| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Sean |
Posted - 20/09/2006 : 02:10:52
Did I miss any?
Dystopia accolade
It should be self-explanatory, although no remakes or sequels. And must be about earth-derived humans (i.e., no humanoids in a galaxy far, far away etc). And it really should be self-inflicted, i.e., reduction in life-quality after a natural disaster probably shouldn't count unless the apocalypse is followed by dystopia.
Edit: Copied from Page 3, I ended up with this definition for this accolade
All of the following need to apply:-
- An imaginary society that is a conceivable progression of human society. It may be a future progression of modern society, or a lateral progression of a past human society (i.e., an alternative present.)
- The society must be relatively stable and functioning. Post-apocalyptic anarchy doesn't fall into this category.
- Most external observers would see the society as a worse place to live than where they live now; there are substantial flaws. This does not necessarily mean that those living in the fictional society are aware of anything 'wrong' with it.
- The flaws in the society are self-inflicted. E.g., oppression by man or man-made machines and perhaps tolerance of oppression, resource depletion and/or environmental degradation, denial of reality, loss of enjoyment and/or purpose etc. Alien invasion does not fall into this category. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| duh |
Posted - 01/10/2007 : 05:24:17
Finally found the right thread.
Yep, Brazil's in it.  |
| Sean |
Posted - 30/09/2007 : 10:51:06
Just added The Bothersome Man.  |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 23/10/2006 : 13:58:14
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Okay, I finally figured out the movie I was thinking of. It's called Rain Without Thunder and is probably the most scary dystopia film I've ever seen - only because with the way things are going in the USA these days, this could become a reality there!
(Yes, I'm trying to add it to the database here.)
Hmm ... sounds like a great premise, but the reviews slammed it! From what you recall, did the dystopia extend beyond the abortion issue?Anyway, it DOES have my pal Fred Forrest in it, so I guess it can't be all bad 
Nicely spotted, CL!
Well, the people who are dissing it sound like they're mostly pro-lifers who are insulted by it. Yes, it isn't a fast-paced movie and yes, it doesn't have a good soundtrack and yes, the documentary format does have its limitations. But given that, I found it totally fascinating as an insight into what could happen if certain parties get their way against Roe v Wade. And as I watch the US slowly chip away at Roe v Wade, this seems less and less fictional. Others don't get the Margarett Atwood connection (Handmaid's Tale), which I've noted in my new comment on IMDb.
But as a dystopia, it is fascinating to watch.
(And I just adore Linda Hunt - the only woman to win an Oscar for playing a role of the opposite sex, and I don't mean a role of a character who is of one sex dressing as another. She really played a man in The Year of Living Dangerously.) |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 23/10/2006 : 12:22:27
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Okay, I finally figured out the movie I was thinking of. It's called Rain Without Thunder and is probably the most scary dystopia film I've ever seen - only because with the way things are going in the USA these days, this could become a reality there!
(Yes, I'm trying to add it to the database here.)
Hmm ... sounds like a great premise, but the reviews slammed it! From what you recall, did the dystopia extend beyond the abortion issue?Anyway, it DOES have my pal Fred Forrest in it, so I guess it can't be all bad
Nicely spotted, CL!
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 23/10/2006 : 11:56:02
Okay, I finally figured out the movie I was thinking of. It's called Rain Without Thunder and is probably the most scary dystopia film I've ever seen - only because with the way things are going in the USA these days, this could become a reality there!
(Yes, I'm trying to add it to the database here.)
|
| SixFourian |
Posted - 02/10/2006 : 16:29:46
This thread reminded me of Koli's great review here.
|
| SixFourian |
Posted - 01/10/2006 : 22:07:08
O.K., I think it fits, but I'm not going to read through to check as I'm sure this thread contains a lot of films that I would enjoy. If you see it eventually, you can decide for yourself. |
| Sean |
Posted - 30/09/2006 : 12:56:22
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
but it is basically a functioning society, just one that is much more depressed and hopeless than today. It's definitely the case that many aspects of the society could be considered wrong, most notably brutality by the state.
If you were to read this whole thread and still think it fits, then it probably does. Post-apocalyptic movies aren't necessarily excluded from the accolade, some may fit if the post-apocalyptic society could be considered dystopic. So, post-apocalyptic anarchy or struggle for survival doesn't count, whereas if a totalitarian state grew following the 'apocalypse' then I'd say it's OK. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 30/09/2006 : 11:59:45
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
I think I have to agree with DT on this one. It appears to be post-apocalyptic. Sure, life has gone bad and it may have been man-made, but I'm not aware of anything significant in the post-apocalyptic society that could be considered 'wrong', ie, that could be changed for the better. I haven't seen the movie though.
BTW, Salopian, I've made an attempt at some 'rules of dystopia' on page three, third post from the bottom (the one with the bold type). You could safely go there and read that without seeing any spoilers.
Thanks. O.K., I didn't realise that you meant non-post-apocalyptic dystopia, but the film is only post-apocalyptic in feel; there has been no disastrous event that we know of. So what I consider a post-apocalyptic feel may amount to being quite similar to any dystopic situation. The only rule where there is any question whether it fits is the stability v. anarchy one, but it is basically a functioning society, just one that is much more depressed and hopeless than today. It's definitely the case that many aspects of the society could be considered wrong, most notably brutality by the state. |
| Sean |
Posted - 29/09/2006 : 22:47:22
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I haven't read the thread as I want to avoid spoilers, so I don't know whether this has been mentioned.
I have to disagree with that one, because it's about our own society in the near future facing what amounts to a natural distaster.
I think I have to agree with DT on this one. It appears to be post-apocalyptic. Sure, life has gone bad and it may have been man-made, but I'm not aware of anything significant in the post-apocalyptic society that could be considered 'wrong', ie, that could be changed for the better. I haven't seen the movie though.
BTW, Salopian, I've made an attempt at some 'rules of dystopia' on page three, third post from the bottom (the one with the bold type). You could safely go there and read that without seeing any spoilers. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 27/09/2006 : 11:47:56
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
I have to disagree with that one, because it's about our own society in the near future facing what amounts to a natural distaster.
I think it's implied that human beings have brought the infertility and decay of society upon themselves. It definitely has a post-apocalyptic feel. |
| Downtown |
Posted - 26/09/2006 : 15:51:04
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I haven't read the thread as I want to avoid spoilers, so I don't know whether this has been mentioned.
I have to disagree with that one, because it's about our own society in the near future facing what amounts to a natural distaster. |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 26/09/2006 : 14:26:10
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Can't recall whether it's already been mentioned, but Memoirs of a Survivor, based on the book by Doris Lessing and starring Julie Christie is mighty dystopic.
Sounds like a good fit. It isn't on fwfr though, so if someone adds it I'll add it to the accolade.
Okay I've added it, but don't know when it will help your accolade because it's joined a pending mountain of about 150, probably a quarter of which are un-addeds. Can't say I didn't try, Senor Penguin. 
|
| SixFourian |
Posted - 26/09/2006 : 13:59:22
I haven't read the thread as I want to avoid spoilers, so I don't know whether this has been mentioned. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 26/09/2006 : 13:24:33
This topic made me remember a movie I saw on TV and I can't for the life of me remember what it was called. Its a futuristic movie about a time when abortion in the US is so illegal its considered a Federal crime and even an abortion performed abroad can be prosecuted - the woman is considered a murderer. It was done in a documentary form with interviews of the people involved. It seems to me it was based on a play or a novel but I can't recall more than one actress from the movie. Of course, I can't remember her name, but she's a very small woman with a particularly not-beautiful face (though terribly interesting looking) who has played many character comedy roles where she's a very tough woman despite her deminutive stature (I think she even played a Judge on one TV sit-com).
Any ideas what movie this is?
|
|
|
