Nort

2w

my mother?

HaroldsChicken

2w

It’s a movie and a Muslim saying lol

Nort

2w

would also like to see digger in imax

but real imax, which would unfortunately be a 2hr commute for me

HaroldsChicken

2w

Hour drive for me lol but by parents so could visit them and see

HaroldsChicken

2w

And like the movie I think we can both be “ right “

WAITING ON SILENT

2w

thinking of seeing this tn around 7. currently no seats have been bought. may get to have a private screening

Dxtr

2w

Theater only had about 8 ppl btw lol

shaleirose

2w

The credits are a meta depiction of us, the audience for Digger, walking out of the theater to the f\*\*\*ed up reality we live in after laughing at a two hour movie that satirizes the people at the top. The final idea the movie wants you to have is that this was a mirror for how art works in our real lives. They didn't want you to walk away thinking "oh so billionaires lie to us". We all already know that

HaroldsChicken

2w

we already knew satire serves that purpose and that reading of it removes the second twist and much of what comes after

HaroldsChicken

2w

Wow what I said but a white woman said it so now yall will get it

shaleirose

2w

From Alejandro himself in the video you shared:

"Suddenly I got this idea because I was struggling how to tell this story, and I felt that the only way was to reflect upon it and see it from a distance to separate it from the reality. Reality sometimes is so close and so complex, that it is very hard for us to understand it. And I think sometimes representation of reality is more real than reality because it allows us to recognize ourselves. That's why in a theater play, or a film, or a song, or a painting, we have distance... we can see ourselves and we can get together and we can laugh at ourselves and that allows us to understand reality more. That's art. That's the role of art, which this film is about: the role of art, which is futile, is useless, but it's very important for us to understand."

Jonboi

2w

Alejandro's point makes no sense.

The audience isn't laughing at themselves, they're laughing at a specific group of politicians and power players. If Alejandro wanted us to earnestly meditate on the cathartic power of art, the only evidence he gives for that is the speech given by Kenny (something TOLD to us, with dramatic irony that mirrors ideas of controlling the narrative discussed in the play) and a brief audience reaction where they cry and mutter "fuck you" under their breath. Which is then immediately followed by an ending which undercuts it and highlights the dramatic irony of the situation. Alejandro never pauses to show reverence for art. The more I think about it the more I think Alejandro does want us to fall somewhere in between, despite constructing a movie that argues much more convincingly for the cynical interpretation. This is partly because it's a much more dramatically interesting thesis. What's interesting about "art gives us catharsis, and that's good, but still the world sucks"? No s\*\*\*. That's a really tepid and boring point to make! It doesn't justify the framing device.

No matter what angle you look at the movie from, you run into problems. I just think the movie doesn't work.