Terminator Genisys ****

The Ideological Content Analysis 30 Days Putsch:

30 Reviews in 30 Days

DAY TWENTY-EIGHT

In a series of events with which the fans of the original Terminator will already be familiar, futuristic human resistance leader John Connor (Jason Clarke) sends his own father (Jai Courtney) back through time to 1984 to save his mother before a Terminator cyborg (CG-rejuvenated Schwarzenegger) can kill her before she conceives the destined savior. Terminator Genisys then proceeds to overturn the audience’s expectations by having Reese arrive not in the 1984 of the first film, but in an alternate, already altered reality in which Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke) has already been toughened by years of tutelage from “Pops” (geriatric Schwarzenegger), her own personal cyborg sidekick and father figure. Genisys, an Orwellian app to be launched in 2017, turns out to be the catalyst for the rise of the machines. The plot gets a lot more convoluted than this, and none of the time travel gobbledygook makes any sense; but fans of the franchise ought to enjoy it, its sinister purposes notwithstanding.

4 out of 5 stars. Ideological Content Analysis indicates that Terminator Genisys is:

3. Feminist. Sarah Connor in this movie is already a battle-hardened warrior woman. She resents Reese’s presumption that she is in need of his protection; and, in fact, it is she, not Reese, who utters the famous line, “Come with me if you want to live.”

2. Zionist. In the bleak future sampled in the exposition, humanity is confined in camps, given arm-barcodes, and exterminated. The term “final solution” even occurs in the script, so that human resistance in Terminator Genisys is understood subtextually to serve as the avatar of holocaust-fearing organized Jewry. Awakening European racial consciousness is equated with the quest of a totalitarian order of genocidal robot supremacy. This is the future that must at all costs be prevented. (Skydance Productions, which made the film, is run by Jews David Ellison, Dana Goldberg, and Jesse Sisgold.)

1. Pro-choice and anti-white. Jew-killing robot armies of whites will never be able to serve their purpose as long as they are never born. Terminator Genisys, consequently, is greatly concerned with promoting Euro-American childlessness. Thirty years of cultural collapse spanning the first film and this one can be read between the lines. Whereas, in the first entry in the series (made in the decade following the Roe v. Wade decision), the Terminator is an antagonist – an abortionist sent from an inhuman future to preemptively terminate Sarah’s pregnancy – this same soulless, robotic abortionist (or one with identical facial features) has, in Terminator Genisys, become a perverse father figure to Sarah, who enlists his help in killing her son, John Connor, who, Sarah discovers in this installment, has become a corrupted collaborator of Skynet in the yet-to-be. One of the major action sequences in Terminator Genisys features Sarah driving a symbolically passengerless school bus – signifying the white race’s decadent demographic decline – in her desperate rush to evade and/or destroy her own posterity. Once freed from the horror of her son’s bleak destiny, Sarah can enjoy sexual freedom and happiness with Reese because, as she puts it, “Now I can choose.” Additionally, the necessity in the film of preemptively assassinating a future savior can be read as expressing a Jewish wish that Christ had been aborted.

Rainer Chlodwig von Kook

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes ****1/2

Here is a worthy addition to the venerable Apes franchise. Like the original Heston classic, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is by turns poignant, thought-provoking, and unintentionally humorous in telling the tragic story of what befalls humanity in the wake of its decimation by a simian flu and the resulting collapse of civilization.

What little remains of Bay Area humanity lives together in downtown San Francisco, led by capable ex-soldier Dreyfus (Gary Oldman). The civilizationally ascendant apes, led by intelligent chimpanzee Caesar (Andy Serkis), inhabit the forest surrounding the city, unaware that humans have survived the plague.

When a chance encounter and death bring the two mutually resentful species into conflict, members of both groups believe their continued existence is at risk. At stake in this exciting installment of the franchise is whether peace is possible or full-scale war between the two tribes is an inevitability.

4.5 stars.

[WARNING: POTENTIAL SPOILERS]

Ideological Content Analysis indicates that the symbolism or subtextual resonance of the ape/human relationship in Dawn is variable, changing in meaning from scene to scene, so that a single comprehensive interpretation is impossible. Anecdotal analysis follows, however, yielding the following diagnoses:

4. Multiculturalist. All races live together in harmony in progressive post-collapse San Francisco. The diverse makeup of the human element, including blacks, softens the association that racially insensitive viewers are likely to draw between apes and blacks. That parallel is exploited, however (see no. 3), and the abstract sense that the apes are akin to the teeming anthropoid scatology constituting the world outside the West – and, increasingly, the West itself – is also unavoidable. (cf. no. 1)

3. Anti-gun. With the planet essentially set back to zero, the original sin that disrupts this new potential Eden is not the eating of fruit, but the bearing of arms. Carver (Kirk Acevedo), a character who bears a suspicious resemblance to George Zimmerman and who, given his Anglo name, is presumably supposed to be some kind of “white Hispanic”, sets the plot in motion when he panics and shoots a (no doubt angelic) chimp in the forest. Apes, at first hopeful of peaceful relations, confiscate and destroy a few of the humans’ guns. Carver later disobeys Caesar’s terms of cooperation by sneaking a gun into ape territory, putting a baby chimp in danger and alerting emotionally susceptible moviegoers that the guns in their homes are a multitude of dead baby tragedies waiting to happen.

2. Green. It is man’s energy dependency which brings him into conflict – in this case, with apes – when Dreyfus determines to get a power plant operating again. No alternative energy is available, viewers are told, the implication being that, had America’s government, in its wisdom, been allowed to invest more of its tax booty in clean, green energy alternatives, the humans’ post-apocalyptic plight might have been avoided.

1. Crypto-Zionist. The misleading notion that the American energy appetite – lust for oil, for instance – is responsible for drawing the country into its conflicts abroad only serves to distract from the reality that it is the Israel lobby, not hootin’, hollerin’ Texas oil barons, who have exercised a Svengali-like influence on American foreign policy in recent decades.

More interestingly, the climactic sequence of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes invites an interpretation according to which the humans, led by Dreyfus, are Jews, and the apes are the primitive gentile hordes. As this interpretation would have it, the climax of the movie presents a kind of encrypted dialogue between two competing Zionisms. Some explanation may be necessary for the uninitiated in matters Judaic as to why goyim might be cast as apes. What too few gentiles understand is that Talmud-taught Jews hold non-Jews to be subhuman, their word for a gentile woman, shiksa, meaning an “unclean animal”. The Yiddish slur goyim, furthermore, is used synonymously with “cattle“.

The name of the human leader, Dreyfus, calls to mind the notorious Dreyfus Affair, which, as Jewish history would have it, constitutes one of the most rabid episodes of anti-Semitism in the history of Christendom (practically the entire history of Christianity being a mere buildup to the “Holocaust” if Jewish historian Raul Hilberg is to be believed). The name Dreyfus, then, suggests a Zionist martyr, as do his words and actions in this momentous sequence.

Toward the end of the film, the simian army has taken control of San Francisco, with bloodthirsty ape usurper Koba* (Toby Kebbell) and his followers occupying a downtown tower as headquarters. Dreyfus and his fellow human-Jews, unknown to the ape-gentiles, have planted explosive charges under the tower – a tactic clearly reminiscent of the Israeli Mossad‘s controlled demolition of the Twin Towers on 9/11.

Dreyfus, defending his decision to eradicate the ape-gentiles when fellow human Malcolm (Jason Clarke) expresses his horror and his hope that ape/human reconciliation is still possible, explains that he is detonating the tower in order to save the human race (i.e., Jews). His position, in other words, is that every ape-gentile must die so that Jew-humans might survive. He then proceeds to explode the tower, himself along with it, considering his act of mass murder a selfless martyrdom. The actual result of his action, however, is that full-scale conflict between ape-gentiles and Jew-humans is now a permanent feature of their inextricable histories. Ape-gentiles will always be hostile and on the defensive from now on because the vindictive Jew-humans can “never forget”.

The Jewish screenwriters of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes appear to intend for their film to function both as a symbolic cover-up for the Jews in subliminally excusing them from principal responsibility for America’s wars of intervention – and, for the tuned-in members of the audience, as a warning to the hardcore terrorist Zionist establishment represented by such figures as Adelson, Netanyahu, Silverstein, Chertoff, Zelikow, Kissinger, Zakheim, Krauthammer, Kristol, Perle, and the rest of the Talmudic rats responsible for the Jew World Order under which gentiles are currently dying and suffering unnecessarily. Push too hard, they caution, and you might just give away the game.

*”Koba”, whether coincidentally or not, was the nickname of supposedly anti-Semitic Joseph Stalin (responsible for the “black years” of Soviet Jewry).

 

Dislike Ideological Content Analysis on Facebook or stalk Rainer Chlodwig von Cuck on Twitter or Google+

The Great Gatsby ***1/2

To take in Baz Luhrmann’s flamboyant adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel is to experience a mingled frustration, pity, awe, amusement, bewilderment, and regret.  The contents of the novel are among the ingredients of this ambitious and idiosyncratic film, which displays a high degree of fidelity with respect to the choice of imagery; but included, too, is a lot of consciously anachronistic pop music and tacky computer-generated manipulation of the visuals, so that The Great Gatsby is a film very nearly ruined in the post-production.  In particular, the floating digital monogram bookends and more than one disorienting sweep from one location into another are unkind on the viewer’s eyes.

The film is most clearly in its element when depicting the outrageous, outsized decadence and debauchery of the twenties.  The Great Gatsby‘s greatest asset, however, is definitely its cast, with nearly every actor conjuring into convincing life the characters as described in the novel.  Tobey Maguire, who even now retains his air of youthful naivete onscreen, could not be bettered as Nick Carraway; and Leonardo DiCaprio, who with his substantial and growing body of lowlife and criminal parts, brings a handsome but soiled baggage to the showcase role of Gatsby, is a genius bit of casting; while fresh-faced Carey Mulligan is absolutely Daisy Buchanan and Joel Edgerton is suitably icy as her philandering husband Tom.  Jack Clayton’s 1974 film remains a stronger and more polished effort overall, but the charms of Luhrmann’s new vision are undeniable.

3.5 out of 5 stars.  Ideological Content Analysis indicates that The Great Gatsby is:

7. Anti-Christian/anti-gun.  Loser mechanic George Wilson (Jason Clarke) is the film’s representative Christian, whose faith in God naturally inspires him to commit a murder out of a sense of divine vengeance after his wife is killed.

6. Arguably feminist.  Daisy reflects with sadness that the best thing for a girl to be is a fool, a suggestion that a woman’s position in her era and at her social level was an unenviable lot when viewed with scrutiny.  Taken at face value, however, the line could also be interpreted as piggishly anti-feminist.

5. Pro-miscegenation.  White speakeasy patrons watch black booty-shakers.  An overweight white man is glimpsed through a window with a black prostitute.

4. Anti-state.  Prohibition has backfired and made alcohol less expensive.  Police are in league with and even subservient to the gangsters whom Prohibition has made into powerful millionaires.

3. Drug-ambivalent.  Liquor flows copiously at Gatsby’s parties and Nick even pops a pill in a near-orgy scene, but immediate consequences are scarce.  The automobile fatality of the denouement is more the result of emotional stress than drinking, most probably.  Nick does end up in a sanatorium, however.

2. Anti-marriage.  Everybody cheats.

1. Class-conscious/anti-racist (i.e., pro-yawn).  Unlikable Tom is the film’s representative bigot.  He recommends that everyone should read an unsettling book on The Rise of the Colored Empires.  (The irony here, of course, is that, in forecasting demographic decline and the consequent eclipse of the West, he is correct.)  Images of black poverty, toil, and subservience are frequently juxtaposed with white privilege and irresponsibility.  However, the depiction of gangster Meyer Wolfsheim (Amitabh Bachchan), though lifted directly from Fitzgerald’s description, is likely to strike ADL types as anti-Semitic.