Don't Look Up

Turgon

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I've watched it yesterday and all i can say is that it's a good satire, comedy with an astonishing accuracy regarding the behavior, way of thinking, mentality and approach to life by the modern time society that is being led like sleeping sheeple towards slaughter house by the PTB and their minions.

To be honest i've found it pretty insightful and i have been amazed a few times while watching the movie that Netflix filmed and uploaded it on their platform. To me it was like right in your face example how the PTB will treat the plebs when the SWHTF if not much worse than the PTB in the movie.
I thought the same when watching it. Yes, there were hints and suggestions of listening to 'peer-reviewed' science and the comet being 100% certain as a comparison to global warming and how we all have to act together to stop it, blah blah blah, but overall I skipped paying attention to those parts and found their portrayal of the shallowness of mainstream and social media, and in the people who are in charge, to be accurate and entertaining. Although I found the way they brushed off the Russian/Chinese attempt to destroy the comet as laughable because it would more than likely be the US that accidentally nukes itself, not the other way around. And the end of the movie was touching, at least I found it to be, the way some of the main characters came together for one final meal.
 

Candice

Jedi
I had no intention of watching this movie due so many saying its “propaganda”. My partner convinced me to watch it with him and I’m happy he did because I was pleasantly surprised.

I’m guessing I’m not so triggered by the political biases as I’m not American, so I don’t align with either political group. In fact I saw the president as a combo of an over the top MAGA female politician mixed with Hillary. The son could either be Trump jr. or Hunter.

Most important point for me was that the majority of humanity will do absolutely anything to reject the truth even when it’s staring them right in the face and that as individuals we have no impact on major events but what we do have control of is how we face them. Keeping our own integrity and humanity intact to the end.
 

Onetrickponystar

Padawan Learner
I interpreted it as possible sabotage by BASH. I think they left that quite open.
I did too. If so, it would praise the movie to portrait big corporates this way: psychopathic, money minded not giving a damn about the faith of the world, sabotaging this event for personal gains and glory. And BASH would probably be a hypothetic merger between Space-X / Google I guess.
 

Ant22

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Well, I watched the Matrix IV on Thursday and this thing on Friday (24th Dec) and it was an interesting movie. I did not have much expectations from it, but I noticed 2 curious things in this movie. The first one: no happy end (unlike most Hollywood movies). The impact happens and most of the humans die as the result (and those who escaped into space ala Alternative 3 scenario also end up getting killed) and there is no hope promoted in the film. If you watch Hollywood productions dealing with catastrophic scenarios , there is usually hope presented in one way or another. In this one, the main characters keep repeating: we all gonna die and indeed they eventually do.

That's one heck of a spoiler Obi, you just told everyone what the ending is :scared: Maybe next time hide info like this behind the spoiler banner.
 

thisplacerocks

Padawan Learner
Right, I was triggered! I just couldn't watch it in a sort of detached way, taking the things as universal when they were so blatantly partisan (IMO). Come on, the president was pure Trump as seen by the libtards: sex scandals, obsessed with appearances, dumb and grandiose, an incompetent slimy son (in law...) in the White House... Pompous rallies with tons of "deplorables" wearing MAGA hats... As for climate change: they literally put a freaking polar bear on melting ice in there, just in case we don't get it! And some of the "good" protestors were holding signs saying "Fossil Fools"! The "good" Ariadne Grande sang "Trust The Science". The "Don't look up" shtick was Trump telling his followers to ignore Climate Change and the Covid Pandemic. The conspiracy theorists who doubted the existence of the comet were the "conspiracy theorists" who doubt Climate Change and the Panedemic... The only subtlety about that was that the "good side" was a bit crazy and pompous too, but well...

Again, you are right: I was triggered and felt insulted by the whole thing, and that's why I couldn't watch it and abstract from all that and apply it to "the other side". But even then, if I want that kind of partisan stuff, I can go on Twitter or watch Tim Pool. Not my idea of an entertaining or deep or uplifting or surprising movie.

It's interesting though how different the reactions to this one seem to be, both here and also among commentators from both "sides".
Perhaps the movie intentionally chose to be ambiguous about its real message. Like what @trytofly said, people with different opinions will view the movie with different responses.

The female president can represent either party. Democrats would love to have a female president, given their heavy push for gender equality and women's rights. A photo on her desk shows her as a young teen sitting on Bill Clinton's lap.

She can also represent the Republicans due to her red outfits, and the cap worn by her and her supporters.

Both parties had presidents with sex scandals.

The "trust the science" part can be used to represent whatever the viewers know, whether it's pro covid vaccine or anti covid vaccine, pro end times cometary cataclysm or anti end times.

The elites escaping on a spaceship is similar to what the C's said regarding Tony Blair in a "rapture special" and alternative 3 (escaping on a spaceship) which would not work as expected. So it seems like someone in the production had inside knowledge.

It's like reading the bible. Those who know the truth can see its hidden meaning. Those who don't won't know.
 

genero81

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
It's double ironic that a satyrical movie about how obtuse people are about following the "science" of global warming is actually off base with that premise to begin with.

If that's not the ultimate irony that reflects the current reality, then I don't know what is!
 

United Gnosis

Jedi Council Member
It's double ironic that a satyrical movie about how obtuse people are about following the "science" of global warming is actually off base with that premise to begin with.

If that's not the ultimate irony that reflects the current reality, then I don't know what is!

And It's triple ironic that after all this discussion, some people still interpret the movie as specifically about global warming, when it literally features not a single minute about the topic...
 

genero81

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
And It's triple ironic that after all this discussion, some people still interpret the movie as specifically about global warming, when it literally features not a single minute about the topic...

I didn't originally interpret it that way. I based that on what Dicaprio himself said about it. Seeing as how he was very much involved in the movie, he would know. OSIT
 

thisplacerocks

Padawan Learner
Yeah, I agree. I tell you other things I saw in it

  • The implicit assumption that if "humanity" got it together we'd have overcome the comet. Humanity has never demonstrated (at least as far as I'm aware) that we can overcome such a thing even if we got it together - yes, we'd stand a better chance but it's no guarantee.
  • Humanity's fate always rests on the hands of the few - the average man on the street really has no power to determine his destiny when it comes to such grandiose matters. Esoterically speaking, is this true? Are we subservient to decision makers in such grandiose existential matters?
I agree the movie is pessimistic in what humans can do. Esoterically, it's not true. Those who do the Work become 4th density candidates and survive the Wave with their souls in tact as 4th density STO beings. Knowledge is still accessible through the internet to help people with the Work despite these challenging times.

Also it was a bit weird how they couldn't destroy the comet with the robots but somehow can build a spaceship to travel and land in another planet 22,000 years later - plus cryogenic chambers that allowed them to live for the whole journey. This last sequence of the movie was weird 🤔

Surely it would have been better to go to Earth's orbit, stay there for a bit and come back down again at a safe location on the planet after things calmed down a bit? This is a better solution than flying to an unknown planet 22,000 earth years away lol
Great question. It's the same thing in the movie Passengers which stars Jennifer Lawrence who ironically is one of the elites who get to board the spaceship. They may be duped into believing that the earth can't recover period. It's quite likely that the spaceships may collide with comets and debris on its journey and get destroyed.

A thought just occurred to me. Perhaps the most powerful 4D and 3D STS entities want to get rid of the next most powerful 3D STS people. There's a Chinese proverb: a mountain can't have two tigers. Imagine if a bunch of 3D STS knew about the Wave and could thus transition into powerful 4D STS. They will want to fight with the ones above them in the power hierarchy. Instead they are tricked into thinking that escaping in a spaceship to a remote planet is the best solution though common sense tells us it has a high likelihood of failure. They die and either reincarnate as cave people or have their souls smashed. They probably lack the esoteric knowledge to become 4D STS.
 

United Gnosis

Jedi Council Member
I didn't originally interpret it that way. I based that on what Dicaprio himself said about it. Seeing as how he was very much involved in the movie, he would know. OSIT

That's a literary analysis 101 mistake. You're not talking about the movie. You're not talking about anything that is objectively present in the movie. You're talking about meta-opinions and statements from people around the movie.

You said:
"a satyrical movie about how obtuse people are about following the "science" of global warming"

Literary analysis 101: using only the content of the movie, justify that assertion. Hint: no one can. One would need to bring those external statements to even construct the hypothetical interpretation, weigh the various intent of the participants in the creation, etc. But then you're no longer looking at what the movie actually contains. Where, at any point, is "the science of global warming" in the movie?

In your wording but by my understanding, the movie is very specifically
"a satyrical movie about how obtuse people are about following the "science" of a massive planet-killer comet hurtling our way"

To state anything beyond that, you need to admit you're bringing in external connotations and are not talkiing about the movie proper.
 
Last edited:

gottathink

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
That's a literary analysis 101 mistake. You're not talking about the movie. You're not talking about anything that is objectively present in the movie. You're talking about meta-opinions and statements from people around the movie.

You said:
"a satyrical movie about how obtuse people are about following the "science" of global warming"

Literary analysis 101: using only the content of the movie, justify that assertion. Hint: no one can. One would need to bring those external statements to even construct the hypothetical interpretation, weigh the various intent of the participants in the creation, etc. But then you're no longer looking at what the movie actually contains. Where, at any point, is "the science of global warming" in the movie?

In your wording but by my understanding, the movie is very specifically
"a satyrical movie about how obtuse people are about following the "science" of a massive planet-killer comet hurtling our way"

To state anything beyond that, you need to admit you're bringing in external connotations and are not talkiing about the movie proper.
I do think the significance of what @genero81 pointed out about DeCaprio’s statements is that a lot of people are believing what the media are saying about the movie, ironically again.

And yes I agree, as well as literary analysis 101, this is a mistake in critical appraisal 101. It is the same as believing in an academic article’s conclusion just because it was written by a certain person or appears in a particular publication, e.g. The Lancet’s fraudulent article showing in-efficacy of Hydroxychloroqine in treatment of Covid-19.

I observe judging information by it’s source rather than it’s content is absolutely rife these days.
 
Last edited:

genero81

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
You're not talking about anything that is objectively present in the movie. You're talking about meta-opinions and statements from people around the movie.

I'm talking about what was the intent of those who made the movie which those who were involved with it would likely know better than anyone who was not involved in the process of making it. (i.e. you)

Your comment to me originally was unnecessarily rude but instead of apologizing you're going to just double down on why you're right?
 
Top Bottom