply