With a name like "Happy Feet" you just KNOW it's propaganda

[QueenAdrock]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200611210008

I really hope the movie is about the penguins' homes melting away and then them being forced to eat their relatives.

[abcdefz]

One of the guys on AICN I usually like a lot sorta went off on this one, too. Saying it was anti-religion propaganda, etc.

Odd, but who knows? I haven't seen it.

...Pretzel?

[milleson]

Hey man, we're going to see it just for the reasons mentioned. My kids being hip to current events, and all.

[QueenAdrock]

I didn't want to see it before, but now I do just to see what all the hype is! It's funny when things backfire like that. Getting people interested with "negative" publicity.

So I wonder if the penguins get together and burn a bunch of Bibles they stole from the Natives, if it's anti-religion. HMMM.

[milleson]

I was under the influence that the movie was more about a penguin who was different overcoming adversity.

[abcdefz]

Here's Massawyrm's take (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/30704?semperex-search)



From AICN:

....Well what if I were to tell you that the overall metaphor, that the overall themes of Happy Feet are that of A) there is nothing wrong with individuality, that society can actually benefit from it, B) the ecological devastation unknowingly caused by man on the environment and the need to stop it, C) the evils of keeping animals in captivity, D) it being okay to defy your elders for the sake of “the truth” and, oh yeah, E) The evils of religion. Wait, what? Back up a second. Did I read that right? The…evils…of religion?

Okay, here’s the part where you tell me I’m crazy. Here’s the part you think I’m reading too much into a fucking kids movie. Here’s the part where I politely tell you to fuck right the hell off. Because I’ve actually seen it and that is EXACTLY what this movie is about. Happy Feet is a film about the dangers and evils of religion in the face of open-minded liberal thought.

Okay, okay. Wait a minute. Let me take that back. I don’t want to say Liberal thought. Because I know a lot of liberals. I have many great friends who are liberal, who hold very well thought out, respectable beliefs. Calling this Liberal is like those people that call Pat Robertson a conservative. Real conservatives cringe at that statement. No, he is an ultra right wing Christian neo conservative who teaches the word of Christ out of one side of his mouth and then calls openly for the public assassination of the democratically elected leader of a sovereign nation out of the other. No. Real conservatives stand as far away from that scary goon as humanly possible. Happy Feet is the Liberal Pat Robertson. Happy feet is liberal like that unwashed hippie wearing the Look to the skies T-shirt that climbs and handcuffs himself to a tree to prevent someone from knocking down a forest on their own land. It’s the kind of liberal Ann Coulter paints every liberal as. That’s closer to the kind of liberal who wrote this half-baked, poorly constructed piece of ultra-hippie, atheist, eco-extremist garbage....

[QueenAdrock]

I was under the influence that the movie was more about a penguin who was different overcoming adversity.

Those communists. :mad:

[QueenAdrock]

But that still doesn't explain HOW it's anti-religion.

Oh man I gots to see it now.

[abcdefz]

But that still doesn't explain HOW it's anti-religion.






Yeah -- I linked to the entire article, in case anyone cared.



More:

....Raise your hand if you know that this film is about a dancing penguin. Okay, all of you. Now keep it raised if you know that said dancing penguin gets kicked out of his community for dancing rather than singing. Okay, slightly less than before. Good, good. Not too many spoilers in the trailer. Now keep your hand raised if you know that said penguin is kicked out of the community by the town elder for Heresy against the Great Penguin in the Sky.

Huh? None of you? Really? You didn’t know that they ask him to recant his belief in aliens and his belief that it’s okay to dance despite being against the ways taught to the people by the Great Penguin in the Sky? What? You think I’m making that up? Think again. They never use the word Heresy and I believe the word they used was “Renounce” not “Recant.” But the context is about as plain as day.

You see, the penguins are starving. Almost to death. After talking to a predator sea bird that tries to eat him, our hero, Mumble, hears that there are aliens that abduct birds, probe them, then leave bright yellow tags on their legs to remind them of their abduction. Mumble believes every word of it and realizes that this must be what’s happening to all the fish. When the town elder accuses Mumble of being the reason the fish have gone away (because they are obviously being punished by the Great Penguin in the Sky for Mumble’s sacrilegious dancing) Mumble reveals his belief that aliens are taking away all the fish. This causes a hysterical screaming fit in which the town elder demands that Mumble renounce what he has just said or he will be banished, lest the town suffer the wrath of the Great Penguin in the Sky. When his father begs him to renounce what he’s said, Mumble refuses and is banished from Penguin society.

Still not making up a single word.

So Mumble decides he is going to find the Aliens, ask them to stop taking the fish and prove to all the Penguins back home that their religion is wrong and his beliefs are correct. So he goes to enlist the help of a charlatan mystic with a sacred necklace (a set of plastic 6-pack rings.) The one thing I found clever in this film was this character – a character who spends half the film choking. Named Lovelace. Cute. A porn reference in a kids film. Nice touch. Well hidden and the kids DEFINITELY won’t get it. Hell, most adults won’t. Now, of course since Lovelace can’t get the “necklace” off, Mumble has to take him along to ask the Aliens for help.

But don’t worry kids, this is just the tip of the ecological Iceberg. There’s plenty more eco-commentary to be had. But for the sake of speeding along a far too lengthy commentary already, let me just hit the highlights of relative insanity.

- Mumble discovers an abandoned fishing town loaded with pollution.

- Mumble tries to stop a giant fishing ship from taking thousands of fish and is forcefully removed from the net with a hook.

- Mumble chases said ships to tell them to stop

- Mumble ends up in sea world where he slowly begins to go crazy and hallucinate in one of the single most disturbing, depressing series of events I’ve seen in a kids film since the bullet to the back of the head in Old Yeller. He loses his mind, his personality and is trapped with a bunch of spaced out, mindless penguins, while he stares blankly at his own reflection.

- Mumble begins to dance, catching the attention of all of Sea World.

- Mumble appears back home with a homing beacon attached to his back. He begins to frantically tell the people that the aliens are coming and the only way to get them to stop taking the fish is if they all dance together.

- A revolution breaks out as the elders scream about heresy against the Great Penguin in the Sky while the youth begin to dance and sing, awaiting the Alien arrival.

- The Aliens arrive. The penguins dance. The Aliens film it.

- The footage of the dancing penguins goes global, appearing on the news and on the internet. People all delight in watching the penguins dance. That’s when things get really batshit crazy in a bizarre live action black and white montage as evil business proclaims “Why should we stop fishing for some flightless birds at the bottom of the world?” BOOOOOOO! HIIIIIIISSSSSSSS!!!!!!!! and others cry out (at the U.N.) “We must save the Penguins and stop fishing!” Hurray!

- We stop fishing and the penguins rejoice as they greedily devour all the fish they can eat in the repopulated seas.

YAY! Mumble saved the day! He communicated with the Aliens…by dancing…and got them to…stop fishing? Not over fishing, not pollution harming the fish. Fucking fishing. What the fuck? Are you fucking kidding me? Seriously? I thought this movie was all about Mumble trying to find his place in the world and fall in love with a girl who appreciated his dancing. Ummm…oh yeah. That’s about 10 minutes of the movie and the entirety of the advertisements. Apparently Warners couldn’t squeeze in the part about God not really existing and the aliens and the losing your fucking mind at Sea World.

[Schmeltz]

- We stop fishing and the penguins rejoice as they greedily devour all the fish they can eat in the repopulated seas.


So this guy frames the movie in terms of some imaginary contest between "us" and the greedy, rapacious penguins for the riches of the sea. He sounds just as far out as he makes the movie out to be. His peculiar attitude toward the "atheism" theme is even stranger - is he expecting us to believe that nobody should ever make a film that suggests an atheist point of view? Or is he just complaining about its presence in a kids' movie? If so, why? There are plenty of religious and mystical themes in lots of childrens' media. If parents find that sort of thing objectionable, then they can simply choose not to take their kids to it.

It might not be a well-expressed point and the movie might genuinely be contrived and poorly made, but I don't think this guy's derogatory criticism of it simply for suggesting an atheist perspective is warranted. Sounds like a bit of a nut.

[DroppinScience]

Ugh, Glenn Beck is such a douchebag.

I may even hate him more than Bill O'Reilly. (n)

[QueenAdrock]

I saw it and thought it did go a little overboard with the "Stop being douchebags, humans," message but I thought it was well-done overall.

I mean, we do pollute. That's a fact. We do throw away those plastic 6-pack rings and animals do get caught. Fact. It's very sad to see a cartoon penguin start choking on one that got caught around his neck. It doesn't mean it's untrue, it's just very sad to see and we'd like to ignore that fact.

There's a good portion of this movie I think the right-wingers saw and thought "This is making me super-depressed. Instead of recognizing the issue and fighting for it (because that's a left-winged standpoint), let's yell at the left for making propaganda."

Simply enough, this movie DID have an agenda - to let humans know their impact on animals and other societies. It tried to let us know that we shouldn't be selfish and uncaring. Mumbles said "Let's appeal to their conscious," when he wanted them to stop stealing all his fish, and the other penguins laughed at him and said no way would that happen. And ironically enough, Glenn Beck has proven the movie right. Hearing this movie say "Let's appeal to his conscious," and him not giving a damn about the overall message of the movie (love all the planet's creatures and be more aware of your impact on the environment) just proved the penguins right.

[sam i am]

Oh good Lord.

Saw it today with my kids.

First of all : the graphics are SUPERB.

Secondly, the music and animation are very well done and Robin Williams is WAAAY more funny than he is in real life.

Finally : what a bunch of claptrap, over-the-top, propoganda. The movie truly is the equivalent of the worst right-wing propoganda you rail against.

[QueenAdrock]

The thing is though, it did go somewhat overboard with the message, but the message is one that I think everyone can agree on. How is "Don't take fish from hungry penguins" "Don't litter" and "Leave environment in its natural state" a bad message? Glenn Beck just seems to write it off and ignore the messages because it's easier to call it propaganda than it is to actually listen to what it has to say.

[Documad]

Secondly, the music and animation are very well done and Robin Williams is WAAAY more funny than he is in real life.
I find it impossible to believe that Robin Williams is funny.

[Drederick Tatum]

nature sucks anyway. it would kill you if it had the chance.

[Otis Driftwood]

What the f*** are you people babbling about??? :confused:

[sam i am]

The thing is though, it did go somewhat overboard with the message, but the message is one that I think everyone can agree on. How is "Don't take fish from hungry penguins" "Don't litter" and "Leave environment in its natural state" a bad message? Glenn Beck just seems to write it off and ignore the messages because it's easier to call it propaganda than it is to actually listen to what it has to say.

"Don't take fish from hungry penguins?!!"

OK. Let's let PEOPLE starve so every freaking ecological niche throughout the animal and plant/mineral kingdoms can have their "freedom" to survive.

Give me a break. Animals are NOT equal nor equivalent to humans and never will be (barring science-fiction like circumstances that somehow "miraculously" elevate animals to the level of people:rolleyes: ).

The "don't litter" message is, of course, just good common practice, but not well-explicated within the context of the movie....it's much more of an afterthought than a well-conceived plot device.

Finally, "leave the environment in it's natural state?" Every time we take a breath or consume food or water or convert energy or walk upon the ground or build or do any of the myriad human things that humans do, we affect our environment and destroy or convert the "natural state." Humans (and, I hate to break the news to you, animals) are naturally destructive and DO what comes "natural" : i.e., affect and/or destroy the "natural state" on an ongoing, throughout history, and continuing on forevermore state. There is ONLY one way to NOT affect the environment : don't exist in any way, shape, or form.

[sam i am]

I find it impossible to believe that Robin Williams is funny.

I know, it's hard to imagine. Think the best bits from Mork and Mindy or a few choice moments from Miss Doubtfire and you have a bit of the concept. Robin Williams live = bad. Robin Williams as an animated penguin with a faux Hispanic accent = pretty funny.

[sam i am]

nature sucks anyway. it would kill you if it had the chance.

True story. Confront a hungry mountain lion in it's natural habitat or come across a pack of feral animals in almost any area and see what the "natural" outcome is.

People, without tools or weapons, are eminently capable of being killed and consumed on a regular basis by the animal kingdom, at least. Plants and minerals are a bit more benign, unless you're allergic to peanuts or poison oak/ivy. And don't even get me STARTED on arachnids or viruses!:mad: :cool:

[QueenAdrock]

"Don't take fish from hungry penguins?!!"

OK. Let's let PEOPLE starve so every freaking ecological niche throughout the animal and plant/mineral kingdoms can have their "freedom" to survive.

Give me a break. Animals are NOT equal nor equivalent to humans and never will be (barring science-fiction like circumstances that somehow "miraculously" elevate animals to the level of people:rolleyes: ).



What gives you the right to say that animals don't deserve to live like you do? Because they don't have the same amount of brain power? That's what I'm assuming you mean. So how about retards? Do they deserve to live? Or maybe it's the idea that we have "souls." We're both living breathing creatures and just because YOU belive that they may not be as "special" as humans because perhaps your religion tells you that humans have souls NOT EVERYONE BELIEVES THAT. Just because Jesus says that you're special and created after god doesn't mean you can shit all over the rest of his creations.

How about apes, do they have souls or less brain power? I mean, Koko the gorilla had a baby kitten she loved very much. She could communicate to us that she loved the kitten, and was able to use sign language to convey that she was sad and upset when her kitten was hit by a car. She was human-like in many ways, had brain power, use of communication, emotions. She's less than us though because she's not homo sapien for some reason? The only argument you can use for that is bible-thumping and that ain't gonna work.

As for the hungry penguin deal, do you realize that humans in North America overproduce food? There have been times we've produced too much grain and not had a large enough market for it. It's unnecessary to take more resources than what is needed, and we oftentimes do. We need food, duh. Do we need as much as we take? No. So don't take food from hungry penguins is a justifiable standpoint. If the whole world was struggling for food, I could understand that argument. But the people fishing in that movie were *probably not* from a starving 3rd world country. Most likely, it was America and we don't need to take as much as we do.


Finally, "leave the environment in it's natural state?" Every time we take a breath or consume food or water or convert energy or walk upon the ground or build or do any of the myriad human things that humans do, we affect our environment and destroy or convert the "natural state." Humans (and, I hate to break the news to you, animals) are naturally destructive and DO what comes "natural" : i.e., affect and/or destroy the "natural state" on an ongoing, throughout history, and continuing on forevermore state. There is ONLY one way to NOT affect the environment : don't exist in any way, shape, or form.

Leave the environment in its natural state meaning AS MUCH AS YOU CAN. I mean, no shit humans will have impact on their environment, through farming and building and whatever, some things can't be avoided. However, is it NECESSARY for us to be there, in freakin' ANTARCTICA? What do we need there? It looked as though they had an oil rig there, which is a pretty shitty reason to be polluting their environment and killing off the penguins. If you can give me a good reason why we NEED to be in Antarctica, by all means let me know.

I'm arguing that humans go overboard. We pollute more, we take more, we don't care about other animals, hell, we don't care about other humans. We let them starve and die in Africa while we have a serious obesity problem in this country. Somethings can't be avoided, but you cannot act like what all is happening falls under the category of things that are unavoidable.

My two bleeding-heart cents.

[Schmeltz]

I think QueenAdrock's point was geared more toward the impracticality of making a destructive impact on the environment through the unrestricted consumption of natural resources - ie overfishing. This is a relevant point considering the recent findings indicating a drastic decline in species diversity and populations in the world's oceans due to that exact practice. You can wax rhetorical all you like about our asendance to the top of the food chain, but if people continue to consume natural resources at these rates then eventually there won't be any left for either the penguins or ourselves. Again, maybe the movie makes this point tritely or poorly, but that doesn't mean it isn't a relevant message.

Yeah, she beat me to it.

[abcdefz]

So this guy frames the movie in terms of some imaginary contest between "us" and the greedy, rapacious penguins for the riches of the sea. He sounds just as far out as he makes the movie out to be. His peculiar attitude toward the "atheism" theme is even stranger - is he expecting us to believe that nobody should ever make a film that suggests an atheist point of view? Or is he just complaining about its presence in a kids' movie? If so, why? There are plenty of religious and mystical themes in lots of childrens' media. If parents find that sort of thing objectionable, then they can simply choose not to take their kids to it.

It might not be a well-expressed point and the movie might genuinely be contrived and poorly made, but I don't think this guy's derogatory criticism of it simply for suggesting an atheist perspective is warranted. Sounds like a bit of a nut.



Like I said, it sounds like he went off on it a bit. He's usually one of the more level-headed people there.

The thing that he did reiterate was that his objection was that the movie was being marketed as one thing, and then half an hour in turns into what he considers to be a propaganda piece. But -- my take on his take -- it seems like he was so steamed at the propaganda that those objections seemed louder in his review than the bait-and-switch thing.

I have no idea; I haven't seen it.

[Drederick Tatum]

thankfully if these indoctrinated kids start caring too much about the environment that sustains life on this planet, there's a decent chance that some nut with a legally purchased assault rifle will gun them down as they sit in class.

[Echewta]

Watership Down.

[saz]

Ugh, Glenn Beck is such a douchebag.

I may even hate him more than Bill O'Reilly. (n)

http://gnn.tv/articles/2771/TV_Blowhard_Barks_at_Iran

[yeahwho]

sazi that Humble Pie album in your avatar kicks it hard and serious.

[DroppinScience]

This discussion of propaganda in "Happy Feet" is making me think of that "Ferngully" movie from '92 or so. Remember that one? That was in the rainforest and it was against deforestation.

DAMN ECO-FRIENDLY CARTOONS!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad:

[sam i am]

What gives you the right to say that animals don't deserve to live like you do? Because they don't have the same amount of brain power? That's what I'm assuming you mean. So how about retards? Do they deserve to live?

Ya hit the nail on the "head" there (pun intentional). Self-awareness and the trappings of "humanity" (which would encompass "retards," though I'd NEVER refer to the mentally disabled that way, and infants both born/unborn) give humans the rights and, more importantly, the responsibilities, that animals do not have.

When an animal can defend itself in court, I'll grant them the same rights as a human being. Children, by definition in the US, at least, have the givernment to defend their rights, since they are not entitled to the same rights and responsibilities as adult humans.

Clear now?

[sam i am]

This discussion of propaganda in "Happy Feet" is making me think of that "Ferngully" movie from '92 or so. Remember that one? That was in the rainforest and it was against deforestation.

DAMN ECO-FRIENDLY CARTOONS!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad:

Really. What the heck?

Can't we go back to the Bambi era....where you KNEW the hunter blew Bambi's mom's brains out, but you didn't HAVE to deal with all the preachy BS in detail, like today's claptrap?

[QueenAdrock]

edit: see below

[QueenAdrock]

Ya hit the nail on the "head" there (pun intentional). Self-awareness and the trappings of "humanity" (which would encompass "retards," though I'd NEVER refer to the mentally disabled that way, and infants both born/unborn) give humans the rights and, more importantly, the responsibilities, that animals do not have.

As for "trappings of humanity" how do you explain Koko the gorilla like I had mentioned? She's self-aware. She's quite human-like. There's actually quite a few animals who are self-aware of themselves, who can recognize themselves in the mirror and recognize other animals/beings. Is it just because she's not homosapien that she's "less" than us?

And people who are mentally disabled can't defend themselves in court either, so that argument doesn't hold up.

[sam i am]

As for "trappings of humanity" how do you explain Koko the gorilla like I had mentioned? She's self-aware. She's quite human-like. There's actually quite a few animals who are self-aware of themselves, who can recognize themselves in the mirror and recognize other animals/beings.

Oh, brother.

Are we really going to try to have this debate?

Should the governments of the world unite and outlaw zoos (because it's trapping "free" animals)? Should we end all studies on animals that have benefitted, and will continue to benefit, humanity? Should we teach (and preach) the equality of animals with humans?

The farther you go down that road, the more and more ridiculous the assertions become, Queen.

You're smarter than that.

[DroppinScience]

I'm failing to see anything wrong with treating animals with dignity and respect. Besides, if you excessively hunt/kill animals, etc. you ARE disrupting the ecosystem. That alone should be considered.

[QueenAdrock]

No, we should just agree that we should RESPECT them. And as long as they're happy in their zoo environment, that would be respectful. If they live in a place where they're taken care of and fed, that's fine. Is it cruel to trap old folks in a retirement home (trapping "free" humans)? No. They're taken care of and have others to be around.

I'm not talking about teaching equality, I'm talking about NOT teaching INequality, such as yourself. I find it to be disturbing that you have so little respect for animals you can just say "they're not as good as me. I deserve their fish, not them."

It's about respect, and letting them live peacefully.

[sam i am]

No, we should just agree that we should RESPECT them. And as long as they're happy in their zoo environment, that would be respectful. If they live in a place where they're taken care of and fed, that's fine. Is it cruel to trap old folks in a retirement home (trapping "free" humans)? No. They're taken care of and have others to be around.

I'm not talking about teaching equality, I'm talking about NOT teaching INequality, such as yourself. I find it to be disturbing that you have so little respect for animals you can just say "they're not as good as me. I deserve their fish, not them."

It's about respect, you let them live peacefully.

All right. Respect doesn't mean that we should leave the fish to them while people do consume said fish.

Plus, have you ever been to an old folks' home? It's like freaking torture in most of them.

[QueenAdrock]

HA! They have Bingo and mashed potatoes. I mean, I'd like it at least.

[sam i am]

But no respect :p

[Funkaloyd]

Should the governments of the world unite and outlaw zoos (because it's trapping "free" animals)? Should we end all studies on animals that have benefitted, and will continue to benefit, humanity? Should we teach (and preach) the equality of animals with humans?

The farther you go down that road, the more and more ridiculous the assertions become, Queen.Holy shit. I have never seen a better example of an Appeal to Ridicule fallacy. Congratulations.

[baltogrl71]

funny, a couple people told me it wasn't that good, they'd seen better "thanksgivivng hits", fucking morons! the movie was fantastic and had a great message about environmental issues, and social issues I loved it.

[sam i am]

Holy shit. I have never seen a better example of an Appeal to Ridicule fallacy. Congratulations.

I have.:o