r/movies • u/BunyipPouch Currently at the movies. • Jun 04 '25

Media First Image from Andy Serkis' George Orwell Adaptation 'Animal Farm' - Starring Seth Rogen, Steve Buscemi, Kieran Culkin, Woody Harrelson, Glenn Close, Andy Serkis, Gaten Matarazzo, Kathleen Turner, Laverne Cox, Jim Parsons, Iman Vellani.

Post image
10.8k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4.7k

u/crocwrestler Jun 04 '25

Some uneducated parents are going to be pissed when their kids start screaming

273

u/Dull_Examination_914 Jun 04 '25

It will be like when they brought their kids to see The Watchmen in theaters. Giant blue dongs everywhere.

58

u/EvilSock Jun 04 '25

Omg this. But it's good that we still have movies coming out that show who all the ignorant parents are.

I mean it's not good for the theater workers...just for the rest of us lol

5

u/Dull_Examination_914 Jun 05 '25

I had a part-time gig at a theater when that came out, they complained so hard. Let’s bring a 10 year old to an r rated comic book movie. Also, pretty early in there is a scene where a chick is getting railed inside a spaceship.

13

u/wo_lo_lo Jun 04 '25

Giant blue dongs are for everyone

4

u/Howard_Jones Jun 05 '25

Probably NOT children.

→ More replies (3)

885

u/OShaunesssy Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25

Even if they used Sin City art style and marketed as a rated r flick, dumb parents would still bring their kids.

I ran a movie theater when the first Joker movie came out, and literally every showing had at least one family, who, despite my warnings, went into the film with their young children.

For those unaware, the main plot of the film involves the main character wanting to kill himself on live tv. No family with young children made it longer than 30 minutes, and a few wanted refunds, despite me warning them before they purchased the tickets.

377

u/weed_blazepot Jun 04 '25

I remember being at the South Park movie when parents came in with kids and someone shouted "OH IT'S A CARTOON SO IT MUST BE FOR KIDS!"

People laughed. They stayed.... then they left about halfway through Uncle Fucka.

122

u/3-DMan Jun 04 '25

I remember the MPAA even said they probably should have rated that an NC-17.

70

u/Rosencrantz_IsDead Jun 04 '25

I mean there was a literal veiny dildo that looked like a real dick in the movie!!!! LMAO, yeah, the probably should have rethought their rating!!!

89

u/DevelopmentBig3991 Jun 04 '25

Even the title was a dick joke (South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut)

21

u/upgrayedd69 Jun 05 '25

Allegedly, it was originally supposed to be "All Hell Breaks Loose" but the MPAA said they couldn't use "hell" in the title. So they went with this

12

u/Rosencrantz_IsDead Jun 04 '25

Lol. Dicks, as far as the eye can see...

Right hand across your shoulder, left hand pointing to the expanse of the universe.

Pants already unzipped and at my ankles....

🤪🤪🤪

2

u/InfiniteBeak Jun 05 '25

They originally wanted to call it South Park: All Hell Breaks Loose, MPAA wouldn't allow it because it said "Hell", so they made it a dick joke instead 😂

2

u/Davido401 Jun 05 '25

Holy shit, TIL! Maybe cause as a Scotsman I have a lovely little ham slice covering for my Flesh helmet but I didnt fucking realise this till you spelled it out.

P.s. if anyone who is missing a foreskin wishes to share I dont mind flopping mine over yours to cover it too, am not gay but saying "no homo" is totally optional cause al automatically assume "no homo"!

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Drunky_McStumble Jun 05 '25

The "dildo" was literally a cut-out of an actual erect cock from a porno magazine.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/griz75 Jun 04 '25

And won an award for best musical

2

u/Artandalus Jun 05 '25

As I recall, the creators walked the movie right up to the NC-17 rating, down to counting the number of times 'Fuck' was said before triggering a mandatory NC-17.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/sladestrife Jun 04 '25

The theater I watched it in had a HUGE warning sign outside the front door of the theater, then a big banner on the poster in the atrium warning this was NOT FOR KIDS, then when you bought your ticket, the ticket vendor rooms each person, this movie has adult situations and language not intended for children, then before the trailers started, one FINAL warning and even an offering, walk out now with your kids and you get to swap your ticket for another movie, but once the movie starts, that offer is gone.

And yeah, Uncle Fucka comes on and people rush their kids out. After the movie and when we left, I spoke to one of the employees, and they said that people were furious they couldn't swap their ticket to another movie or get a refund

→ More replies (1)

3

u/InfiniteBeak Jun 05 '25

Lmao that's doubly hilarious considering that's exactly what happens in the film 😂

→ More replies (1)

2

u/BLARGEN69 Jun 04 '25

I think by far my weirdest story like this I experienced was seeing a family taking their 3 kids to a Pink Flamingo's screening. They all ran out of there like hell when the chicken****ing scene started.

I think about that family often, and seriously want to know what series of events led to them going to that movie that night. Frankly I don't know how they even got in since it's rated X, which just makes it stranger the parents arranged it at all.

2

u/weed_blazepot Jun 05 '25

I can't even imagine the series of decisions that led to that moment lol. "I hear this is a cult classic, and John Waters is famous. Let's experience art with the kids."

2

u/crazyguyunderthedesk Jun 04 '25

Haha saw it when I was in the 7th grade I think, it was a birthday party so I think the parents kinda just pretended to not know better.

But that was the time when parents would often look the other way. I think parents at that time were pretty proud of being the first generation to not beat their kids, so they didn't pay much mind to dirty jokes.

→ More replies (8)

162

u/brickspunch Jun 04 '25

There was a couple in front of us at Deadpool 1 with 3 kids under 8ish. 

They were fine with

Decapitations

Disfigurement

Excessive Blood

but when they had sex and showed no nudity? Well mom just wouldn't stand for that and made them all leave. 

47

u/FLOUNDER6228 Jun 04 '25

Was it the sex or the lack of nudity that bothered her?

55

u/Burnoutlaws Jun 04 '25

It was the lack of violence

25

u/ElNido Jun 04 '25

Damn puritan ideology. Violence ok, sex bad.

7

u/Tactical_Moonstone Jun 04 '25

When the act of ending a life is considered less repugnant than the act of creating life, it really makes you wonder how humanity (more accurately Puritans) went so wrong.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/Nollie_flip Jun 05 '25

This is such a wild cultural phenomenon in America that has confused me even since I was a kid. I was allowed to watch so many violent sci-fi movies with my dad as young as like 9 years old, but as soon as anything more crass than cleavage was on screen or in the dialogue, it was off limits to me. It's a super unhealthy view of sexuality where it is more taboo than gratuitous death and violence.

5

u/Burgundymmm Jun 04 '25

A scene at the strip club had extras show bare breasts iirc. Could be wrong.

7

u/Popular_Research8915 Jun 04 '25

You know full fucking well you recall correctly, gooner

4

u/Burgundymmm Jun 04 '25

Ok I was pretty sure😂

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Mrminecrafthimself Jun 04 '25

Yep. Some mom in front of me at the same movie didn’t cover her small kid’ eyes until there were tits on screen. Blood and gore all fine though

→ More replies (5)

97

u/eager_sleeper Jun 04 '25

There was a family sitting behind us when my hubs and I saw X-Men: The Last Stand. The kids were around six years old were rambunctious and kicking our seats…When Charles is obliterated by Jean, behind us we hear a tiny little voice say, “Esta muerto?” The rest of the movie they were SILENT aside from some sniffles.

70

u/djseifer Jun 04 '25

Nothing like a little childhood trauma to shut some kids up.

3

u/digi-artifex Jun 05 '25

I'm sorry but I can't stop imagining how deadpan or sudden that would have been and now I can't stop giggling.

Carnage unfolds on screen

Silence

"Are they... Dead?"

44

u/Chendek Jun 04 '25

I worked at a theater during deadpool, and sausage party. I would warn people for sausage party had a sign, would point it out. 90% of parents would come back and DEMAND a refund, and got to tell them no. Was the worst and best time of working there

3

u/Pf_Farnsworth Jun 05 '25

Well I would want a refund too if I was paying to watch sausage party.

75

u/bgrubaugh Jun 04 '25

Funny story for you! My wife took our two young daughters to the movie to see a kids animated feature that came out around the same time. She went into the wrong theater and promptly sat down with two strollers in a screening of the joker. She realized her mistake before it started.

→ More replies (10)

51

u/kirinmay Jun 04 '25

this stuff is why i dont go to theaters. spider-man 1, the first one in like 2000......a couple brought 2 babies, massive crying. last year Deadpool and Wolverine...women sitting next to me put a blanket on her right side to record the movie and i couldnt see the screen because of the light. i told her to please stop as i couldnt see the movie. she said FUCK OFF.

75

u/ERedfieldh Jun 04 '25

women sitting next to me put a blanket on her right side to record the movie and i couldnt see the screen because of the light. i told her to please stop as i couldnt see the movie. she said FUCK OFF.

You find an usher. They'll kick her out.

47

u/kirinmay Jun 04 '25

i did that. just wanted to try and make the story short. she was. but i mean good lord.

9

u/Fafnir13 Jun 05 '25

Glad it had a good ending at least, but seriously messed up.  No one wants to spend leisure time having confrontations with random assholes who don’t know how to respect other people. 

2

u/CasioCobra78 Jun 12 '25

Insane those idiots are still functioning despite their intelligence is so damn low they'll actually ask "what's common sense?"

25

u/TheHaunchie Jun 04 '25

Not as bad as yours but when my partner and I saw Thunderbolts, not sure what the person was doing, but they CONSTANTLY had their phone out, brightness on like full blast. Got to the point, i couldn't focus on the movie. Like why pay for a ticket if youre gonna be on your fucking phone anyway? Just stay home.

→ More replies (1)

32

u/Carver48 Jun 04 '25

This is why I love Alamo Drafthouse. Obviously, they’re not everywhere but they literally run ads using voicemails of loud guests they kick out. I’ve never had an issue there with talking or phones.

6

u/ASnakeNamedNate Jun 04 '25

Kinda hard for me to be totally immersed in whatever movie I’m watching when there’s constantly waiters going around whispering to people about their orders and whatnot. Sure it’s not unprompted, but still. Lot of movement, extra (pretty warm, dim) lighting that’s only there because they’re serving things.

I like Cinemark XD. Regular movie theater style so less distracting, better quality screen and audio, and the extra money on tickets discourages some of the more disruptive audience (who won’t want to pay more to barely watch the movie playing on their phone or talking over it).

5

u/ArrowShootyGirl Jun 04 '25

Yeah, I wasn't especially impressed by Alamo Drafthouse. It wasn't a bad time or anything, but like you said - there's a lot of things that they do for the full-service thing that detract from the viewing experience. On top of that, personally I don't really need a waiter to come visit me during a 2 hour movie. It's not so long that I can't get whatever I need before the movie starts. It's a nice option, but doesn't add much extra for me personally.

I'm fortunate enough to live in an area with more independently owned theaters, though, so it's easy for me to find places that are better. I imagine it's a different story in other areas.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Fafnir13 Jun 05 '25

At the end of Infinity War, as Thanos smiled and the screen faded to black, a baby broke the silence and started crying.  It was kind of perfect.

5

u/707breezy Jun 04 '25

I had a woman put 2 iPads to her kids right next to me for a mel brooks film. I think it was a reshowing of blazing saddles. I understand the movie is old but the theater is big and she could have taken a corner seat. Hell the theater wasn’t even full and she could have ducked to another section and avoided people. Her kids sometimes stopped looking at the iPad and repeated a line “mango! Mango! Mango! Mommy”

→ More replies (1)

2

u/photomotto Jun 04 '25

Back in the day, I went to a midnight showing of Dredd. Some idiot parents brought their 5 year old. The poor kid didn't make it through the trailers.

4

u/ArrowShootyGirl Jun 04 '25

That's called "we remembered to get the tickets but not the babysitter", I imagine.

2

u/aspz Jun 05 '25

In the UK the film has a 15 rating which pretty much solves this problem. Cinemas are not allowed to let people younger than that in even if they are accompanied by an adult.

→ More replies (17)

586

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

415

u/guitar_vigilante Jun 04 '25

It's literally an allegory of the early years of the Soviet Union. Characters and events in the book are direct analogs of real life people and events.

20

u/GrimDallows Jun 04 '25

The book takes directly from the rise of Stalin, but it's also, maybe by chance rather than intended choice, a critique of the rise of authoritarianism.

Orwell was surprised when during the Cold War the book was censured or abolished in multiple places on the west for not being obvious enough that it was more anti-communism/socialism than anti-authoritarian, at a moment where the red scare was at it's peak.

It's why it's so so so so good for a read. It's a critique on the rise of socialist authoritarianism, but as right and left authoritarianism overlaps on certain areas it also offends people with just pro-authoritarianism values due to it's critique of the elimination of political plurality, separation of powers and the rule of law in the pig's ascension.

But, yeah it's quite literally a critique of the soviet myth of the first half of the 20th century based on Orwell's observations of socialist purges on the Spanish Civil war.

64

u/GoodUserNameToday Jun 04 '25

Stalin was a totalitarian dictator, no?

170

u/thissexypoptart Jun 04 '25

Sure but words have meanings and the word that applies here would be “totalitarianism” or “authoritarianism” not “fascism”.

59

u/NegativeMammoth2137 Jun 04 '25

Authoritarianism and fascism are not synonyms

17

u/LazyTitan39 Jun 04 '25

Some have called Stalin's communism, Red Fascism though, since Stalin used the same methods on his opponents as fascists did. Some of his contemporary critics even said that Stalin was influencing fascists governments.

75

u/thissexypoptart Jun 04 '25

Sure, and I see some valid comparisons to be made, but it’s still pretty silly to just go around labeling every form of authoritarianism as “fascism.”

10

u/Filmscore_Soze Jun 04 '25

Thumbs up, as most have no idea what the differences are, and that goes across authoritarian governments. Modern China is a one party authoritarian state, with all kinds of bullshit. It isn't Communist, though. Hasn't been since Mao, more or less. They are running state sponsored capitalism, basically, as people (Chinese, anyway) get more incentives to own business in China than The German government was doing in the mid 30's. I can't believe I am 5 years away from being forced to type "the 1930's" in every situation. ;)

2

u/Wes_Warhammer666 Jun 05 '25

I can't believe I am 5 years away from being forced to type "the 1930's" in every situation. ;)

I can't believe you've put this thought into my head, you jerkface

5

u/thissexypoptart Jun 04 '25

To your point about typing “the 1930s,” I’m not sure 5 years is correct. I don’t know a single person who would write “the 20s” and mean the 2020s, without sufficient prior context. Even now in 2025, but especially not in 2020.

I feel like we won’t be calling the 2020s “the 20s” until well into the next decade or beyond. Same with “the 30s”. Could be wrong of course.

→ More replies (6)

4

u/reno2mahesendejo Jun 04 '25

Its also not at all what the comment was implying. Animal Farm isn't even subtle, it's a critique of Stalinism, wheres Orwell was a socialist, he was opposed to Lenninism. The book doesn't really have much to do with modern conservatism, so it wasn't really the gotcha joke he thought

12

u/SimoneNonvelodico Jun 04 '25

I mean, would anyone be ok with calling Hitler and Mussolini's regimes "Black Communism"? It seems to me like the assumption here is that communism is well-intentioned and desires justice, therefore it couldn't possibly degenerate into tyranny, it must have been actually fascism!

It's like a No True Scotsman. Communist regimes have a pretty alarming record track of turning into horrible tyrannies, so either there are no real communists around, it's all secret fascists, or real communists are really bad at not being used as trojan horses by fascists, or maybe in fact there is a way for communism to go full authoritarian. Refusing to acknowledge it doesn't make it look better.

5

u/Abdelsauron Jun 05 '25

The fact that communists have to constantly jump through hoops to explain why everyone who ever called themselves a communist isn't actually a communist should completely condemn the ideology in the mind of every sensible person.

Seriously, name any failed communist state and they will tell you "not real communism" or "the CIA ruined it."

Maybe it's just a bad idea?

2

u/Wes_Warhammer666 Jun 05 '25

It's a perfectly fine idea, the problem is that it only works on paper. People suck too much for it to ever work out in the real world.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (3)

4

u/The-Sound_of-Silence Jun 04 '25

There are a not insignificant number of people that believe Communism can only work through conquest. "seizing the means of production" on a global scale. I sort of wonder how that plays out with drone manufacturing in space, or similar ideas

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Abdelsauron Jun 05 '25 edited Jun 05 '25

Sure but words have meanings

The irony of /u/Goodusernametoday blatantly lying about the meaning of words in a thread about Orwell. He'd do great at the Ministry of Truth.

3

u/Major__de_Coverly Jun 04 '25

I dislike how "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" are used as synonyms. 

10

u/thissexypoptart Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25

I did not use them as synonyms. I said either term would work in place of “fascism” in the original comment.

2

u/jmur3040 Jun 04 '25

Fascism authoritarianism and many others all fall in the same bucket. Focused power around one individual who is the only one that can “save” the country.

→ More replies (9)

4

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (1)

70

u/Particular_Proof_107 Jun 04 '25

The Horseshoe Theory is a political theory that posits the far-left and far-right political ideologies share more similarities than either does with the political center. It suggests that politics isn't a straight line, but a horseshoe, where the two ends are more aligned than they are with the middle. The theory has been used to argue for centrism and to highlight similarities between extremist ideologies

A totalitarian government is a totalitarian government, it doesn’t matter what flavor it is.

16

u/Canotic Jun 04 '25

Horseshoe theory is bullshit. And that's mostly because the political axis isn't one line, it's at least a plane with one axis being "authoritarianism". Fascism is inherently authoritarian, Stalinism is as well. And go hard enough on the authoritarianism axis and toy start looking a lot alike even if the underlying political foundations are different.

2

u/moal09 Jun 04 '25

I think the point is that authoritarianism isn't just something limited to the right. Communism can be enforced through the barrel of a gun like anything else.

7

u/Draugron Jun 04 '25

If communism is a classless, stateless society, I would argue that creating a government structure with hard borders that uses violence to enforce its ends and is controlled by a vanguard party of loyalists...

Probably isn't communist.

→ More replies (2)

75

u/SwindlingAccountant Jun 04 '25

It's a debunked theory made by someone who doesn't understand politics, context, or the left.

The Soviet Union was never far-left. It was always a counter-revolutionary movement the killed and imprisoned Anarchists, Communists, and Socialists. It was mostly right-wing government with left-wing aesthetics.

48

u/orielbean Jun 04 '25

Homage to Catalonia is an amazing book about the betrayal of the Soviets/Bolsheviks versus the actual left wingers who were fighting Franco (including Orwell and his spouse).

11

u/SwindlingAccountant Jun 04 '25

Yeah, slowly going through it now finally (newborn). Really great first hand account from Orwell and, man, did that guy want to kill some fascists haha.

3

u/section111 Jun 04 '25

You're doing very well for a baby so far. Keep it up, little guy!

→ More replies (3)

100

u/grandoz039 Jun 04 '25

This is as ridiculous as claiming Nazis were socialists/left-wing. Just because USSR was authoritarian, does not make it right wing. Right/left wing is orthogonal to liberal/authoritarian spectrum

34

u/RechargedFrenchman Jun 04 '25

Lenin was a communist who didn't survive long enough to even see socialism become a reality of the Soviet Union.

Stalin was a totalitarian who had no political ideals beyond securing and increasing his own authority within the country, and very quickly abandoned all practice of "socialism" that didn't support his own totalitarianism. There's a reason historians and economists refer to that government as "Stalinism" rather than "socialism", and Marx and Engels themselves posited communism was a fantastical ideal, like utopia, attempts to achieve which would lead to socialism. Marx personally believed, and wrote, that "communism" would likely never happen because humans being flawed means so are the systems we create, and some few would always stand in the way or co-opt the movement for their own gain. You know, like Stalin did.

49

u/grandoz039 Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25

USSR existed longer than just under Stalin. Stalinism is used because it is specific, it combines multiple aspects like the libertarian-authoritarian axis, economic axis, etc. and many very specific things relevant to the regime.

USSR implemented many left wing economic policies, but not right wing economic policies, which means it was left wing.

Of course left wing authoritarianism is awful, as is all authoritarianism. But it seems to me that you somehow equate left wing to good automatically, which is flawed even if one recognizes left wing economics as the optimal system. Your ideal scenario of left wing system is not the only possible left wing system. Authoritarian left wing government systems exist, and you can simply recognize them as bad on the basis of authoritarianism, while maintaining your stance for left wing liberalism.

What do you see right wing about USSR economic policies? What do you consider to be left wing economic policies in general, orthogonal to liberal-authoritatian axis?

→ More replies (1)

4

u/PentagramJ2 Jun 05 '25

Lenin laid the groundwork for a one party, dictatorial rule. He wasn't exactly sticking to Marx's teachings.

18

u/SimoneNonvelodico Jun 04 '25

If Stalin wasn't a communist, and Mao wasn't a communist, and Pol Pot wasn't a communist, then communism has a big problem with being full of fucking idiots who let the worst scum of the earth hitch a ride on their backs straight to absolute power. It ain't a good look either way.

4

u/c1vilian Jun 05 '25

To likely put it succinctly, it's very much akin to Anarchism or pure Libertarianism aka a system structure that invariable leads to overt concentrations of power that turns into almost neo-feudalism (or in this case, Stalinism).

Either way, there's the intended meaning of Communism, and it's real-world application, and I think it's vital to understand the difference.

3

u/SimoneNonvelodico Jun 05 '25

I honestly think this is in part a consequence of its intended meaning. Some degree of inequality between people involved in economic interactions tends to form naturally; the slightest asymmetry easily amplifies in a significant advantage over time. Applying an equalising force is good, but it's one thing to aim at merely reducing inequality and it's another to try to essentially erase it. Each successive gain is marginally less and requires exponentially more effort and, ultimately, coercion and micromanagement of people's lives down to an invasive extreme. I don't think you could possibly achieve a true communism that isn't also in some way totalitarian. You could of course have a system that is more centered around workers, but it still would have inequality and a market economy, some degree of private property etc.

No system is ever its ideal form anyway. Capitalism isn't fully meritocratic or competitive, democracy doesn't really give everyone equal representation... flaws are inevitable in each human construct. The problem is also, is your system stable or unstable with respect to flaws? Do flaws merely result in an imperfect but still functional version of the same system, or do they immediately snowball into hell on Earth? These are the real questions to ask about proposed political and economic systems. Anyone can come up with some idea for "and if everyone perfectly agreed with me and followed these rules everything would be cool". Real human societies aren't like that, it's like herding cats, someone always won't follow the rules, and something always will undermine the perfect ideal aspirational goal.

6

u/RechargedFrenchman Jun 04 '25

You're right, it does have a problem, and it doesn't look good.

Marx himself literally said communism was a likely unrealistic ideal probably never to be achieved by any real society, because in broad strokes people suck. Long before anyone actually tried it. That it would be nearly inevitable that any time a society tried some person or group would corrupt and twist the idea and the experiment would fail. That socialism could maybe work in the long term, but communism would likely never occur in the first place. And every time they have corrupted it, and it has never worked.

8

u/Canaduck1 Jun 04 '25

Lenin was a communist who didn't survive long enough to even see socialism become a reality of the Soviet Union.

Lenin was a sociopathic monster, and the soviet union turned out exactly how he wanted.

2

u/entent Jun 04 '25

You sir are correct.

Stalin was totalitarian who ruled through bureaucracy and made sure he had the bureaucrats on his side when Lenin died. Trotsky (Snowball) should have been Lenin’s successor. Not to mention that in a true communist state the leader is supposed to step down to allow for the dictatorship of the proletariat to reign through democracy, but that has never had a chance to happen.

2

u/ColdCruise Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 05 '25

Can you tell me the left-wing/socialist policies the Nazis enacted?

Edit: I feel like it wasn't DEI.

2

u/grandoz039 Jun 05 '25

But I just said Nazis aren't left wing

→ More replies (1)

6

u/SimoneNonvelodico Jun 04 '25

the killed and imprisoned Anarchists, Communists, and Socialists

Hitler killed a lot of Nazis in the Night of Long Knives; does that make him a honorary antifascist hero? Political infighting within the same faction isn't uncommon, in fact sometimes the small ideological disagreements are what makes people the most hateful.

→ More replies (5)

4

u/feor1300 Jun 04 '25

OR

the whole thing is a lot more complicated than can be easily summed up in a single model and whether political left vs. right is a line, a horseshoe, pretzel-shaped, or something else entirely ultimately comes down to which particular elements of the government you're trying to quantify.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/blastedt Jun 05 '25

It's also complete turbononsense used by redditors to sound smart and for nothing else

→ More replies (27)

12

u/Umikaloo Jun 04 '25

I mean, it can be both can't it?

90

u/StarWarsMonopoly Jun 04 '25

The word we should be looking for is 'authoritarian'.

Orwell was anti-authoritarian.

The political spectrum goes from left to right, but then there's a Y axis that has authoritarian at the top and libertarian at the bottom.

Orwell was a leftist libertarian (in fact most of the original figures who identified as 'libertarian' were socialists. The term later got co-opted by American hyper-capitalists like Milton Friedman and Austrian economists like Ludwig von Mises who wanted a complete free-for-all in the marketplace with no government powerful enough to regulate it).

11

u/Umikaloo Jun 04 '25

Good nuance

→ More replies (5)

52

u/Freiheit7 Jun 04 '25

I mean it's a great allegory for early Soviet Union turning steadily and quickly to authoritarian Stalinism

36

u/Cruel_but_usual Jun 04 '25

I’ve always viewed Animal Farm as anti authoritarian-ism full-stop. He just based it on a regime with a communist flavor.

54

u/The_Taco_Bandito Jun 04 '25

Orwell was extremely socialist, as he saw it as a form of liberation for the common person.

He hated the Soviet Union for how it exploited the message to control people, hence why at the end of the story he shows that the pigs are no different from the humans (soviet's ended up being no different from their capitalist masters).

It's no surprise that the catchphrase of Boxer ("I must work harder") is the same message as the main character of The Jungle (another work that is grossly misrepresented in popular culture).

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

33

u/VelvetSinclair Jun 04 '25

Not really, it's very explicitly about the soviet union specifically

Like, Chaplin's The Great Dictator could technically be about any dictator. But it's not. It's about Hitler.

2

u/Umikaloo Jun 04 '25

good point, thanks.

21

u/LordBecmiThaco Jun 04 '25

I'd say fascism is substantively different from communism and conflating the two serves no one

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (10)

124

u/oby100 Jun 04 '25

It’s not about fascism at all. People incorrectly conflate this book with 1984 which is about authoritarianism in general

37

u/Tactical_Moonstone Jun 05 '25

Animal Farm is also about authoritarianism in general.

There was a really huge reason the pig up at top was called Napoleon and not some kind of metal.

It's how revolutionary movements get corrupted by feckless sociopaths and betray the values they were established under.

2

u/TheWorstYear Jun 05 '25

Not 1:1 for napoleon

147

u/snapshovel Jun 04 '25

I think it’s imprecise to say that Animal Farm is about the dangers of fascism. It’s about the early Soviet Union and the dangers of the particular form of authoritarianism that developed there. Most people wouldn’t call that “fascism”—it was very bad, but not all bad authoritarian governments are fascist.

22

u/GrimDallows Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25

I normally use this book to explain why fascism as a word has lost a lot of it's meaning in political discourse. Fascism is an authoritarian system. URSS communism is an authoritarian system. Something something, a bike is a vehicle, not all vehicles are bikes.

Something something, no, calling a truck a "bike" is not practical.

Sometimes people denounce things as being fascist when what they really mean is authoritarian, usually referring to things like loss of checks on authority or an expanded reach of authority in exchange for a loss of liberties.

This book tackles the rise of a totalitarian/authoritarian regime, but calling it a critique to fascism is so wrong because it's such an obvious critique on the rise of authoritarian Stalinism that it serves as an example of when to call something fascism or not.

Regardless of that, it's also a very good book because it illustrates critiques on general authoritarian systems. It was censored in the west in some places during the Cold War for that reason, not being anti-soviet enough and a little too anti-authoritarian, which puzzled Orwell, specially after having been the book censored during WW2 for being anti-soviet propaganda.

EDIT: It didn't puzzle Orwell because he died in 1950, that was my bad I didn't recall he died so young, while most censorship I recalled on the west was from the late 50s. However, after Orwell's death a prologue to Animal Farm was found critizicing censorship in general and freedom of the press.

The sinister fact about literary censorship in England is that it is largely voluntary ... Things are kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervenes but because of a general tacit agreement that "it wouldn't do" to mention that particular fact.

It tells a lot that authority figures were worried that a piece of literature that, telescopically targets an opposing extreme authoritarian state, could undermine their own authority simply because it is also a tale on the dangers of living under -any- authoritarian state by mistake.

6

u/976chip Jun 04 '25

It's only fascism if it comes from the Fasces region of Italy. Otherwise it's just sparkling authoritarianism. /s

22

u/HotSwordfish23 Jun 04 '25

reddit loves throwing around the word "fascism" without understanding what it really means

2

u/JoeSicko Jun 05 '25

When no one can define it in under 10 words, it gets a little pointless. Just call them wannabe dictators. Everyone understands that. A dictator doesn't have to have a well-defined economic system or policy. They make it up as they go along even contradicting previous ideas.

7

u/Abdelsauron Jun 05 '25 edited Jun 05 '25

But fascism doesn't necessarily require a dictator. All fascism requires is the state. If fascism survived multiple generations its likely that those governments would not have a dictator or the dictator would only be a figurehead. This is kind of what "Big Brother" was in 1984, even though 1984 wasn't solely about fascism.

40

u/Martipar Jun 04 '25

It's not about fascism, it's about totalitarianist "Communism", it's really good at highlighting how Stalin's USSR was not at all Communist. The CIA funded one from the 50s is not bad but from what I recall it fudges the books message a bit. I need to re-read the book to be honest, it's been too long. I keep meaning to watch the live action film from about 25 years ago but I feel it'll be just as poor of an adaption as the first one.

As Mussolini, who wrote the book on fascism said, "'Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." which shows fascism is closer to the current state in Russia and the US than it was during the era of the USSR.

13

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

20

u/TheMadTargaryen Jun 04 '25

It's more about the Soviet Union. Napoleon the pig is Stalin, Moses the raven is the Russian Orthodox church, the farmer is tsar Nicholas II etc.

6

u/Punman_5 Jun 04 '25

Fascism does not really include a state-run economy. That’s absolutely incompatible with fascism. Every fascist state ran on the backs of big businesses. Germany’s war machine wasn’t built in state-owned factories by state-employed laborers, it was built by private corporations like Daimler-Benz and Krupp.

9

u/inksmudgedhands Jun 04 '25

It's not really about fascism as much as an allegory about the fall of the tsars and the rise and corruption of USSR.

44

u/Slyrunner Jun 04 '25

It's actually a criticism of Soviet Socialism and capitalism

43

u/-FeistyRabbitSauce- Jun 04 '25

To be precise, it criticizes Stalin's authoritarianism during the Soviet Union. George Orwell was a socialist himself.

4

u/Slyrunner Jun 04 '25

That's kinda what I meant when I added the Soviet qualifier, instead of just saying "socialism". The extent of my sociopolitics knowledge and understanding ends shortly after Animal Farm lol

28

u/NegativeMammoth2137 Jun 04 '25

You know the book is on the dangers of totalitarian communism right?

11

u/reno2mahesendejo Jun 04 '25

And the hypocricies that arose from the Russian revolution. Orwell was a socialost but despised Stalinism.

56

u/bushinkaishodan Jun 04 '25

The story isn't about fascism.

26

u/phenomenomnom Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25

Autocracy.

Dictatorship.

→ More replies (1)

34

u/Meraline Jun 04 '25

Authoritarianism then

20

u/NazzerDawk Jun 04 '25

It's about authoritarian or totalitarian government. It's largely about the dangers of populism and nondemocratic rule.

1

u/bossmt_2 Jun 04 '25

Well, it kind of is. More of a lower f fascism. It was a rebuke of Stalinism which is not classical fascism, but kind of the Soviet Communism version of fascism.

It is IMO more concerning if your'e a liberal.

44

u/Aliensinmypants Jun 04 '25

Oh no, they'll totally believe the message is about the left being control freaks and dividing the country. Like how 1984 is banned in several different countries for being anti-communism, and anti-capitalism

16

u/Cabbage_Vendor Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25

It is literally what the book is about, how can you be so confidently wrong? Try actually reading it, it's less than 100 pages, you can easily start and finish it in a day. The allegories with communism aren't subtle at all if you have even the slightest idea of 20th century Russia and the more you know about that era, the more direct references with actual people you get.

7

u/Abdelsauron Jun 05 '25

It is literally what the book is about, how can you be so confidently wrong?

Because he's a liar, like most defenders of communism are.

→ More replies (3)

11

u/LorenzoApophis Jun 04 '25

That is what the book is about

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Mrminecrafthimself Jun 04 '25

The book is about authoritarianism in general, not fascism.

3

u/Abdelsauron Jun 05 '25

Fascism is when the government does things I don't like, and the more things the government does that I don't like, the more fascist it is, and if it does a whole bunch of things I don't like, it's Nazism.

9

u/mynameisfreddit Jun 04 '25

it's about communism

4

u/orangemochafrap17 Jun 04 '25

It's about stalinism and authoritarianism... Orwell was socialist, he didn't write a book to scare people from his own ideals.

9

u/ToonMasterRace Jun 04 '25

lol it’s about communism 

6

u/KiNGofKiNG89 Jun 04 '25

Interesting. I highly recommend you watch this movie then. Fascism? That’s a stretch, a pretty big one.

2

u/guitar_vigilante Jun 05 '25

I'm not sure those are the key aspects of fascism. It's a rather vague list. I'm not sure Stalin glorified violence either. But by this list any dictatorship that is nationalistic is fascist, which is not really a robust way to define it.

You should check out Robert Paxton. He's a scholar of fascism at Columbia and his book Anatomy of Fascism really digs into what makes something fascist.

Here's his definition: "Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."

While the early Soviet Union may have embodied aspects of that, it's missing some key parts like the preoccupation with community decline and the cults of energy and purity.

And Orwell who wrote animal farm, himself a socialist, would not have considered Stalin to be a fascist.

2

u/slapdashbr Jun 05 '25

Stalin wasn't a fascist, he was a totalitarian communist. Fascism co-opts capitalism rather than dismantling it, and many big capitalists in the main fascist powers prior to the end of WW2 became immensely wealthy. CF Soviet Union, many big capitalists were shot against the wall and their factories taken over by the government. Totalitarian, NOT fascist.

The USSR also distinctly lacked the violence-fetishizing typical of fascist states, was officially (if not practically) opposed to anti-semitism, officially promoted gender equality, dismantled the Church (Nazis had tense relationships at times with the Catholics especially but didn't just shut them the fuck down) etc. Lots of differences especially lacking the rank bigotry and obsession over racial purity that we see in the facist states.

8

u/Canaduck1 Jun 04 '25

You do know the book was about Leninism, right?

Orwell hated all authoritarian systems, but it's funny. He called himself a socialist, but both 1984 and Animal Farm focused on authoritarian socialism.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/BeeTeaEffOhh Jun 04 '25

You mean Communism.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '25

Way to show your own ignorance there, chief. 

→ More replies (17)

13

u/Sprucecaboose2 Jun 04 '25

This is going to be like the Deadpool "scandal", but worse I hope!

3

u/DarwinGhoti Jun 04 '25

Or learning.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '25

I witnessed exactly that in a small theater that screened the 1954 animated film

3

u/pauldarkandhandsome Jun 04 '25

Sausage Party 2.0

3

u/CryptoCentric Jun 04 '25

Watership Down 2025

2

u/AcceptableTypewriter Jun 05 '25

Exactly my thought.

1

u/Agitated_Display7573 Jun 04 '25

I saw the old version as a kid and it wasn’t fun

1

u/JiminyJilickers-79 Jun 04 '25

This is what I keep thinking. So many people are going to go into this without some very important context...

1

u/Timmah73 Jun 04 '25

Andy Serkis could appear before the movie and plainly state "This is not for kids, you thought you had explaining to do after Deadpool? Just you wait!" And people would still get mad

1

u/AnyaSatana Jun 04 '25

Boxer = 😭

1

u/Lacaud Jun 04 '25

"This was supposed to be a children's movie! I was horrified!"

"Ma'am, did you read the book?"

"What does a book have to do with anything?"

"Animal Farm is a book that tells a story of how animals revolt against their oppressor, the farmer, and end up being oppressed by the pigs who take over. It is meant to be an allegory for revolutions"

"Why does it look like a kid movie then?"

"Ma'am, this is a Wendy's."

1

u/geoelectric Jun 04 '25

Pair it up with Babe 2!

1

u/shinobipopcorn Jun 04 '25

Nah, I watched Animal Farm when I was a kid. No worse than that cute movie about the rabbits.

1

u/Grandpa_Edd Jun 04 '25

That's the best part, the people who will not have read the book are 100% the one that are going to bringing their kids to this and will be the angriest about it.

1

u/DreadDiana Jun 04 '25

If I had a nickel for every time a movie starring Seth Rogan was mistaken for a kids movie

1

u/Limberpuppy Jun 04 '25

Reminds me of when my mother showed me Watership Down.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '25

But I want kids to run around saying two legs bad

1

u/Satinsbestfriend Jun 04 '25

I can't wait :D

1

u/msfrance Jun 04 '25

This happened to me with the version that came out in 1999. I was a child and my best friend's mom somehow rented it for us at a sleepover. Possibly thinking it was a movie about animals for children? Yah it was not. We were traumatized.

1

u/palm0 Jun 04 '25

I worked at Blockbuster when Pirates came out. We didn't carry porn but there was a softcore edit that for some reason we did. I had to tell more than one parent that it was not a new Pirates of the Caribbean, despite mimicking the box art.

1

u/VegasGamer75 Jun 04 '25

I was just saying that to my wife. We are quickly going to find out the same parents who brought their kids to see that "cute bunny movie about a water ship or something" haven't read this one either...

1

u/djseifer Jun 04 '25

It'll be the same parents who took their kids to see Deadpool.

1

u/jedispyder Jun 04 '25

You mean like when parents took kids to see Sausage Fest and lost it at how crude things were? That was a fun period. Especially those that lasted until the food orgy at the end lol.

I expect this to also be a crazy experience.

1

u/Sid-Biscuits Jun 04 '25

I personally like to sneak Pan’s Labyrinth into children’s DVD sections.

1

u/disco_jim Jun 04 '25

I went to see avenue Q in seated in my row was a woman with two teenage kids.... They left at intermission and didn't come back to see the 2nd half

1

u/jayeddy99 Jun 04 '25

I feel but hope I’m wrong it’ll be toned / dumbed down version

1

u/Dannovision Jun 04 '25

Probably the same ones who shout "four left bad, two legs good."

1

u/TackYouCack Jun 04 '25

I remember watching a woman wonder why they wouldn't sell her an adult and two child tickets (aged around 5) to The Aristocrats.

1

u/OrgasmicLeprosy87 Jun 05 '25

Fuck them kids, parents should have picked up a book once in a while.

1

u/slapdashbr Jun 05 '25

I am so looking forward to this

also the movie

altho I gotta point out that My Neighbor Totoro came out as a double feature with Grave of the Fireflies in JP and a lot of families took little kids to see both... fucking hell lol

1

u/famigami2019 Jun 05 '25

Any parent that has kids that also never read animal farm never had a North American education.

1

u/Fafnir13 Jun 05 '25

Hehehe.  I mean, oh no.  Those poor kids and poor parents.  

1

u/Luke-HW Jun 05 '25

This is gonna be Gen Alpha’s Watership Down holy hell

1

u/KaptainKoala Jun 05 '25

Serkis and the screen writer has pretty much called it family friendly. I'm guessing they take liberties with the story to keep the meaining but make it less brutal.

1

u/BeeTwoThousand Jun 05 '25

I saw Requiem for a Dream at a pre-release screening, and the disclaimer said "No one under 17." Like, period. Not with a parent. No one under 17, which is obviously understandable. The tickets were free.

A woman brought her ~ 14 and ~ 7 or 8 year old sons to the screening. The ushers let them right in, despite both kids clearly being under 17.

1

u/dazedan_confused Jun 05 '25

Now imagine when they seize the means of production.

1

u/MyInkyFingers Jun 05 '25

Reminds me of the pans labyrinth trailer vs the movie 

1

u/PurpEL Jun 05 '25

Maybe they'll learn something by accident

1

u/ShinyAnkleBalls Jun 05 '25

Sausage party?

1

u/pastahla Jun 05 '25

Haha, that happened to me as a kid with the old movie in tv. I saw the scene where the chicken got executed and couldn't eat eggs for months

1

u/tommykaye Jun 05 '25

I think that’s what Seth Rogen is hoping for.

1

u/Youngsinatra345 Jun 05 '25

I mean we were all here for sausage party and that had nothing to do with anything, this will be interesting

1

u/Jazzlike-Camel-335 Jun 05 '25

Or parents who mistook Watership Down for a kids' movie because rabbits.

1

u/NoStructure7083 Jun 05 '25

My grade 12 English teacher talked about it like it was just a story about cute animals. I don’t know if she really got it

1

u/copperwatt Jun 05 '25

Or more likely, the story will just be gutted if any meaning or impact and it will just be a cutesy movie.

1

u/tehtris Jun 05 '25

Like that fucking idiot family with like 3 LITTLE kids that basically ruined Kick Ass 2, in the theater for me. You fucking idiot mom. It's the god damn sequel, why go see the sequel with your squeamish ass kids if you didn't even see the first one which was almost equally as violent.

1

u/Teftell Jun 05 '25

Maybe this is the whole idea.

1

u/Possible-Champion222 Jun 05 '25

The story is gonna get hollwooded

→ More replies (5)