|
Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:You've completely missed my point and gone on your own political binge instead. A majority of the sci-fi content on Syfy centers around either corporate statism (incorporated, kill joys, dark matter) or a corporate antagonist (the expanse). I enjoy all of these shows, but its a noticeable and increasingly boring trend. All of those corporations have different motivations and dynamics, though (can't speak for Dark Matter as I haven't seen it). Evil corporation is equivalent to an evil state, a sci-fi trope during the Cold War. It's just a reaction to the current public consciousness and hardly something only SyFy does. Personally I am not tired of watching shows about evil corporations any more then shows about evil oppressive states or if you want to go to some other way, evil dysfunctional crime families. I don't find a show about any old seeming concept boring if it is presented well. Killjoys hits completely different buttons for me then Incorporated.
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 05:45 |
|
|
drat, Ben is a stone cold psychopath. He's less like Don Draper and more like Tony Soprano. Duck Phillips kid wasn't exactly wrong when he called him out on lying to everyone, including his wife.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:You've completely missed my point and gone on your own political binge instead. A majority of the sci-fi content on Syfy centers around either corporate statism (incorporated, kill joys, dark matter) or a corporate antagonist (the expanse). I enjoy all of these shows, but its a noticeable and increasingly boring trend. I don't know, I think you're stretching a bit here. Incorporated is pretty thoroughly a modern cyberpunk show with all the trappings (ie, strong corporations and weak states) that implies. There aren't a ton of similarities in terms of world building to Killjoys or Darkmatter, other than the word "corporation." I'm not even really sure that "corporate statism" is an accurate depiction of Dark Matter's universe, which just seems more like a poorly thought out mashup of random sci-fi elements.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 07:53
|
|
|
The intro with the fire seemed really cruel, but there are areas where that happens right now. You don't pay your fire insurance, the fire dept will just show up to prevent it from spreading to other places.Astroman posted:drat, Ben is a stone cold psychopath. He's less like Don Draper and more like Tony Soprano.  Roger you were a competent antagonist until he saw your red beeping watch. I thought for sure that he would survive a bit longer, then get mind wiped with the thing Aaron was working on.
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Astroman posted:drat, Ben is a stone cold psychopath. He's less like Don Draper and more like Tony Soprano. Toplowtech fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
The show is asking some interesting questions in regards to Ben's morality. He's stolen from the corporations since he was a kid, but you can forgive that since they are painted as so evil, with literal sex and sensation slaves that are legal property, mindwiping, killing, etc. He's lied and cheated in the corporate world, but none of those guys are above reproach, except when prevented by draconian security measures. And the world "outside the wall" is cold, cutthroat, and cruel as well. But how far is too far? He has completely deceived his wife, lying to her and pretending to love her, and she appears to be the only decent person in the world. The other halfway decent person, his ageless HR friend, has only done minor lying and cheating but Ben, he's gotten people mindwiped and now straight up murdered. Sure, in the beginning he was a victim of circumstance, trying to do right by his lover, blamed wrongly for ruining her family when in fact it was the corporation. But does his pure love for one woman justify massive immorality? The strength of the show will be in how they explore that, or if it's just backgrounded as a way to show this cool horrible dystopian future. It could go either way at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
It's sort of like cyberpunk Count of Monte Cristo, especially given how Ben is really obsessed with his goal regardless of the collateral damage it causes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Astroman posted:drat, Ben is a stone cold psychopath. He's less like Don Draper and more like Tony Soprano. Lol yeah I thought he was just some lame hacker/con artist but he went from Walter White to Heisenberg in the span of one episode. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Astroman posted:The show is asking some interesting questions in regards to Ben's morality. Is it? Ben/Aaron is definitely questioning his morality, but to the viewer he is right as rain: everyone in the Green Zone is a piece of poo poo and he should burn the whole thing to the ground. No one there can claim ignorance to the conditions in the red zones, either, as travel between zones is free (one-way). Hell, many of them even go there to explore and abuse the poor some more. Roger manipulated his handicapped brother, tortured a woman and resorted to blackmail to ruin a man's life because he stole "his" promotion. I'm glad he's dead. As to the deceived wife, she's just as rotten as the rest of them: - She disapproves of mutilating a young slave to look like a recently deceased rich rear end in a top hat, then does the procedure (for money) anyway. Later that night she goes home and sleeps like a baby. - Her maid steals food to help a neighbor whose kid is sick. The good doctor offers assistance but, as soon as things become inconvenient for her, she backs off of the deal and fires the maid. With one less person able to raise money in their building, the kid will probably die, but let's forget about that and fire up The Sims 2099 to see how our baby is gonna look like! - When things get rough, she turns to her confidant: a torturer and murderer. She talks to him specifically because she knows he's "seen things in his job"; therapists are useless, but my good buddy the butcher of people... now, that just might work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
That's quite a bit of edge you've got there. Anyway, have to say I was impressed by the straight on scene regarding PTSD and coping. Did not expect that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
 #maga
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:That's quite a bit of edge you've got there. Why?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
The Trump presidency caused the world depicted in Incorporated
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
seravid posted:Why? My guess? Lack of positive male role models.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
Haven't started the show yet, but the premise reminded me of Jennifer Government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Government If anyone is interested in the concept of corporations controlling the wolrd I'd recommend it. It's a pretty easy read. It includes the police only investigating crimes if you bankroll the investigation, corporations murdering people as a marketing stunt and the name of the company you work for being your last name.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
I really enjoyed Jennifer Government. It's definitely pulp sypunk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:My guess? Lack of positive male role models. Well there's plenty of that in the show. Ben did try to strike a bargain with Roger, but he couldn't be reasoned with. Of course he couldn't, just like the lady that sets buildings on fire to turn desperate women into sexual slaves couldn't. The solution to the Incorporated problem is not diplomatic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
seravid posted:Well there's plenty of that in the show. I doubt given the cutthroat nature of the corporations you could ever trust a climber like Roger to keep his side of the bargain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
Almost caught up, saw the first 3 episodes, consistent quality so far. Agree with the people that said the defection sequence was very good. But I don't see why Syngenta (or whatever) wouldn't run their own indoctrination programs, seems like the logical next step really. Anyone seen that show Continuum that was mentioned before? Is it any good? From what I get from wikipedia, anticorporation terrorists travel to 2012 and continue being anticorporation terrorists. Is that correct? That could be fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
It's Spiga Biotech, but I was amused at the idea he's working for Sargento, makers of fine frozen Oven Ready Pizzas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
Mr. Nemo posted:Almost caught up, saw the first 3 episodes, consistent quality so far. Agree with the people that said the defection sequence was very good. But I don't see why Syngenta (or whatever) wouldn't run their own indoctrination programs, seems like the logical next step really. Continuum was an odd show because the "good" guy main character is a future cop who is attempting to keep the (horrible corporate run) future as it is while the "bad" guys are terrorists who are trying to stop it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
Mr. Nemo posted:Almost caught up, saw the first 3 episodes, consistent quality so far. Agree with the people that said the defection sequence was very good. But I don't see why Syngenta (or whatever) wouldn't run their own indoctrination programs, seems like the logical next step really. I'm for sure the TVIV foremost expert on Continuum and yeah, its great. It manages to be good sci-fi/time travel while managing to eventually subvert just about every expectation you might have about the show. Yeah they're anti-corporate terrorists, but they're sure as poo poo not the bad guys. The presented protagonists, with one exception, are pretty much downright evil.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 07:40
|
|
|
seravid posted:Is it? Ben/Aaron is definitely questioning his morality, but to the viewer he is right as rain: everyone in the Green Zone is a piece of poo poo and he should burn the whole thing to the ground. No one there can claim ignorance to the conditions in the red zones, either, as travel between zones is free (one-way). Hell, many of them even go there to explore and abuse the poor some more. I'm not saying the Green Zone people are in any way morally pure and good, but the question the show seems to be hinting at is that for their evil, is Ben morally right to do anything and everything evil himself to get his girlfriend back? And while their circumstances aren't great, I haven't seen too many Red Zone people portrayed as noble and perfect either. Elena's brother breaks that innocent kid's leg, ruining his life and chances to get out. Her father, when he gets out of debtor's prison thanks to her selling herself into sex slavery, abandoned his son to go on a bender. The guy her brother works for is a gangster, and the hacker lady humiliated/tortured Roger for kicks to get the info off the keyhole. You could also argue that the people in the Green Zone are just as much slaves to their circumstance and forced to do evil, the same way ordinary Americans are forced to go along with the Nazi occupation in Man in the High Castle and parrot sieg heil's and pretend to love the fascist system they now live in. It would be pretty difficult for a woke rich Green Zone citizen to decide to fight the system, protest, sabotage, make a loud public stand, etc without getting unpersoned, arrested, or killed. Their fight would not last long. Ben's wife isn't perfect, and does seem to be the least immoral person in the Green Zone we've seen so far, and seems to be starting to question her life. I'd say causing a riot that could cause her to be arrested and lose her husband and house is a bit more than being "inconvenienced." She hasn't seemed to do anything that justifies what Ben is doing to her other than "being born in the Green Zone." The other two who *might* be somewhat moral are the Allstate Gestapo security guy and Ben's HR friend. But the former compartmentalizes his perfect family from his job, which is surveillance, daily torture and full support of the worst of the system--he seems to have some deep morals that come out at odd times, but he's firmly a company man. The latter is a Red Zone social climber who may have done no worse than petty crime there and fraud to sneak into the Green Zone, but we don't know enough about him yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
"Circumstances aren't great" in the Red Zone is one hell of an euphemism and a few examples of lovely people do not define millions (?) of people living in the dirt. The hacker lady was right and good, though, uncool of you to put her in the same group as the dad. Ben's motivations are selfish and it would be preferable for him to want to dismantle the corporations from the inside because it's the right thing to do, but a journey to save his girlfriend makes for a more fun show. What evil did he do? People in the Green Zone are either for the hyper-capitalist system or against it. Everyone's driving a Prius now, but the system is exactly the same as before: a need to increase profit and growth year after year means it's only a matter of time until a new global disaster happens and, in the meantime, untold number of people live unnecessarily in poverty. There is free flow of information, people living in the Green Zone are not being deceived about the reality of their world. I'm not even talking about violent insurgence; the absolute least the doctor could've done is choosing not to carve the boy's face; she did it willingly. Treating the folks down at the gate, however, was a bridge too far: she was only willing to check on the little girl and even that proved to be too much effort for her. Note that the riot caused her no problems whatsoever, I don't know what you mean by risking arrest and losing the house. Point is: the doctor pretends, but she doesn't give a poo poo. She is not only an accessory, but an active participant in the oppressive system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
seravid posted:Ben's motivations are selfish and it would be preferable for him to want to dismantle the corporations from the inside because it's the right thing to do, but a journey to save his girlfriend makes for a more fun show. What evil did he do? He's building a mind reading device for an evil corporation. That's like peak evil.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
I'm having a lot of trouble buying this world. The idea that Due Process would be abolished for any executive level employee, let alone a senior executive, is absurd. Private property also seems to be abolished, since the corporation owns everyone's car and house. It just doesn't make any sense that the haves in this society would have so little protection.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
seravid posted:Ben's motivations are selfish and it would be preferable for him to want to dismantle the corporations from the inside because it's the right thing to do, but a journey to save his girlfriend makes for a more fun show. I would be shocked if they're not building to her dying in his arms and him swearing to burn the system down. LegoPirateNinja posted:I'm having a lot of trouble buying this world. Why? This is basically how feudalism worked until the age of absolute monarchies and even then the very top was usually privileged. Human civilization has had laws for thousands of years but the idea that everyone is equal under them is a recent invention.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
Getting people accustomed to a luxurious living that can be taken away at a moment's notice is just good business.Mulva posted:He's building a mind reading device for an evil corporation. That's like peak evil. That looks pretty bad, but we'll have to wait and see how it ends up being used. MiddleOne posted:I would be shocked if they're not building to her dying in his arms and him swearing to burn the system down. As likely as that sounds, fridging Elena would be very disappointing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
1: This is a Capitalist system, or it's supposed to be. 2: Feudalism did have protections for nobles since the Magna Carta. Everything about this world says Stalinism, not capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:Private property also seems to be abolished, since the corporation owns everyone's car and house. The people in the green zone are not free people. They are serfs that are allowed to work for the corporation and in return get a comfortable place/stuff to live a good life. The people in the red zone are noone - or slaves at best. MiddleOne posted:... feudalism... What I cant believe regarding their worldbuilding is that even after 70% of the earth became uninhabitable there still is a market that big enough to keep such megacorporations running.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
I'm glad I'm not the only one who watches this show for its chilling look into a future where the Soviets won the Cold War.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Nektu posted:The "haves" you talk about are the CEOs and maybe the upper management. Chad Johnson is a 40th level executive with access to the super exclusive executive clubs. If he isn't upper management, no one is. Even Ben should qualify, since he ranks high enough to report directly to the CEO. And Chad's family has no insurance whatsoever. No security. It is absurd.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:Chad Johnson is a 40th level executive with access to the super exclusive executive clubs. If he isn't upper management, no one is. Even Ben should qualify, since he ranks high enough to report directly to the CEO. And every human working for it is just a replaceable cog in the machine 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:1: This is a Capitalist system, or it's supposed to be. Not necessarily. Much of modern contemporary capitalism, well since the 1980's and the shift towards neo-liberalism and market fundamentalism at least, is built on the philosophical assumptions of modern libertarianism and its ideas of the minimal state and the absolute sanctity of private ownership and voluntary contracts made between individuals. (Just google 'State, Anarchy and Utopia') Basically, the state should only be big enough to defend private ownership, enforce voluntary contracts (voluntary here does not account for coercion) and basically should only redistribute what it needs to protect these systems. Depriving someone of their property without a voluntary contract is to be seen as tantamount to depriving them off their limbs. One of the easiest critiques to levy against this philosophy is that it becomes virtually indistinguishable from feudalism when taken to its logical conclusion and a few own all the property. People are still technically participating voluntarily, but there's not really a choice as the option is death. The dystopia on display here pretty much reflects that criticism. The show keeps hammering down how people are voluntarily signing away their rights, because within this system they have no choice. The corporations can mind-wipe anyone for any reason because the green-zone employees had to 'voluntarily' agree to that stipulation to enjoy their privileges in the first place. No one is technically being forced into anything. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jan 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:It just doesn't make any sense that the haves in this society would have so little protection. There's no reason to think the 'haves' have appeared in the show yet. Like I'm sure Krauss earns a ton of money to buy all those paintings and poo poo, but she's still working for a living. The corps answer to shareholders and the show hasn't given any indication that the capitalist class stopped getting paid. Edit: Yeah this seems more like anarcho-capitalism than anything else, but it's like 1984 in that the ideological framework that led to this point is kind of irrelevant, the story is about power. The show isn't really anti-capitalist beyond the trappings, at least not yet. Vitamin P fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Jan 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
seravid posted:People in the Green Zone are either for the hyper-capitalist system or against it. Everyone's driving a Prius now, but the system is exactly the same as before: a need to increase profit and growth year after year means it's only a matter of time until a new global disaster happens and, in the meantime, untold number of people live unnecessarily in poverty. There is free flow of information, people living in the Green Zone are not being deceived about the reality of their world. People in the green zone are slaves to the system too, just ones with better benefits. Chad Johnson didn't like the pressure of his job but he felt trapped because the only alternative is to instantly lose everything (which happened when Ben interfered to incriminate him). And if switching companies is basically treason then challenging corporations in general would be even worse, and every company would want to crush that out as quickly as possible. Also redzoners trample over each other to get into the green zone (prizefighter Theo tried to do it, basketball runner up tried to do it) and we have good reason to suspect that when their value expires they'll be at risk of being kicked out back to the red zone (Elena says when her contract expires she'll be mindwiped and kicked to the red zone, Chad Johnson's family lost their house and was getting kicked to the red zone when he got fired). The specifics are kind of debatable but when you have super-powerful corporations who operate unchallenged and can destroy lives on a whim then they have no reason to permit people to undermine them. Want to try a civil non-violent protest? Well they still kick you out into the redzone immediately and deprive you of all power soooo good luck with that. If Ben's wife refused to operate on the young guy's face, the old lady files a complaint and just goes to someone else. The protest achieves nothing. I also think you're being extremely unfair about the situation at the gate. Let's go through the events. - The housekeeper tries to steal from the Larson household and gets arrested. - Ben's wife gets the housekeeper released, finds out why she did it and agrees to help treat the ill child. She has no authority to do this, could get in serious trouble for doing it and gets absolutely no personal benefit out of the arrangement. - A huge crowd of people turn up instead of the one patient she was expecting. She obviously can't treat a whole crowd of people in one sitting, especially without destroying her own position (which cripples her ability to help anyone else in future), so she tries to help the one person she agreed to help. The crowd gets angry with this, a riot nearly breaks out and she gets injured by a brick being thrown in her face, then she gives up on the plan. Ben's wife was trying to give pro bono medical aid for a stranger (at a risk to her own life/career), an idea she came up with on her own to help her housekeeper (who had been stealing from her moments earlier) and she was going ahead with it until an angry mob threw a brick in her face. Oh and Ben's wife is still traumatized about getting kidnapped, mutilated and ransomed the last time she visited the red zone... so an angry/violent group of redzoners would be extremely scary for her. It also isn't too difficult to imagine that if things had gone well (treat the girl without having any issues) then providing medical aid could be something that Laura Larson might have tried again and she might have gone on to help more people, but it's perfectly understandable for someone to abandon an idea when it involves them getting physically harmed. Condemning her because her attempt to help didn't involve instantly curing EVERYBODY of all their ailments seems insane because it's far beyond her power. quote:Note that the riot caused her no problems whatsoever, I don't know what you mean by risking arrest and losing the house. She was quite clearly breaking the rules and the established setting has little tolerance for rule breakers. She didn't get arrested or lose her house, but she was taking some risks there. She's clearly not supposed to be inviting redzoners in without a good reason (sneaking people in through the backgate at night isn't something you do when what you're doing is allowed and legitimate). As a plastic surgeon she isn't supposed to do medical work. These are things that would get you in trouble in modern society, so they're almost certainly forbidden in a future dystopia. Yeah she has (so far) dodged any punitive consequences for her actions, but that doesn't mean she wasn't taking a risk and it's also possible her mother helped brush the problem under the rug.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
There may be consequences to those who defy the establishment, so better stay quiet and keep loving the poor and the planet some more? Refusing to do the procedure wouldn't really accomplish anything, so might as well be the one to do it and make a few bucks? You're exaggerating the danger and risks Laura faced. Going to the checkpoint at night is fine if you need slaves for a dinner party; someone of her status could probably get five or six (cooks, waiters, etc.) in without raising any suspicion. Anyway, Laura arrived at the gate and saw the mess she caused but, even then, she was in complete control. The guards had to know things were gonna go south the minute they opened the gate, but a word from her and they complied immediately. She then unfortunately took a rock to the head (that did not endanger her life) and proceeded to condemn the girl to a horrible death ("I've been hearing her scream through the night") and fire the maid for good measure. Do you think this is an appropriate response? Afterwards, there was no follow-up of any kind and nothing suggests she got or could've gotten in any kind of trouble for the occurrence. The people at the top don't care. And neither does Laura.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
seravid posted:"Circumstances aren't great" in the Red Zone is one hell of an euphemism and a few examples of lovely people do not define millions (?) of people living in the dirt. The hacker lady was right and good, though, uncool of you to put her in the same group as the dad. Let me guess--if YOU were there, you'd be tearing down that system from the inside!  Hacker lady isn't "cool"--she humilated, debased, and befouled someone who deserved it--so that he could destroy someone else. What evil did Ben do? Besides Mulva posted:He's building a mind reading device for an evil corporation. That's like peak evil. he's also psychopathically manipulating his wife. He met this woman and pretended to love her, lying to her and tricking her into marriage. He lies to her every day, saying he loves her, lying about who he is, and it's all to get Elena back, and if he does he'll walk out on his wife leaving her crushed, and she's already psychologically traumatized as it is. I mean for what it's worth, Don Draper did seem to actually love Betty at first. With Ben it's 100% acting. Or does the fact that she is "complicit" in the system because she doesn't realize it's bad and isn't trying to bring it down every day make Ben's treatment of her good? For someone who says stuff like you worry about a woman being "fridged", it's not very feminist of you to find his lovely treatment of her OK. My point is that Ben seems to not be the good guy hero he's supposed to be to us, and that if he gets Elena he'd gladly just do whatever he could to make the best life for them within the system. And so far, it just seems to me that his wife, while not perfect, is the best person we've seen in the show so far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
I think the show would be better if Laura fell over dead from the head trauma she sustained. Furthermore
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 05:45 |
|
|
LegoPirateNinja posted:I'm having a lot of trouble buying this world. LegoPirateNinja posted:1: This is a Capitalist system, or it's supposed to be. There's nothing inherently anti-capitalist about companies providing living quarters for their employees or having a large degree of control over their lives. Was the US actually a non-capitalist state for a pretty significant portion of its existence? Capitalism has nothing to do with particular types of private property, such as land, being within reach for any particular portion of the population. It's reasonable given the setting that the resources required for a middle or upper-class lifestyle are so far out of reach for even the wealthy that only very large organizations can actually afford them. People at Ben's level (or even at Chad's level) can't afford to live in a nice house in the Green Zone, but the companies can. They get to live there as part of their employment contract. There's no "due process" when they get fired, just like there's no due process when your employer fires you and stops providing you with health insurance. Paradoxish fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Jan 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2017 01:15
|
|