Theres been a lot of talk about this film and my own thoughts have been pretty conflicted regarding how to weigh the good and bad aspects of it, and I think this critique does a good job at addressing a lot of the things ive had problems with the film, mainly its underlying liberal rhetoric and the shortcomings of its American-centric narratives. Dont get me wrong I think its a good film and all, but theres some very real limitations to its overall commentary that I think we all need to be thinking about seriously.
was she supposed to be a trump stand in? i thought the movie made a distinction between her and the conservatives. thought she was supposed to be like a typical liberal stand in like Kamala or someone?
she had very trump iconography (the banners and the caps etc), the dont look up rallies and everything were clearly supposed to be trump like, she was wearing red most of the time, her senior advisor was her incompetent son, there was the whole "judge with sex scandals" thing in the background, and she was radiating a trump kinda energy in general. cant remember anything that pointed to her being democrat, might have missed it though. most of the shit ive read about it seemed to have the same takeaway fwiw, so i think if they were trying for a "jabs at both sides" generic non-partisan president character i think they missed the mark
i remember she had a picture of Bill and Hillary on her desk, and i thought the difference was that conservatives were pretending there wasnt even anything to talk about when it went to their news show, vs everyone else and in the administration who did acknowledge its happening, tried to stop it, and then backed out after the capitalists basically said no and then they turned to damage control. i think its somewhat ambiguous on purpose, and shes clearly supposed to sorta be a jab at Clinton and liberals too i feel. i think maybe the film failed in that aspect too of not going after liberals clearly enough