Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostfriendly
I know, we've all read the wiki article. I'm being approximate, and you're ignoring the serious issues I posted about; the gender roles in this film are as toxic as its politics.
Political assassination and terrorist bombings are not grey morality; a franchise about fighting space Nazis doesn't actually have a lot of grey morality. Hathaway's puerile ideas are presented seriously, and his supporters are presented as reasonable, thoughtful persons who never leave a man behind and (hypocritically) pray for their victims' rest before they blow them up - when these are people whose cause and methods are as morally bankrupt as Al-Qaeda's. Plenty of poor and desperate people in the real world think of Al-Qaeda as the good guys, sticking it to those horribly rich and corrupt Westerners; that does not justify Al-Qaeda's existence. The film fails because it fails to absolutely condemn this kind of terrorism, give any voice to victims of terrorism, or show the support of such terrorism for any reason as insupportable. I explicitly said in my last post that the problem was not that the Maftist's were supported, but that their support and supporters aren't condemned as blinded by poverty or insensibility into following an evil cause, or evil followers of an evil cause.
Although the Earth government are deporting persons to the colonies, that isn't worth mentioning next to Carol and Tuesday's anti-Trump satire. You'll remember that it's Trump supporters who are violently threatening the 'corrupt Washington elite' in the same way as the Maftists, with as much morality. By even suggesting that assassination is a justifiable response to political corruption, the film condemns itself. This is not a debatable case where media can present an open question, but where it has a social responsibility not to romanticise terrorists or repeat their lies.
|
The movie portrayed one socialite who has a sugar-daddy and one pilot who panicked during one moment and you cry "toxic gender roles"?
Also, instead of comparing Mafty to Al-Qaeda, Mafty is actually more comparable to the Rebel from the Andor show. The people here hate EF just as much as the people on Andor hate The Empire. Don't forget that the corruption of the EF goes way back from treating their own Earthnoid subjects like shit from the UC 0079 calendar to being responsible for the TITANS who gassed colonies killing millions which is much worse than what the Nazi did. They then became more or less totalitarian government from around UC 0090s to UC 0105 during Hathaway's event, not only deporting the people they deemed "unworthy of living on Earth" but also killing them when they see fit. Their forces was not named "Manhunter" for nothing. Hence the UC people's hate for EF government has much much
much stronger base than Al-Qeda's hate for the "US of A".
Also, say what you want, but I like that Gundam simply portray "terrorist" organizations like AEUG & Mafty as simply something that exist. They left the judgement for the audience to decide. They just show you the people inside said organizations & how they work. AEUG & Mafty do not kill civillian/non-EF higher-ups willy nilly like Al-Qaeda killing innocent civilians. They killed innocent civillians by way of collateral damage (which they didn't want to happen). Hence, it's more than natural to see members of such organization feeling guilty of said collateral damage and offer them some prayers. That's simply because no rebel effort or revolution can be done without collateral damage to innocent people. That's just the reality of it.