Curiosity Inc. wrote:
Looks to me like your basic "social inequality" sci-fi movie. I worry that this movie's central dividing line between rich and poor will be little more than a gimmick, as opposed to something that enriches and deepens the allegory.
Take In Time, for example. In that film, the connection between money and life was made quite literal. What's more, the movie built upon this premise to deliver two very different lifestyles that served to contrast the social strata (one's slow and one's fast, one's uber-cautious and the other takes risks, etc.).
Then there's Daybreakers, in which the wealthy were seriously made into bloodsucking freaks who were only allowed to keep on living through the blood of their comatose slaves. Again, the filmmakers built on this central premise -- a civilization of vampires -- to deliver a world that could only have been built by the new ruling class.
And let's not forget Gattaca, in which the upper class are genetically engineered in such a way that they really are smarter, stronger, more beautiful, and better than the commoners in every way. Again, this is a world that's very notably different for the class divide, and the classes themselves are that much more distinct for it.
Now let's look at Upside Down. The trailer tells us that the rich and the poor live 180 degrees from each other. How does that relate to social inequality? What does one have that the other doesn't? Why do those in the lower classes take orders from those up above? What are the cultural differences between these two worlds?
Look, I'm not denying that the hook is creative and visually astounding. I'll also be the first to admit that the three examples I mentioned were far from perfect movies. But unless there's something in this film to make the allegory deeper, I seriously doubt it's going to be any better.
i personally get a romeo and Juliet vibe personally but with a sci fi hook
separated by social class