Deceit and Distrust, Submission and Subversion: What Makes a Good Dystopian Film?

Many dystopian films originate as novels, but whilst all films begin as narratives, the depth of a fully-developed novel is hard to replicate. There is a risk that book adaptations will undermine and fail to do justice to an original story. After all, these narrative layers are part of the reason that novels and films garner attention in the first instance. Whereas films such as ‘The 5th Wave’ and ‘The Giver’ do not capture every intricate detail - choosing to focus on action over and above narrative - ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ and ‘Children of Men’ perhaps adopt a more roundabout approach, replicating key themes and accentuating underlying motifs. Balancing action with narrative storytelling is fundamental to realising the making of a film.

Typically set during or in the wake of an apocalypse, dystopian films utilise world-building to construct a plausible setting for a systematic society governed by corrupt power. For instance ‘Children of Men’ is set in 2027 London, providing an apt dystopian setting to portray a bitterly hopeless society, not least because of its gloomy weather but because London is a technologically advanced cultural hub. Contemporary and future dystopia is characterised by technological advancements, leading to oppressive societal conditions. Media facilitates the invasion of privacy, allowing dystopian power regimes to conduct surveillance, mediate interactions and restrict information. The middle class protagonist in ‘Children of Men’ represents the average man. Despite class differences, the general population share a lack of hope for the future. As people become trapped in a mundane routine and increasingly susceptible to deception, the likelihood of change begins to diminish.

The standout dystopian franchise ‘The Hunger Games’ brought a new dynamic to the genre, responsible in part for its newfound popularity in the late 2000s. ‘The Hunger Games’ was recognised in large for its capitalist critique. Notably, the choice of a young protagonist brings forth an element of relatability for a contemporary youth audience. Protagonist Katniss Everdeen endures loss after loss, but holds on to the chance for avenging those lost in spite of everything. Her resilience is empowering, but most crucially it is the key to liberation. Katniss’ journey also poses an interesting philosophical question: Is it more noble to save the general people or to protect those close to you on a personal level? ‘The Hunger Games’ is driven by her need to protect her younger sister. When hope of fulfilling this is shattered, can Katniss be trusted to protect the general person or does revenge take over? The ethical conundrum of pursuing a personal vendetta over the greater good prevails in philosophical debate and among avid ‘The Hunger Games’ fans. 

So what makes a good dystopia? Is it moral ambiguity? Corrupt leadership? It is tedium, followed by an action taken to break the system. It is the imbalance of power and the greed of the privileged at the expense of the misfortunate. It is submission and it is subversion. When rising insurgents finally revolt against the enforcers of injustice, there is hope for a better future. Edited by Hannah Sugars