Poll: Excuse me, waiter there appears to be politics in my sci-fi

[bushwhacker2k]

For the most part I don't see much, but often when I do I'm like "was that really necessary?" It's like the author was all like OO queue generic political statement, gotta be all idealistic and make people hate this one guy. I for one pay just about no attention to politics so I usually try to ignore it but it's annoying when it comes up.

 

[Mr. Doe]

Spoiler

Star Trek (the original series) had one message and that was "Space is awesome!"

Are you sure about that? Maybe you need to rewatch some of the old episodes because from what I've seen every one had some kind of moral.

Pick one at random, A Taste of Armageddon [http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon_(episode)], who's moral was a simple "war is fucked up no matter how you slice it" message.

But I got a question. Can you name a single film, outside the science fiction genre, that you consider good, that didn't have a message of some sort?

Full Metal Jacket didnt have a message (or at least one that I saw) and it stands as one of my favorite movies of all time.

Full Metal Jacket was all about how war fucks you up in the head. It takes rational people and makes the fat guy shoot himself, the guy who can laugh it off a journalist reporting body counts, and Pvt. snowball is sad with lack of watermelon. in the end, they all sing the mickey mouse song. It's about war being insane for everyone.

You see I dont see that I see war and death and the loss of everything and it never says anything with it it just shows you it and tell you the story without ever saying anything is wrong or right or saying anything is happening it shows you and leads you on this journey never forcing anything into your head just letting you figure it out for yourself.

It's supposed to be getting you to identify with them by being as non-intrusive as possible. Just because there isn't a moral stretched out twelve feet high in neon letters doesn't mean it's not there.

To your OP, can you name a game that matches what you describe that wouldn't also fit under the moniker of "arcade style"?

I sure can Dark Void all it has to say is "WOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOO JETPACKS, DOGFIGHTS, TESLA! PUNCH AN ALIEN ROBOT IN THE DICK!"

Isn't that the game that has been panned for being "half done"? I honestly can't claim to knowing more than what anyone else can glean from ZP's review and the wiki page, which makes the game sound like it got chopped pretty bad and that it was based on the entire "War is bad there are bigger problems out there" train of thought. It just happened to be aliens instead of poverty or famine because well... aliens sell better?

There's a difference between not having moral or political messages and not having that message(s) play a central role in the game. That's why you have sci-fi RPG's like Mass Effect (see what I did there?)

Eh not really the game felt less like it was half done and more like it was just trying to get out of your way as fast as possible. But there wasnt any real message it was going for the feel of old Pulp novels no message more complicated other than "Nazi's are bad and Jetpacks are awesome." and you know what? it won my heart by doing those things I played it for days on end just wishing I could do more with it I'd have loved for the game to keep going maybe fight in its alternate history WWII with like giant robots and stuff all Sky Captain: and the world of tommorow like and fly my jetpack through a zepplin's baloon and watch as the Nazis tryed in vain to land before smacking into the ground at 400 miles per hour.

 

[Calhoun347]

No large political message, but morality is a central theme of sci-fi. Sentient ai's, clones, that sort of thing comes in to play a lot in Sci-fi, and the moral dilemmas associated with them.

My favorite Sci-fi series is Stargate: SG-1. There's lots of Sci-fi action, but there are moral quandaries. It adds depth to the show. Explosions and cool stuff are fine, but JUST explosions and cool spacey stuff? Count me out. SG-1 never went OUT of it's way to make a statement, but they did deal with complex moral problems. Beyond that, there's often a display of conflict between civilian and military authority (Though that's seen more often in SG:A).

 

[Mr. Doe]

Sci-Fi has always had a message within its text, early sci-fi were usually allegories and parables about the folly of perusing nuclear war, later sci-fi stories were about acceptance of others despite being of another race or culture.

Look a Heinlein's stories (which I think are the most awesome of sci-fi stories), his three most well known books: Starship Troopers, Stranger in a Strange Land and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress all have some kind of political/ social message to teach people.

Starship troopers was about serving ones society for the greater good and proving that you were willing to give up a part of your self for society.

Stranger in a Strange Land suggested people look towards more peaceful and natural ways of finding self satisfaction and achievement. Throughout the story there is present, a massive mega church which functions more as a moneymaking machine and a place of hedonistic practices rather than a center of inner peace. The scary part is this was really before the advent of modern mega churches and the similarities are striking.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress serves to promote a Libertarian agenda that argues that people can self regulate themselves and don't need a massive government telling them what to do. The text suggests that personal freedoms and economic freedoms can be fairly self determined by the people of society.

All three of these stories were critically aclaimed and well recived by both readers and reviewers (All three of these novels won Hugo awards as well)

Political messages don't ruin sci-fi novels or movies, indeed some of the more politically and socially motivated stories have given us some of the highest quality of writing. What messes up these stories and makers them uninteresting is sloppy execution, not the fact they are trying to send a message.

Well yes those are exceptional works that have messages but the messages themselves werent topical at the time they were more speculative like Asimov and his moral questions on robots.

 

[Demongeneral109]

Spoiler

Star Trek (the original series) had one message and that was "Space is awesome!"

Are you sure about that? Maybe you need to rewatch some of the old episodes because from what I've seen every one had some kind of moral.

Pick one at random, A Taste of Armageddon [http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon_(episode)], who's moral was a simple "war is fucked up no matter how you slice it" message.

But I got a question. Can you name a single film, outside the science fiction genre, that you consider good, that didn't have a message of some sort?

Full Metal Jacket didnt have a message (or at least one that I saw) and it stands as one of my favorite movies of all time.

Full Metal Jacket was all about how war fucks you up in the head. It takes rational people and makes the fat guy shoot himself, the guy who can laugh it off a journalist reporting body counts, and Pvt. snowball is sad with lack of watermelon. in the end, they all sing the mickey mouse song. It's about war being insane for everyone.

You see I dont see that I see war and death and the loss of everything and it never says anything with it it just shows you it and tell you the story without ever saying anything is wrong or right or saying anything is happening it shows you and leads you on this journey never forcing anything into your head just letting you figure it out for yourself.

It's supposed to be getting you to identify with them by being as non-intrusive as possible. Just because there isn't a moral stretched out twelve feet high in neon letters doesn't mean it's not there.

To your OP, can you name a game that matches what you describe that wouldn't also fit under the moniker of "arcade style"?

I sure can Dark Void all it has to say is "WOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOO JETPACKS, DOGFIGHTS, TESLA! PUNCH AN ALIEN ROBOT IN THE DICK!"

Isn't that the game that has been panned for being "half done"? I honestly can't claim to knowing more than what anyone else can glean from ZP's review and the wiki page, which makes the game sound like it got chopped pretty bad and that it was based on the entire "War is bad there are bigger problems out there" train of thought. It just happened to be aliens instead of poverty or famine because well... aliens sell better?

There's a difference between not having moral or political messages and not having that message(s) play a central role in the game. That's why you have sci-fi RPG's like Mass Effect (see what I did there?)

Eh not really the game felt less like it was half done and more like it was just trying to get out of your way as fast as possible. But there wasnt any real message it was going for the feel of old Pulp novels no message more complicated other than "Nazi's are bad and Jetpacks are awesome." and you know what? it won my heart by doing those things I played it for days on end just wishing I could do more with it I'd have loved for the game to keep going maybe fight in its alternate history WWII with like giant robots and stuff all Sky Captain: and the world of tommorow like and fly my jetpack through a zepplin's baloon and watch as the Nazis tryed in vain to land before smacking into the ground at 400 miles per hour.

I think you missing the point... Star-Trek and almost any other Si-Fi anything have political messages, how complicated that message is is what your focusing on... even "Nazis are bad!" is still a message right? Often, Si-Fi is an allagory of current events. Have you ever heard of Dune? Its considered the greatest Si-Fi novel of all time,what started the entire damn genre!!! Its fun, but it has many, many messages, it discusses the global dependance on oil, racism, fate vs. free will, and every message was seamlessly woven into the narrative... Ok, so its no fun when the message is stuffed down your throat, but they're still there weather you see them or not. Even Star Wars is a glorified speech on the 'slippery slope,' again fate vs. free will, how easily people fall to temptation while trying their hardest to do the right thing... and with your comment on how you form your own interpertations, every message turns you one way or another; If you can honestly tell me that any series with a "Band of Brothers" or even a lone survivor in a war-zone isn't going over the old "War is Hell" story (unless its painting it as propaganda to support Iraq or somthing..) than you clearly are missing the point nyoro!~

 

[Demongeneral109]

Sci-Fi has always had a message within its text, early sci-fi were usually allegories and parables about the folly of perusing nuclear war, later sci-fi stories were about acceptance of others despite being of another race or culture.

Look a Heinlein's stories (which I think are the most awesome of sci-fi stories), his three most well known books: Starship Troopers, Stranger in a Strange Land and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress all have some kind of political/ social message to teach people.

Starship troopers was about serving ones society for the greater good and proving that you were willing to give up a part of your self for society.

Stranger in a Strange Land suggested people look towards more peaceful and natural ways of finding self satisfaction and achievement. Throughout the story there is present, a massive mega church which functions more as a moneymaking machine and a place of hedonistic practices rather than a center of inner peace. The scary part is this was really before the advent of modern mega churches and the similarities are striking.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress serves to promote a Libertarian agenda that argues that people can self regulate themselves and don't need a massive government telling them what to do. The text suggests that personal freedoms and economic freedoms can be fairly self determined by the people of society.

All three of these stories were critically aclaimed and well recived by both readers and reviewers (All three of these novels won Hugo awards as well)

Political messages don't ruin sci-fi novels or movies, indeed some of the more politically and socially motivated stories have given us some of the highest quality of writing. What messes up these stories and makers them uninteresting is sloppy execution, not the fact they are trying to send a message.

Well yes those are exceptional works that have messages but the messages themselves werent topical at the time they were more speculative like Asimov and his moral questions on robots.

do you really think that those same moral questions cant be applied to other things besides robots? I never read Asimov, but he might have been reflecting on exploitation or any number of subjects, using the robots as a metaphor... don't assume that unless a message is sitting there in glowing green letters that it is not present... why do you think English classes spend so much time on this stuff? (even if they do pick the "MESSAGE HERE!!!" books...myoro~)

 

[Mr. Doe]

Sci-Fi has always had a message within its text, early sci-fi were usually allegories and parables about the folly of perusing nuclear war, later sci-fi stories were about acceptance of others despite being of another race or culture.

Look a Heinlein's stories (which I think are the most awesome of sci-fi stories), his three most well known books: Starship Troopers, Stranger in a Strange Land and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress all have some kind of political/ social message to teach people.

Starship troopers was about serving ones society for the greater good and proving that you were willing to give up a part of your self for society.

Stranger in a Strange Land suggested people look towards more peaceful and natural ways of finding self satisfaction and achievement. Throughout the story there is present, a massive mega church which functions more as a moneymaking machine and a place of hedonistic practices rather than a center of inner peace. The scary part is this was really before the advent of modern mega churches and the similarities are striking.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress serves to promote a Libertarian agenda that argues that people can self regulate themselves and don't need a massive government telling them what to do. The text suggests that personal freedoms and economic freedoms can be fairly self determined by the people of society.

All three of these stories were critically aclaimed and well recived by both readers and reviewers (All three of these novels won Hugo awards as well)

Political messages don't ruin sci-fi novels or movies, indeed some of the more politically and socially motivated stories have given us some of the highest quality of writing. What messes up these stories and makers them uninteresting is sloppy execution, not the fact they are trying to send a message.

Well yes those are exceptional works that have messages but the messages themselves werent topical at the time they were more speculative like Asimov and his moral questions on robots.

do you really think that those same moral questions cant be applied to other things besides robots? I never read Asimov, but he might have been reflecting on exploitation or any number of subjects, using the robots as a metaphor... don't assume that unless a message is sitting there in glowing green letters that it is not present... why do you think English classes spend so much time on this stuff? (even if they do pick the "MESSAGE HERE!!!" books...myoro~)

if you didnt read my addendum than you dont know I posted that messages work when they work with the story, dont take away from the plot or arent the main focus Asimov wrote about robots in a speculative manner questioning if we would treat them as well as organics, if they would be able to truly have free will he basically invented the whole 'What measure is a robot?' thing. and to answer your question No I dont beleive it can work with anything else other than robots and speculative situations because District 9 tried to pull me in with refugee aliens standing in for refugees in Africa and all that did was make it seem like it was ignoring the Sci-fi aspect (sans a laser gun and a mech) and undermining the awful situation of apartheid it would have been a stronger movie if it was just a movie about apartheid.

 

[lokun489]

yo do know thats one of the reasons sci-fi was made right? it was to make political influences without being direct about it. the other is space is cool.

 

[Wolfrug]

Full Metal Jacket didnt have a message (or at least one that I saw) and it stands as one of my favorite movies of all time.

Yeaaah, umm. This is the point where I stopped reading and following your comments. If you seriously think that one of our time's greatest anti-war, anti-Vietnam movies "didn't have a message", then I'm surprised you've been able to spot them in other works of art at all. Maybe we can blame Avatar for that, being so god-damned obvious that even the most thick headed got the message: "exploiting the natural world is bad". Or maybe we should THANK Avatar for opening your eyes.

I mean, seriously. FMJ didn't have a message? Egads. I know this is about as condescending as you can get, and I apologize, but: grow up.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Well, its just because when Sci fi tries to incorporate politics, you suddenly get a whole bunch of ne'ASSUMING CONTROL

 

[Reolus]

Maybe it's not the movies that have changed, but the consumers?

This thread is evidence in of itself: as a society we are much more critical and insightful about the meaning behind things, and movies are no exception.

Isn't the real question: Why can't you just enjoy Avatar for the dinosaur flights and exploding gunships?

 

[BonsaiK]

TL;DR Sci-fi is cool and shouldnt be a way to tell me how you feel about politics or religion or w/e
Addendum: Im not saying they just cant be in there Im just saying they shouldnt play center stage to the laser fights.
Im sick and tired of Science fiction being less about Sci-fi and more about "making a point" Like how Avatar was just a "What we did to the Native Americans was wrong!" or how Moviebob wants Predator to turn into Ted Nugent with arm blades and Dreadlocks. When did Sci-fi stop being good enough on its own? Why arent there movies that have a genuine Sci-fi feel to them anymore? Why is Mass Effect about morality instead of Woosh bang space adventure its the final frontier for gods sake it shouldnt need additional shit to attract people. If a movie gets made where the premise is Humanity is dying and needs a strange new matter that was discovered on an alien world but the natives are hostile and the air is poison so we develop technology to make our clones of the species so we can fuck them up I should decide if I want it on those merits, if I hear theres a franchise where there is an entire species devoted to warfare that are also dinosaurs and theyre nearing extinction because a race of frog people needed them to kill space crabs but then couldnt contain the numbers I should buy that immediatly I shouldnt need a moral choice system to help me decide if its worth 60 dollars. Where are the green skinned space babes? Where are the space pirates? Where are the Sentient AIs bent on human eradication? Why is Sci-fi being reduced to a channel for people to pour political/religious diatribe instead of being about Aliens and lasers and foward thrusters?

Every single science-fiction tale is also a political tale by default, because the society that created the tale is informed and influenced by political opinion. There isn't a single science fiction tale that cannot be interpreted as having a political message of some sort. Star Wars is a very preachy parable about the importance of standing up to totalitarianism (I mean, they even called the bad soldiers stormtroopers, geez, talk about underlining the point, George "subtlety, we don't need that" Lucas). Starship Troopers is one of the most clever and caustic anti-war films ever made. Nasty sentinent AIs when they appear in a film are usually there as a critique of humanity's technological race and the possible consequences. Star Trek is the perfect postmodern critique of colonialist thinking (contrast how the Enterprise crew behave when visiting "unknown worlds" with what European settlers did in Africa, Australia etc), and most films involving "aliens" usually have something under the surface to say about things like immigration, racism etc (no coincidence that the US calls illegal immigrants "aliens" too). Those green-skinned space babes were probably on the run from oppression in their homeworld. Even E.T. was just a tale of human prejudice. The reason why you see science fiction always paired with politics is because science fiction IS politics. If you've never noticed this before, it's probably just because you were younger and not as aware - now that you're older and smarter you're able to read between the lines of these things a lot more easily.

 

[AWDMANOUT]

Star Wars.

Story of a Galactic Republic corrupting into an Empire.

Story of magical super ninjas using their religion to kick ass.

Are you telling me you did not like Star Wars, sir?

 

[Internet Kraken]

I don't mind it when a story as a message. I actually appreciate it, since it makes the events of said story much more potent. So to me, having a message doesn't automatically ruin my ability to enjoy a game/book/movie/whatever.

Now what does bother me is when there is random commentary on modern society when it's completley out of place. This bugs me since it kills immersion by bringing up an issue in our modern world that has little relevance to the world portrayed in the book/game/movie etc. An example of this is in Mass Effect 2. You're walking through the prison facility, when you see a prisoner being beaten up by two guards. Upon passing by said prisoner, all of your party members will randomly take a jab at torture. They are all opposed to it, for one reason or another.

Now this has several problems. The first is that the guy being beaten up is not being tortured for information, but rather as a punishment. Yet several party members will randomly state that you don't get good information from torture when that has no relevance in the current situation. Second, not all of your party members should be opposed to this, as their personalities would lead them to either not care or approve of it. An example of this is Garrus, who uses torture to get information and supports the actions of the guards in the prison. Yet even he will condemn this act of torture when it's completely out of character for him to do so. Third, you can use torture multiple times during the game. And it will always give you good information. So the message this part of the game tries to send is inconsistent with the rest of it.

As a result, this commentary on torture feels completley out of place and is unwanted as well. That bugs me. If torture had been a reoccurring issue throughout the game and the characters had been consistent, it might not have been so bad. But as it stands it's just an awkward attempt to commentate on an issue in modern society.

 

[Mr. Doe]

Full Metal Jacket didnt have a message (or at least one that I saw) and it stands as one of my favorite movies of all time.

Yeaaah, umm. This is the point where I stopped reading and following your comments. If you seriously think that one of our time's greatest anti-war, anti-Vietnam movies "didn't have a message", then I'm surprised you've been able to spot them in other works of art at all. Maybe we can blame Avatar for that, being so god-damned obvious that even the most thick headed got the message: "exploiting the natural world is bad". Or maybe we should THANK Avatar for opening your eyes.

I mean, seriously. FMJ didn't have a message? Egads. I know this is about as condescending as you can get, and I apologize, but: grow up.

at what point did Full Metal Jacket say anything anti war? sure half the American soldiers were crazy as hell but the enemy forces werent taking any moral high ground YOU INTERPERATED it as anti war Full Metal Jacket isnt about "This is wrong and awful" its "This is what war is like. What do you think?" and why are you telling me to grow up? because I dont want political diatribe in my entertainment? and I find it just lovely that you think that the only messages I saw were the political messages in Avatar that is just what pushed me over the edge that and the thought of a predator movie where half the predators wear mood rings and dont hunt for skulls. In conclusion FMJ isnt pro or anti war its a story that lets you decide and I think a more anti-war/anti-vietnam movie is Platoon.

 

[Mr. Doe]

snip

Every single science-fiction tale is also a political tale by default, because the society that created the tale is informed and influenced by political opinion. There isn't a single science fiction tale that cannot be interpreted as having a political message of some sort. Star Wars is a very preachy parable about the importance of standing up to totalitarianism (I mean, they even called the bad soldiers stormtroopers, geez, talk about underlining the point, George "subtlety, we don't need that" Lucas). Starship Troopers is one of the most clever and caustic anti-war films ever made. Nasty sentinent AIs when they appear in a film are usually there as a critique of humanity's technological race and the possible consequences. Star Trek is the perfect postmodern critique of colonialist thinking (contrast how the Enterprise crew behave when visiting "unknown worlds" with what European settlers did in Africa, Australia etc), and most films involving "aliens" usually have something under the surface to say about things like immigration, racism etc (no coincidence that the US calls illegal immigrants "aliens" too). Those green-skinned space babes were probably on the run from oppression in their homeworld. Even E.T. was just a tale of human prejudice. The reason why you see science fiction always paired with politics is because science fiction IS politics. If you've never noticed this before, it's probably just because you were younger and not as aware - now that you're older and smarter you're able to read between the lines of these things a lot more easily.

Well thats really only your interperetation of them and I didnt say that "ALL MESSAGES ARE BAD RAAAAARGH" you cant argue with "Totalitarian death marching space nazis are evil" if its a message like that and it doesnt try and be anything prominent than it works because on Star Wars center stage are space Samurai/Wizards living in the distant past fighting an evil empire. When I sit down to watch sci-fi I dont want to be deconstructing the whole thing to find hidden messages I want to watch lasers blast through hulls and space sword fights. Sci-fi (the movies anyway) for me has awlays been a sort of mind vacation where I dont have to think about HOW the thrusters are working or WHY the aliens are hostile or any sort of the thing its space its supposed to be awesome the final unexplored parts of our universe lawless and fantastic without any of the bullshit in other fiction where they cant be muslims because were at war with them and they cant be americans because than it looks like we support the "THE GOVERNMENT DID IT!" type of thinking when I watch sci-fi I watch it because it has space marines and mile long spaceships. And one Sci-fi movie that definetly has no message of politics or social satire (unless you didnt take your meds that day) is ALIEN a story about a frieghter that gets murdered by a dickheaded alien.

 

[Woodsey]

We need something we can relate to, and quite often someone will write a theme into something unintentionally.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Star Trek (the original series) had one message and that was "Space is awesome!"

You're kidding, right? TOS was a series of morality plays; almost, if not every episode had a message, or some kind of theme that it was exploring. This didn't start to fade until Gene Rodenbery died, and the lack of it is why so many people say that the new movie was a good action flick, but a bad Star Trek. As a matter of fact, Star Trek is the first thing that came to mind when I saw your thread title; I was thinking something along the lines of "Star Trek says this is nothing new."

As I stated a little more harshly in the rant, Sci-Fi has almost always explored issues -- it's practically inherent to the genre. However, if you're looking for non-preachy stuff, you might like some old pulp novels -- which are pretty much "guy gets girl while shooting aliens." The reprints from the '70s tend to be dirt cheap in used bookstores, and they all make good Summer reads. Incidentally, this is where the distinction between Space Opera and other types of Sci-Fi come into play; Space opera is to Sci-Fi as Sword and Sorcery is to Fantasy. It takes itself less seriously, and is more fun in general -- partially because it tends to be written on a much lower level. These stories were kind of the video games of the '30s, and they saw a resurgence in the '70s for some reason, with both old stories being reprinted and new stories being written.

 

[Wolfrug]

at what point did Full Metal Jacket say anything anti war? sure half the American soldiers were crazy as hell but the enemy forces werent taking any moral high ground YOU INTERPERATED it as anti war Full Metal Jacket isnt about "This is wrong and awful" its "This is what war is like. What do you think?" and why are you telling me to grow up? because I dont want political diatribe in my entertainment? and I find it just lovely that you think that the only messages I saw were the political messages in Avatar that is just what pushed me over the edge that and the thought of a predator movie where half the predators wear mood rings and dont hunt for skulls. In conclusion FMJ isnt pro or anti war its a story that lets you decide and I think a more anti-war/anti-vietnam movie is Platoon.

Yes, sure, FMJ, as a work of art, is a subjective experience, and Kubrick did supposedly intend to make a movie portraying war, rather than making an implicit anti-war movie. But yes, my interpretation is one of anti-war. In fact, I'd say any movie which successfully portrays war is by default an anti-war movie - anything else will be propaganda. You don't exactly come out of it feeling like it'd be a fun idea to go shootin' and tootin' in the jungles, do you? Then again, I am well aware that soldiers can turn any movie into a pro-war movie (as was also briefly mentioned in Jarhead, although they were watching Apocalypse Now).

Now, why can we have this discussion? Well, because the movie FMJ clearly has some kind of message, whether pro-, anti-, or proffed "neutral". We could each of us give our reasons for why we think the movie corresponds to our view of things (for instance, I think the whole first act in the boot camp is about as anti-military as you can get), and then have mature debate over it. What we'd be discussing then is the inherent message of the movie, as we subjectively experienced it. I'd say that any work of art must have a message, and I personally think that FMJ has a lot more of it than most.

It was your blanket statement that the movie is somehow a tabula rasa which should be taken at face value and nothing more that prompted my "grow up" comment: shit ain't that easy. As others have tried to tell you here, nothing is that easy. I do often elect to watch(/read/listen to/play) something which I know has deeper ramifications, but which I choose to ignore for the moment and just let it entertain me. That's why I can enjoy Gears of War even though everything in its narrative is ludicrous, or why I can watch Die Hard and just get me some John McClane action without further wondering about the othering of the European. But just because I choose to ignore the message for the moment does not mean it's not there, and I do have the critical capacity to discern it. We can have differing opinions on a matter (say, whether Aliens is pro-feminist or anti-feminist), but it does -not- remove the fact something is happening below the surface.

Honestly, I don't understand what you're looking for here. If an author/director/developer is too 'in your face' with their message (like for instance Cameron was in Avatar, plus the fact he hashes it all up), then that's a sign of poor writing/directing/whatever, which can and should be criticized. But to somehow completely, in an Uwe Boll-like manner, attempt to SIDESTEP a deeper message? What the hell? Are you deliberately looking for poor writing?

I apologize for the personal attack, anyway, it was unnecessary, although I explained my reasoning above.