Furthermore it is the soldiers who are the only people who can save the galaxy, military force is more or less the only way to solve the various threats that pop up in the series.
edited 8th Sep '17 9:44:16 AM by Fourthspartan56
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangNobody says anything about stopping those kind of movies, it is just interesting how they pop up - and how they are used. I mean Dunkirk has somehow become the symbol for enduring Brexit which is just...yeah, I guess Brexiter haven't understood that Dunkirk was a crushing defeat. And I do feel that ironically, the strong man narrative has been seen more critical in the past. Sure, you always had your all-defeating action hero, but what they fought for and how they were seen was slightly different.
the difference between star wars and mass effect, is the MAN in star wars is the empire, aka Space Nazi's, while in mass effect, the man is the Citadel council, democratically elected officials, and bureaucrats.
because of that fact, Star wars comes off as distinctly anti-fascist, while mass effect can easily be read as pro-military
edited 8th Sep '17 12:57:09 PM by Jetyl
I'm afraid I can't explain myself, sir. Because I am not myself, you see?![]()
Kinda but issue is we dont see democratic institution in star wars except as poor victim it must be protected, people were complaing by how useless they are against the first order which come as "democracy is usless but necesary"
Because is nonsense to think miliary exist as world separate from politics or that military are some sort of superhero that just want to protect everyone and them leave, that thinking is what let to trope like strawman civilian
edited 8th Sep '17 1:22:09 PM by Fourthspartan56
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI wish we had more pro-military stories, personally. I'm sick of hapless everyman protagonists. I miss stories that were about professional heroes. Cops, soldiers, special agents, etc. People who spent years being trained for whatever they're dealing with, have access to professional resources and funding, and go out there to do some good.
Private industry heroes are fine too, so long as we get to see these people being experts in their field. I'm just so sick of the "hapless schlub spends two weeks getting a crash course in awesomeness and then saves the day" formula.
Battleship is actually one of my all-time favorite movies, because it pits American and Japanese naval forces against an alien invasion and plays the matchup completely straight. I also really liked the first Transformers movie, but fell out of the franchise after the second when they started putting more emphasis on the giant robots and hapless kid.
edited 8th Sep '17 1:30:40 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.![]()
![]()
![]()
which is why I'd say Star Wars is just Anti-Facist, not pro-democracy.
![]()
![]()
the problem with pro-military stories, is the inherent deflection that comes to discussing the military critically. which it needs to be look at critically, given its an institution whose objectives are inherently violent, and murderous.
there is also the issue with the pervasiveness of pro-military stories. Honestly, I wouldn't have immediately thought of Mass Effect as a pro-military story, until this forum pointed it out. and in that, it has let me click together many of the reasons I was not satisfied with the story of mass effect
![]()
honestly, I'd disagree. Tho, I'd cite personal tastes more. I hate 90% of action flicks, and prefer more human and social dramas. Oh how I wish I could get Sci-fi and fantasy works in those kind of veins, instead of action stories.
edited 8th Sep '17 1:38:05 PM by Jetyl
I'm afraid I can't explain myself, sir. Because I am not myself, you see?I have no problem with the military being glorified in ME 1. i have a problem with the fact they only look good because somebody else was made to look bad.
Yeah, from a storywriting standpoint, what makes the miltary the Only Sane Man is the fact that the Cital Council wholly ineffectual, obstructionist and prone to Head-in-the-Sand Management.
Kinda like a sci-fi League of Nations.
edited 8th Sep '17 1:42:48 PM by DrunkenNordmann
We learn from history that we do not learn from historyI'm fine with the military being portrayed positively, so long as the Straw Civilian trope isn't played straight. Deference to civilian leadership is at the heart of a modern democratic society; without that, you live in a security state dictatorship. So when there's a story where the military hero and his military mentors and associates are portrayed as the only sane ones while elected or appointed civilian leadership is portrayed as ineffectual, cowardly, or malicious, I have a problem with it. I don't really care whether a soldier character is ruthless or magnanimous, but what I don't like is when they're portrayed as unfettered and omniscient.
Mass Effect has this problem, to the point where some parts of Mass Effect 1 could have an "ARMY OF ONE" advertisement stuck into the dialogue without context and it wouldn't sound weird.
edited 8th Sep '17 1:55:04 PM by CrimsonZephyr
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."Taste is probably a factor there. In this regard, I'm specifically talking about action romps. If somebody is going to be using violence for the greater good, I'd like to see it more often being people who are charged with the responsibility to use violence for the greater good. The problem with Everyman Heroes is that they always come with this anti-authority screed. It's a right-wing power fantasy that we've normalized in our culture.
The cops can't help you. The military isn't prepared for this. The people who are supposed to protect you won't. Only Joe Cowboy and his rack of guns can possibly save you from what's coming. That guy walking down the street with dark glasses, a tattoo of a swastika, and a 12-gauge strapped to his back? He's the true hero, looking out for your best interests, defending you from wicked horrors you couldn't even begin to imagine. Like vampires! Or black people!
Everyman heroes challenge the monopolization of force, a concept that's ingrained in the very concept of government. They propose that violence is a skill that anyone can master within a week-long training montage, while legitimate authority is useless at best and dangerously corrupt at worst. They often go so far as to court the idea that certain individuals just have an inherent specialness about them, and because they're so special, the rules shouldn't apply to them like they do to everyone else.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Personally, I found the citadel to fall into the category of unintentionally sympathetic, due to fourth wall myopia-at least in the first game. When you think about, the council actually has very little evidence that the reapers really exist.
Mind you, most stories try to justify some level of With This Herring. This is why many stories these days have obstructive politicians or governments. If Gotham's police were competent, you wouldn't need Batman.
Personally, I think ME has a fairly sensible view of the military. It helps that the story has plenty of peace aesops, too. The story is mostly about people of different backgrounds putting aside their differences for the greater good.
Leviticus 19:34Not sure I agree with the notion of the Everyman hero being a rightist concept. A lot of conservatives I've listened to have criticized the overuse of it as un-patriotic. They tend to argue we need more positive portrayals of authority figures like police, soldiers, and government agents.
Leviticus 19:34I agree that I rather see a trained man taking on the enemy than some everyday guy doing it and somehow getting away with it. But that doesn't mean that the end result has to be unquestionable pro-military. I mean, I recently decided to give the A-Team movie a try and I was frankly kind of shocked. The original show was stupid in its insistence that the solution to pretty much every problem is a military action involving a big shoot out, but there were at least hints of the military being not necessarily the greatest thing on earth and Vietnam not being a piece of Cake. There was naturally Murdock, but also the way the characters spoke and reacted about war suggested that there was a lot of trauma involved with their story. But the movie....I frankly didn't make it that far in, but the whole beginning played like a very uncomfortable joke. "Oh, you have a Ranger Tattoo? This is fate, you'll totally help me to rescue my friend even though I have threatened you with a gun just now." "Oh, you are Hanibal? I'll totally risk my live in an operation I know nothing about, no problem, I might be an ex-ranger but I am a honourable ex-ranger." And yes, I know that it was deliberately so over the top, but it was still uncomfortable to watch.
And when they take a trained guy (or gal for that matter) I still expect some consequences when the go over the line.
edited 8th Sep '17 2:24:13 PM by Swanpride
Just popping in to say that it seems weird you'd object to a series named for the giant robots focusing more on the giant robots.

The people who give the military their power. Soldier men with guns are pawns, maybe even a queen if they're lucky. But no matter how powerful they are, they're still just a playing piece. Someone tell them where to go and who to shoot and that's it.
There was no need to portray everyone in political power as greedy and stupid while only the soldier mens could save the galaxy.