MovieChat Forums > Circle (2015) Discussion > Unrealistic liberal fantasy

Unrealistic liberal fantasy


Hollywood loves to push the idea that if you put a group of diverse people together of all walks of life and races, at least half of them will feel that complete strangers should sacrifice themselves for other strangers who are very different from them in every way. That isn't how the world is. Liberals love the idea but if placed in that situation they more than likely wouldn't act it out. Most wouldn't. Most people are more and more likely to sacrifice themselves the more similar to themselves the people they are sacrificing for happen to be. If this movie had only white Presbyterians from the same town standing in a circle, then the likelihood of men sacrificing for women, old for young etc....goes up. But it is still not nearly as likely as if it was one family standing in a circle. Why should a man sacrifice himself for a woman he doesn't know when he has a wife at home? Why should he sacrifice for a stranger child if he has children at home? It sounds harsh but that is reality.

reply

Yeah this movie is really pushing the liberal agenda. I think I even saw the hidden message vote for Hilary pop up.

reply

In a movie entirely about political agenda you're concerned it has political agenda.

noun
the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.

You're infusing the discussion with your own political agenda.

There were 50 individuals in a room whose decision making processes were individual and not a one of them was about modern, real-world political agenda's. One character completely abstains even from discussion. Another character, a minister, most likely abstained as well. The two major factions believed these characters were voting when they were not, hence the surprise on blonde surfer guys face when he realized there were only two people in the room voting.

You're infusing personality traits on characters because political discussion breeds political discussion breeds political discussions. There's no liberal agenda here.

Case-in-point the couple that killed each other. They voted a tie for themselves. They chose to mutually die - that had nothing to do with protecting themselves by rallying against another group of people, though they could have. Another fake-married couple did quite well voting against the rest of the group. They even address your concern when race comes up - in the end it's a bunch of white people. The "black guy" realizes directly after a muslim woman is killed that minorities are being targeted. The asian guy is picked off later - that cognitive bias is represented accurately. People do, instinctually, vote against other races or those they do not feel are similar to them. This is represented - I see no leftist equilibrium being weighed in. They even jokingly go, "Kill the black guy" because it's not only an obvious cue in a crucial moment, but instinctually it's not as hard to kill someone if they're the minority.

If the entire situation had been flipped, and it was a room full of black people left, or asians or hispanics that cognitive bias would've been there. When you seem like an outsider by race, you get wrecked, and many did.

People's choices are individual, I saw no reflection of bias. If anything I saw an accurate representation of pro-life versus pro-choice discussions being evenly split by the example of mother with child versus child, with no clear outcome displayed to be right or wrong. Pro-life pro-choice often comes down to the definition of "alive" meaning biologically alive, or sentient. At no point do they swing left or right on that equation - they sidestep it entirely by presenting not only the impasse created by the two sides, but by creating a situation in which case the proponents of both sides were corrupted by individuals using those agenda's to get their way. If they were going liberal, as you say, the mother with child would count as two lives and be encouraged to be voted in over the single child - but this does not happen. At no point is that argument expressed to be right or wrong and is entirely circumvented by a clever *beep*

You're seeing agenda where the was none.



reply

Very good point, and it's something I didn't pay enough attention to - the movie manages to present various biases and behaviors of various groups of people without an agenda. It's quite an achievement, actually.

there's a highway that is curling up like smoke above her shoulder

reply

How do you explain the unborn baby? Not very liberal when the baby is deemed alive by the writer of the script. Like the BigMac8000 said. You are infusing your discussion with your own political agenda.
You're seeing agenda where there was none.

reply

I think you are clearly missing the point of the movie. The key character never picks a side, never chooses a life to be lost and never once speaks. He simply allows nature and man to decide their own fate and in the end, he when he has no options, he chooses himself over strangers. The result is leaving the core of what "white" America is and to show who holds the power. What's interesting is that the results of the movie almost never follow a liberal storyline and yet the thing liberals bring up constantly, is what you're exhibiting. White Guilt. Describe a more conservative ending....assuming you saw the reaction in the final scene.

reply

Exactly, i didn't find the movie to have a liberal message at all. Other than the diverse cast (which is reflection of society), i don't see how it was liberal. It just showed that EVERYONE is individual. Young people can be selfish and and selfless, same with old people, black people, gay, straight, white, asian etc etc

It really just held a mirror up to society.

reply

The only UNREALISTIC thing is that they don't all start running around as soon as they wake up.

People hate being restrained, and they'd have to be to allow such a vote to take place.

But tying everyone down eliminates the possibility of self-sacrifice, and it's just messy visually.

I can accept them standing still to focus on the discussion and the puzzle they face.

reply

Considering the guy who lives is a selfish sociopath while all the idealistic self-sacrificing characters get out-maneuvered and killed, I'm gonna say your analysis is pretty off.

Death Awaits (Horror forum)
http://w11.zetaboards.com/Death_Awaits/index/

reply

Good Lord, it's exhausting watching little punk ass high school children like gra05 go on and on using words they don't understand, parroting their ignorant parents' views on things. Just makes a body tired.

-----
WORDS MEAN THINGS! Also, before you come to bitch about a plot hole, rewatch the show/movie.

reply

Liberal fantasy? LOL. You're such a swilly widdle conspiracy theorist, seeing things that aren't there.... So cute!

reply

I think a lot of extreme conservatives see a movie as liberal if it contains or primarily focuses on anything other than white men. This movie had a very diverse cast from all different strata of society and perfectly showed how everyone would have a conflict between saving themselves and others in that situation with everyone's different biases and survival strategies coming out as things progressed. I don't think this movie had any agenda at all other than to show what people will do in extreme circumstances to survive.

reply