MovieChat Forums > Wreck-It Ralph (2012) Discussion > The ending's pro-Big Brother, anti-free ...

The ending's pro-Big Brother, anti-free market sentiment ; BARF!

posted 11 years ago by mapzilla
36 replies | jump to latest

I reall HATE it when politics invade my movie viewing experience. It was so much easier to enjoy flicks as a kid. Ignorance is bliss.

For older me, the fates of Ralph and Vanellope represented two sides of the same coin. The winners in a leftist, big government society and the losers.

Ralph was living a life that was not a reflection of his true values and aspirations. Some people want to see the world crumble and fall. That was not Ralph. He wanted to not just BE a hero but more importantly PURSUE the life of a hero, regardless of what level of greatness he achieved. The freedom to pursue your dreams is what matters. THAT is the beauty of free market society.

What he is stuck with at the end is his assigned lot in life. And he accepts the Big Brother system of winners and losers that put him there. But take heart Communist peasant Ralph! In his moment of humiliation, he gets to look out on Vanellope, an ASSIGNED winner.

I cannot emphasive the word assigned enough. Vanellope is practically guaranteed to win every time because of a glitch that allows her to cheat. In a game where all the other racers have to play by the rules, her character dictates that if the gamer wants to win they MUST choose her.

What gamer would want to play a piece of crap like that?! A game like that would have ZERO staying power. King Candy was right. At least in reality. His touching speech to Ralph was the most HONEST part of the film. Which is why the lying Marxist writers of this film had to make sure he was a fraud. What a convenient plot twist that was.

[–] january2010 11 years ago

"I reall HATE it when politics invade my movie viewing experience."

I think you are invading your own movie viewing experience with politics, chump. If you are so obsessed with politics that you see all that crap in a Disney movie, you are probably the problem.

[–] mapzilla 11 years ago

Blue pill?

I can practically see the hair on your back rising as you type. The blue pill response to any challenge is to resort to name calling and finger pointing (this person is a problem). Although "chump" is kind of mild for your type. I appreciate you kept the G rating in your response. I know it must have been hard.

[–] january2010 11 years ago

Well, mapzilla, but you ARE the problem. Not sure how else to put it. You are the only one getting worked up over here over a not-particularly subversive movie.

[–] Vince_D 11 years ago

I don't completely agree with what you are saying, but I see what you're getting at and you have a point.

You're assuming that the society displayed in the beginning of the film is a Free-Market Society, and that free-market societies are the best option.

The problem with that theory is that Ralph DID have an assigned lot in life, no matter what he did.

He did indeed want to pursue the life of a hero, but it was unobtainable due to the society he lived in.

Felix was the ASSIGNED hero, simply due to the fact that he INHERITED his dads magic hammer.

The key point there is that Felix did not work for anything, he was assigned to be the winner, just like Vanellope is assigned to be the winner in her game at the end.

Which is actually my personal beef with the movie. The message to me seemed to be "just be happy with your place in life and don't try to make things better for yourself"

[–] mapzilla 11 years ago

"just be happy with your place in life and don't try to make things better for yourself"

That is Communism in a nutshell. It is the trapping of an animal that is so paralized by fear that it cannot evolve. BARF!

[–] Vince_D 11 years ago

Yes, that's the part I agree with you on.

I'm just saying that the society of the movie wasn't any better at the start of the movie either, it may have been worse.

Ralph was not happy with his assigned role in life, but he was screwed because there was nothing he could do about it, he just didn't realize it.

Also, look at Q*Bert, he was homeless because his game was unplugged. There was nothing he could do to work his way out of his situation. He was screwed.

It seemed like a "Free-Market economy" only existed for the people already at the top, like Felix & The Nicelanders.

There was no possibility of Upward Mobility for Q*Bert or Ralph.

Which means it wasn't really a Free-Market Economy.

[–] ruudos 11 years ago

"The message to me seemed to be "just be happy with your place in life and don't try to make things better for yourself"

Wel at the end Ralph made things better for himself, didn't he?

[–] Vince_D 11 years ago

No, not as far as I'm concerned. He was happy at the end of the film, no question about that.

But he was still stuck in the same place in life.

[–] bdowden23 11 years ago

Wait, what? Ralph got the respect of the Nice Landers, moved out of the dump, and was no longer viewed as "The Villain." By saving Sugar Rush, he by extension saved the other games and was considered the hero.(Which consequently, is all he wanted in the first place.) He learned that being the "bad guy" was simply his job. Hell, Zangief sums up the film in the first five minutes. This has nothing to do with communism or any political connotations that are being attached. It has everything to do with accepting what you do as a profession might not always have a bearing on who you are as an individual. It's a pretty clear message. Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.

[–] MettaQueensbridgeWarfare 11 years ago

This. Well said.

[–] Mick1994 11 years ago

Give this man… TWO cookies!

[–] andsoitgoes_42 11 years ago

This, exactly.

OP seems determined to obfuscate and create a theory from his own political feelings/agenda.

He's probably in the same camp of those who admonished "Lord Business" as being anti-capitalist from The Lego Movie.

Sometimes, many times, Occam's Razor is in play. This is one of them. It's about accepting who you.

As for Vanellope winning constantly, I think it's just a misstep from the creators. It would make no sense to have a game where one character breaks the game. It would, instead, make more sense for it to be a character feature, more than a game breaking glitch.

[–] lorenjlemos 11 years ago

Political analyses of children's movies are totally valid, why not? However, this libertarian reading is a bit of a stretch. It's clearer to read Ralph's story as a pro-labor metaphor.

Ralph does a difficult but necessary job within Fix-It Felix Jr. He doesn't hate the work itself, but feels ashamed of his exclusion from all the Nicelanders. They treat him like a criminal and leave him to sleep in the dump. This is classism in action: a guy with a dirty job is treated like he himself is dirty. However, when he (unwittingly) "goes on strike" by leaving in search of a hero's medal, Fix-It Felix Jr. nearly goes out of business without Ralph's essential contribution, and the Nicelanders learn that they need him.

At the end of the film, Ralph is doing the same job, but with a "raise" in the form of better living quarters and an open invitation to the penthouse, a victory for "organized labor".

[–] Harper_Lives 10 years ago

^second this. If you must read to far into something then this should be the way you look at it. This and what I believe to be the true intention behind the movie, what you do isn't who you are/ don't judge a book by its cover.

[–] tu-agamemnon 11 years ago

The politics didn't occur to me but that's probably because it doesn't apply to this movie. Ralph had a job, with the talent and 30 years of experience to make him the best at it. Nobody else could take his place, so much so that the entire game would shut down without him. He was as great at wrecking things as the game's "hero" was at fixing stuff. The trail of destruction he leaves throughout this movie was proof of that. His only problem was that he didn't get the recognition he deserved for it, because his job wasn't socially acceptable. He didn't want to be a hero. He wanted to stop living in the garbage and get some respect. Acting the hero and earning a medal was just the means to that end.

Vanellope was at the height of her career before she was unfairly shunted aside. Yet by the end of the movie, she not only stages her comeback but accepts the stigmatism of being a glitch that she had to experience and forges it into a new strength. A strength she earned. If her victory had been assigned, she would have stuck to being the glitch-free princess. Her ability to overcome the game reset and retain her glitchiness is proof that she can pursue a new dream and make something of herself.

There are games with characters suited to certain tactics that assure victory. Expecting a uniform character balance with equal chances of victory irrespective of individual traits is commie talk.

One could look for a liberal media bias here. Yet even if it did exist, not everyone would be bothered by an alternate political viewpoint. They'd point it out, maybe even accept it for what it is, or try & draw lessons from its shortcomings rather than expect everything to conform to their brand of politics. But they wouldn't go on a rant about it. So yes OP, it's just you. Frankly the dig about the "Marxist writers" makes me think the problem isn't this movie but rather an overdose of right-wing talk radio and Fox Entertainment News.

[–] kapsi 11 years ago

You mean this?
htp://fdzeta.net/imgcache/20276.imgcache.jpg

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Druff 11 years ago

Kill yourself, you pretentious hooker.