Hero

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:16 pm

<----- Needs to read dates.

Thats just the thing, Justice wasn't sacrificed. Maybe if you paid attention you'd have realized that, but you're too busy looking for "OMG FASCIST OVERTONES." He realized what the one other fighter was saying (Which is why he did not assasinate the emporer) in that if China was to ever be united, they need to forget their local differances and unite as a people under one banner. If you noticed, the ruler wasn't actually a tyrant, he was a visionary. He envisioned a land where everyone could communicate and could live in peace. In essence he wished to end war. The differance I pointed out is not meaningless however. Dying so the people will benefit is not only a better cause but in the long run works better then doing it for the greed of any one government. Not only that, but it kinda addresses your point of "HE DIED FOR THE GOVERNMENT LEWL!" message you said since he DIDN'T die for his government. He died for his people.

Justice was not infact sacrified, but withheld if you think about it. Assassins who are caught are killed, sorry, but thats how it works unless you live in bizzaro land. Make no differance about it, but thats what Jet Li's character was. An assassin. However, instead of taking personal vengeance against the emperor he did what was for the greater good of not only his region's countrymen, but for the benefit of all the provinces of china. That in itself is a noble way to go, but changes the message of the movie completely from what you suggested.

V for Vendetta · Post by **V for Vendetta** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 7:21 pm

Wow, you have me figured out. I'm the Joe McCarthy of fascists. Oh, wait, but I actually went expecting to see a good movie and my reaction was one of surprise. There goes my career in the Senate, I suppose.

Seriously, weren't you paying attention? "Uniting" China was done by the massacre of peaceful villages and the subjugating people who didn't want to be ruled by the dictator in question. There was no reason given for why "unity" was so important for greatness. What we're talking about is a classic tale of might making right, and those in power getting the definitive view of history. If someone was sent to assassinate Saddam Hussein, or Joseph Stalin, or Hitler, wouldn't you think they were on a just mission? Those guys were all pretty big about national unity. All those Germans in Danzig and the Rhineland...

And come on, do you really think a tyrant CAN'T be a visionary? Every despot wants his people to live in unity and peace -- under his absolute rule. This is nothing new. When you add in the fact that this movie was bankrolled by a repressive state that would very much like to "unify" China and Taiwan, the movie's message is clear.

At any rate, Retlaw83 is absolutely right -- I should have expected as much from a film bankrolled by a government that kills people for disagreeing and fears the subversive influence of Google News.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 7:52 pm

Right, having chinese names as producers makes the movie bankrolled by the government of China and it automatically equals fascism?

Anyhow, why do you even give a shit about it?

V for Vendetta · Post by **V for Vendetta** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:30 pm

Actually, the fact that one of the production houses, Beijing New Film Co., is owned by the People's Republic of China automatically means that the government of China bankrolled it. While that doesn't necessarily mean fascism, I've already told you why a lecture about how a government nobody wants has a right to rule is at least a little despotic. Did you read my post? Did you pay attention?

I give a shit because the film justifies tyranny. Which is bad.

And no, I didn't intend my first few posts to be so thematic to my tag. :\

Post by **King of Creation** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:49 pm

V for Vendetta wrote:Actually, the fact that one of the production houses, Beijing New Film Co., is owned by the People's Republic of China automatically means that the government of China bankrolled it.

Valid point, indeed. However, I'm not entirely sure that the film advocated tyranny. When I viewed it, the sense I got was one of National Unity...which is what was accomplished by letting the emperor live. That was the end to war....assassinating the emperor would have just given rise to another emperor who would have pursued the same goals that the previous one had. Which would have meant even more brutal war, because they had the added incentive for retribution for the emperor.

No, I believe that the film was very much a nationalist piece, if anything...with overtones of might's not right.

In fact, its just like Might and Right a la The Once and Future King. Arthur's goal was to unite all of the warring factions under one banner, in order to ensure future peace. Same thing happened in Hero.

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:26 pm

Ernesto wrote:Blah, blah, fishcakes.

That's "blah blah blah fishcakes". 20 pushups.

And since I have absolutely nothing to contribute to this discussion of fascism, I'll just sit back and look moody.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 5:23 pm

I understood the "subliminal fascist message" of Hero as simply putting and end to the otherwise never-ending war and struggle between the 6(?) kingdoms. You either let that one man, who seemed like a tyrant, take over the whole land and unite it or fight from here to eternity.

And besides, the empire that was formed from those kingdoms was the very same empire that Mao Zedong wanted to kick to the shitter. I mean, you have a revolution when things are fucked up, right? The "unified China" at the end of the movie is still far away from the wannabe communist wonderland China is today.

I liked the movie... Or at least I thought it was OK, nothing spectacular. Sure it was pretty, but I'm not a really big fan of those fly-through-the-air-and-point-your-sword-in-one-direction thingies.

Duck and Cover

Hero

Was it?