MovieChat Forums > Mang jing (2003) Discussion > Anti-Socialist or Anti-Capitalist?

Anti-Socialist or Anti-Capitalist?


Interestingly, some reviewers believe that this film is anti-Capitalist (showing how Western Capitalist money has corrupted Chinese society, and suggesting that Capitalism and blind, cruel greed are intertwined), while others believe that it is anti-Socialist/Communist (the Chinese government clearly thinks so, since it saw the movie as such an act of subversion that it banned Yang Li from ever making another movie in the country).

So what do YOU think, which is it?

"Now get your patchouli stink out of my store!"

reply

[deleted]

yes.

I think it is just pointing out some of the problems in the chinese mining industry. as china grows and its demand for coal increases, there are a lot of opportunists looking to make a buck or two, and the government isnt doing anything to make sure they are following the rules (you know, the usual: lack of personnel, bribes, etc). this is why every month or so you here of a major accident in some illegal or underregulated Chinese mine that kills a hundred or two people. its a serious problem.

reply

China has one foot in the "failed communist/socialist state" grave and another on the "laissez-faire capitalistic state" banana peel. I think the movie is simply trying to show what it's like to be on the lower strata in such a schizophrenic society, and how meaningless human life can become in such a system. I think the movie is anti-greed and anti-corruption. I

reply

[deleted]

This is a really, really late reply. But it's probably really an anti-corruption film. Which occurs under all systems, I think. China seems to me to be a lot like the US was in terms of economy around the 1900s, in how there were no regulations or anything, all that mattered was money. Upton Sinclair and all that.

reply

[deleted]

people grew up in the 'free world' seem to have a habit of making everything political. but in reality, a vast majority of human activities are outside the realm of politics.

this movie, for one, is not political in the least bit.

the government dislikes it because it is way too realistic and detailed about a horrible crime. there is no functional government in the world who would like that, for two reasons;

one, it undermines the authority of the government, the sense of security of the people, and the overall stability of the society.

two, copycats. there are already too many cases like the one depicted in the movie happening even now than the government can handle. they don't want any more people to get inspiration, encouragement, or guidance from this movie, which, i would like to point out in advance in case anyone comes up with the argument, does nothing in helping preventing the crime because those who can do something about it are already fully aware of the situation and those who don't already know can't do anything.

these two reasons concern any government regardless of their political agenda. how do you think uncle sam would react if someone in the us made an expertly informative step by step movie guide about a series of successful terrorist attacks on american soil, in which no cops or feds were shown to be helpful in anyway, and the only slight relieve at the end comes entirely at the mercy of a terrorist?

reply

I think it is neither. Similar events are widespread in developing countries whatever political regime is in power. I know it would be quite believable in the Caribbean country where I lived where capitalism is so totally unconstrained that life here is like the Old Wild West.

Tragic events are more frequent and more serious in China (and in India, a capitalist country with a right-wing government) because of the huge size and population of those countries.

China has come a long way. Can you imagine such a film being made a generation ago?

The one big difference between China and where I live is the importance of, and respect shown to, education in China. In this movie the boy, one of the crooks, and other characters such as whores, all stress education as the way forward. Which is why China has raised more people out of dire poverty within two generations than every other nation in the entire history of the world and why China will continue to rise, whereas where I live education is considered a mug's game and the way forward is scamming loans and grants from First World countries in return for political subservience, which sources will dry up sooner or later.

reply