MovieChat Forums > Extraction (2020) Discussion > Another way to look at this movie

Another way to look at this movie

posted 5 years ago by ecrispy (3)
13 replies | jump to latest

This movie is getting rave reviews. Imagine the following -

Mexican drug cartel's boss has his son kidnapped and taken to the US. He sends a special forces operative and team to get him back. Who proceeds to destroy half the city, murder and kill hundreds of cops and innocent civilians, all of it just to save some scumbag's son who btw thinks its 'brave' that all these other people are being killed to save him.

Would audiences have cheered and rooted for that? Hell no. But hey, its just brown skinned Indians/Bangladeshis, they're barely human, plus they are poor so who cares. And the film specifically focuses on slums and poor sections, and all the army/cops never have their faces shown, just to make it even more obvious that these people's lives don't matter. Even Black Hawk Down wasn't this blatant about showing white supremacy.

[–] r5d4d2 (702) 5 years ago

Don't agree with the white supremacy comment, but I posted this in another thread a few days ago:

"Change the setting and I think people would be outraged. Lets make it clear that he was knowingly working for one drug lord against another drug lord.

If the kid was being held in San Diego and Hemsworth had to kill 100 cops and border patrol agents trying to get the kid safely to Mexico, I think most people would have a huge problem with it.

In Terminator 2, they made a point of telling Arnie not to kill cops."

[–] ecrispy (3) 5 years ago

I don't mean 'white supremacy' in a racial/KuKluxKlan way. What I mean is that Hollywood always portrays 3rd world countries in the worst possible light, in order to enforce stereotypes prevalent here about how they are so bad, how the West is superior in every way and they need to be liberated, preferably by military force.

You'll see this in every movie that features a poor nation. Bangladesh is a poor country no doubt but Dhaka isn't all slums, neither is India. The local people are depicted as dehumanized brainless idiots running about in the street with AK47's. There was another post about how this isn't Africa, there are no child soldiers etc.

[–] mrbnk (419) 5 years ago

I agree they are trying to dehumanize antagonists and cannon fodder so we don't feel bad rooting for the "good guy" (who is a mercenary who will probably murder anyone if he is paid to), but i think there is a reason the setting is some 3rd world country and not the other way.

If a drug lord's son is kidnapped to the states by a rival drug lord, you probably wouldn't hire mercs to retrieve your kid, you would just inform the authorities and they would rain down on those poor bastards. Then they would keep the kid in exchange of your cooperation about your crimes on US soil. So, it would be a totally different movie.

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 5 years ago

The implication was that the drug lord (Bollywood superstar by the sheer mogging, I'm guessing) was in complete control of the city and thus its police were his soldiers. Not something too believable in 1st world countries.
I thought it was absurd how many of them there were and how well armed they were.

Outside of the action, I thought this movie was very bad. Luckily it was an action movie.

[–] Befus (497) 5 years ago

You're an idiot.

[–] CheekyMonkey (584) 5 years ago

Have you not seen John Wick series? They kill as many people and no one gives a shit about their race... because it's not a big deal... it's just an action movie... It's ballet for bros...

The red paint is just to not feel gay looking at a bunch of guys manhandle one another ;) ... kidding!

The whole point of action movies is action... You're briging your ideological lens to this, but you're only seeing your lens, not the reality...

[–] TimMC (9143) 5 years ago

White supremacy. LOL.

[–] DracTarashV2 (4496) 5 years ago

This post - well done! No joke.

I didn’t take the movie quite that seriously but you do make some valid points. (It’s still good fun.) And besides, compared to the ENDLESS amount of idiotic “this movie is anti-white sjw woke pc blah blah” posts you see from the “edgy” and “disenfranchised” (really projecting snowflakes) reactionary chuds all over this site and the internet in general, posts that CLEARLY triggered the salty and paranoid anti-human decency reactionary chuds who deeply wish Hollywood would go back to them “good ol’ days” so their regressive butts can be cheerful and calm (hahaha) are much appreciated. ;)

[–] Rorikon (18126) 5 years ago

I like how people need to find some semblance of relevance or meaning to whatever ideology they hold so they can either praise or condemn this movie. IT'S A MOVIE! An action flick gung ho guns flinging rescue someone deep in corrupt central slums. I bet you'd think this was alright if it was some East Indian doing this instead. Civilians are always casualty in any war so suck it up. It's called collateral damage. Facts of life.

As for Black Hawk Down, I have seen enough dead Africans to fill a football field with the amount the Rangers and Delta Force killed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enCI3LHX4mE crowds in the hundreds them poor blackies killed in number by white supremacists, AH MER GERD!