From director of Jack the Giant Slayer, Bryan Singer:
I don't get golden nuggets like that very often, so I like to exploit them for all they are worth when one happens to drop in my lap. The film is 100% pro-socialist, the question is, what socio-political commentary is Jack the Giant Slayer born of?
Singer's Jack the Giant Slayer continues utilizing the staples in the battleground of language in the struggle for America's soul between capitalists and socialists. As a capitalist myself, there were two “new” weapons deployed in Jack the Giant Slayer which causes me concern, but two grave mistakes which should be concerning socialists and they just happen to be the exact same thing: why this country was founded and the “self-made man.” We've seen both sides—capitalists and socialists—resorting to history for ammunition, but socialists seem to have pulled out a gun that has severely backfired on them.
Towards the end of the film, we discover that the crown which controls the giants (much more on this in a moment) later becomes the crown of King Edward; the form of government during the film, however, is feudalism, in which peasants were “tied to the land” and lived and died on the same bit of land generation after generation, retaining a bit of the fruit of their labors for themselves, but giving up most of it to the lord who owned the land, usually a gift from the monarch for some favor rendered (and everyone was either nobility or a peasant, and no one ever rose from being a peasant to the nobility unless there was a freak accident).
On the one hand, the film contends that the upper-class is bad, while on the other, Jack becomes a "farmer-boy prince" who moves into the castle, rather than Isabelle moving into the cottage. Here's a perfect example of what the film believes conflicting with what the film wants. As a young woman, Isabelle symbolizes the motherland and it's future; as a member of the nobility, she symbolizes the future of the nobility in the land; the men "attacking her" is exactly what the socialists want to do: rape the upper-class of their wealth (her bracelet one of the men see before the clip starts); the men attacking Isabelle are, by the film's standards, capitalists because "you look a little too drunk to do that" Jack tells the man who hits him, meaning he has been indulging in his "appetite" for beer:
Prior to where this clip begins, they were watching "little people" act out the story of Jack and the Beanstalk, so the audience wants you to know, when Elmont rides up behind him, that Jack is the "little person" and the nobility is the giant; this is repeated later in the film, but reversed, when Jack wears the crown and the giants appear to be bowing to Elmont but actually bow to Jack behind Elmont, which the film considers to be poetic justice. Elmont (McGregor) will literally pay for his piggishness when he's wrapped up in dough by the giant Cook and baked liked a pig in a blanket (a direct undermining of the anti-socialist story Animal Farm and referencing the anti-capitalist film Lawless that capitalists are pigs) but, because Elmont will see Jack's worth and bravery, he will be saved in the end because he reforms his own bad behavior (this also happens with the King):
This clip serves two purposes: first, it punishes Elmont; secondly, it encourages people who are of the upper-class to "join ranks" with the lower-class so this kind of thing won't happen to them, and to encourage them to see their own faults so they will want a just society to keep them from committing these faults (no, self-reform isn't an option for socialists, because everyone is mindless with no free will of their own and there is no individuality, but magically, when society becomes socialist, the government will suddenly be run by great leaders who care only for the welfare of others, not their own pockets, and everyone will sing and be kind and perfect, although they still won't have any free will or individuality or souls or anything like that).
original story of Jack and the Beanstalk (at this link), Jack goes up the beanstalk three times, first taking a bag of gold, then a hen laying golden eggs, then the golden harp. This story corresponds to the advances of capitalist wealth in getting your money (the bag of gold), and getting a "nest egg" for yourself to provide against rainy days, and the harp is meant to bring harmony to others (good public works to benefit society with your surplus); these elements of the story represent the original theories of capitalism (we can't go into here, sorry). So, in the film, Jack goes into the gaints' treasure room, and Jack sees the harp (actually, we are shown the harp twice in the film, the first time at the very start in an illustration, and then when Jack passes it by in the treasury) so the film makers want us to know that they know about the harp, but they chose to leave it out; why? They don't want harmony. Socialists want unrest so the "seeds of revenge" can grow. What does Jack take (what does he steal?)? An egg. Why? Eggs symbolize life, new life, and any highly ornate egg reminds anyone of the iconic Russian Faberge Eggs, so it sends a message of "new life the Russian way," i.e., new life the communist way (although the eggs were commissioned by the Tsars).
The last issue I want to address is one line in the film Roderick says to the giants: after they conquer Cloister, "We are going to test the Viking myth of land beyond the sea" which, of course, is America, and suggests that it was "giants" of society (the wealthy) who were the founders of America so they could exploit it for their own good. The truth is, the poor were migrating so quickly to America--they weren't leaving anything behind because they didn't have anything to leave--that the British Parliament nearly passed a law forbidding immigration because landowners couldn't find anyone to work their land or render basic services (such as metal smiths and cobblers); the poor knew America was their chance to "make it" and have a new life to attain wealth for themselves, it wasn't founded by the wealthy although many earned wealth here.
The Fine Art Diner
It’s a very traditional fairytale, probably the most traditional thing I’ve ever done. But it’ll also be a fun twist on the notion of how these tales are told... Fairytales are often borne of socio-political commentary and translated into stories for children. But what if they were based on something that really happened?.. What if we look back at the story that inspired the story that you read to your kids? That’s kind of what this movie’s about. (emphasis added)
I don't get golden nuggets like that very often, so I like to exploit them for all they are worth when one happens to drop in my lap. The film is 100% pro-socialist, the question is, what socio-political commentary is Jack the Giant Slayer born of?
Singer's Jack the Giant Slayer continues utilizing the staples in the battleground of language in the struggle for America's soul between capitalists and socialists. As a capitalist myself, there were two “new” weapons deployed in Jack the Giant Slayer which causes me concern, but two grave mistakes which should be concerning socialists and they just happen to be the exact same thing: why this country was founded and the “self-made man.” We've seen both sides—capitalists and socialists—resorting to history for ammunition, but socialists seem to have pulled out a gun that has severely backfired on them.
“Fee-Fi-Foe-Fumm, Ask not whence the thunder comes,” the line is repeated throughout the tale and deliberately changed from the original, "Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum, I smell the blood of an Englishman! Be he alive or be he dead, I'll have his bones to grind my bread." Why change this line if socialists want to instill in the audience's mind how blood-thirsty capitalists are? What does it mean? This is the second popular film examining thunder in relationship to a character, the other being Thor (Chris Hemsworth, Thor, The Avengers and Thor: The Dark World, to be released in November); whereas the Asgardian god of thunder protects the earth and symbolically examines the role of America as a super-power protecting the nations of the world, and the most proper way for us to fulfill that role, Jack the Giant Slayer correlates thunder to the giants who mean to eat humans and steal all their stuff, in other words, those who are “on top” of the social ladder of society (symbolized by the bean stalk) let loose the thunder when the “underlings” don't do as they are told, and the underlings are not to question (correlating to, "Ask not whence the thunder comes") why society is this way instead of that way (why some people are up on top like the giants and nobility, whereas others like Jack are on the bottom and can't rise to the top); the same theme will probably be explored, to a lesser or greater degree, in the upcoming film UpsideDown. |
On the one hand, the film contends that the upper-class is bad, while on the other, Jack becomes a "farmer-boy prince" who moves into the castle, rather than Isabelle moving into the cottage. Here's a perfect example of what the film believes conflicting with what the film wants. As a young woman, Isabelle symbolizes the motherland and it's future; as a member of the nobility, she symbolizes the future of the nobility in the land; the men "attacking her" is exactly what the socialists want to do: rape the upper-class of their wealth (her bracelet one of the men see before the clip starts); the men attacking Isabelle are, by the film's standards, capitalists because "you look a little too drunk to do that" Jack tells the man who hits him, meaning he has been indulging in his "appetite" for beer:
Prior to where this clip begins, they were watching "little people" act out the story of Jack and the Beanstalk, so the audience wants you to know, when Elmont rides up behind him, that Jack is the "little person" and the nobility is the giant; this is repeated later in the film, but reversed, when Jack wears the crown and the giants appear to be bowing to Elmont but actually bow to Jack behind Elmont, which the film considers to be poetic justice. Elmont (McGregor) will literally pay for his piggishness when he's wrapped up in dough by the giant Cook and baked liked a pig in a blanket (a direct undermining of the anti-socialist story Animal Farm and referencing the anti-capitalist film Lawless that capitalists are pigs) but, because Elmont will see Jack's worth and bravery, he will be saved in the end because he reforms his own bad behavior (this also happens with the King):
This clip serves two purposes: first, it punishes Elmont; secondly, it encourages people who are of the upper-class to "join ranks" with the lower-class so this kind of thing won't happen to them, and to encourage them to see their own faults so they will want a just society to keep them from committing these faults (no, self-reform isn't an option for socialists, because everyone is mindless with no free will of their own and there is no individuality, but magically, when society becomes socialist, the government will suddenly be run by great leaders who care only for the welfare of others, not their own pockets, and everyone will sing and be kind and perfect, although they still won't have any free will or individuality or souls or anything like that).
original story of Jack and the Beanstalk (at this link), Jack goes up the beanstalk three times, first taking a bag of gold, then a hen laying golden eggs, then the golden harp. This story corresponds to the advances of capitalist wealth in getting your money (the bag of gold), and getting a "nest egg" for yourself to provide against rainy days, and the harp is meant to bring harmony to others (good public works to benefit society with your surplus); these elements of the story represent the original theories of capitalism (we can't go into here, sorry). So, in the film, Jack goes into the gaints' treasure room, and Jack sees the harp (actually, we are shown the harp twice in the film, the first time at the very start in an illustration, and then when Jack passes it by in the treasury) so the film makers want us to know that they know about the harp, but they chose to leave it out; why? They don't want harmony. Socialists want unrest so the "seeds of revenge" can grow. What does Jack take (what does he steal?)? An egg. Why? Eggs symbolize life, new life, and any highly ornate egg reminds anyone of the iconic Russian Faberge Eggs, so it sends a message of "new life the Russian way," i.e., new life the communist way (although the eggs were commissioned by the Tsars).
This looks almost exactly like the egg Jack steals from the giants (although we don't know if it opens or not). Why is this important? Well, perhaps they want to mimic James Bond's device of using stolen art in their films, because this particular egg also happens to be stolen from an English jeweler just as Jack steals it in the film. Thieves broke the window of a jewellery store to get this egg, and that might be the film inciting people to break into the wealth of the giants in society (the film The Bling Ring details this very thing, as well as Now You See Me) because their wealth will give them "new life" they won't have otherwise. In the original story, Jack has to climb the bean stalk three times; Jack the Giant Slayer doesn't want you to have to work that hard, just take what you want. |
The Fine Art Diner
0 comments:
Post a Comment