Are we even sure that satire ever did what it was supposed to do? Does pretending to be a thing to point out its absurdity actually work on anyone who doesn't explicitly know/care about the intent? Or was satire always niche shitposting that only a few understood but most took at face value? And instead of huffing its own farts for being clever and subversive, should have noticed the writing on the wall a couple centuries ago?
"Americans don't get satire" is a thing I've heard a lot and I think it's true. This is part of the genius of paul verhoeven. He knows 99% of american viewers will not catch the satire, so he gives them a kick-ass action film that they can hoot and eat popcorn to. Very effective propoganda (the good kind) imo
With verhoeven specifically, he was way ahead of his audience and his films have taken on more depth than people used to give them. I think most people understand his films as satire now. As far as I can see the only way to make a big budget hollywood movie that has anti police/ anti corporate themes (robocop) or anti imperialist themes (starship troopers) is to do it trojan horse style, packaged in a genre action film.
Yeah he always had subversive messaging in his work but at the same time just as you're saying he was known to the mainstream audience back in his heyday as a guy who does schlocky action flicks with loads of gory violence and explicit nudity, bordering on outright porn. I mean the main discourse around Basic Instinct was whether you can really see Sharon Stone's snatch for fucks sake. As a comparison, even if it's a merely ok movie (as opposed to brilliant) the issue of how they made the pencil disappear in The Dark Knight was way in the background.
Malcom Gladwell has a good episode on how shit American satire is and Colbert Report in particular. I know Gladwell has tons of shit takes, but that was a good episode.
Are we even sure that satire ever did what it was supposed to do? Does pretending to be a thing to point out its absurdity actually work on anyone who doesn't explicitly know/care about the intent? Or was satire always niche shitposting that only a few understood but most took at face value? And instead of huffing its own farts for being clever and subversive, should have noticed the writing on the wall a couple centuries ago?
"Americans don't get satire" is a thing I've heard a lot and I think it's true. This is part of the genius of paul verhoeven. He knows 99% of american viewers will not catch the satire, so he gives them a kick-ass action film that they can hoot and eat popcorn to. Very effective propoganda (the good kind) imo
How is it then functionally anything else but jingoistic pro-empire propaganda?
With verhoeven specifically, he was way ahead of his audience and his films have taken on more depth than people used to give them. I think most people understand his films as satire now. As far as I can see the only way to make a big budget hollywood movie that has anti police/ anti corporate themes (robocop) or anti imperialist themes (starship troopers) is to do it trojan horse style, packaged in a genre action film.
Yeah he always had subversive messaging in his work but at the same time just as you're saying he was known to the mainstream audience back in his heyday as a guy who does schlocky action flicks with loads of gory violence and explicit nudity, bordering on outright porn. I mean the main discourse around Basic Instinct was whether you can really see Sharon Stone's snatch for fucks sake. As a comparison, even if it's a merely ok movie (as opposed to brilliant) the issue of how they made the pencil disappear in The Dark Knight was way in the background.
I think you're correct.
Case in point -- every single reddit community that started out as satire has become 100% serious.
Malcom Gladwell has a good episode on how shit American satire is and Colbert Report in particular. I know Gladwell has tons of shit takes, but that was a good episode.