Genndy Taratkovsky's Hotel Transylvania follows the line of pro-socialist films we have been seeing for months now and follows the same manner as well with a critique of capitalism to turn people away from it, while failing to glorify socialism, and show how the same drawbacks inherent in capitalism are "solved" by socialism. How does it establish itself as being against capitalism? There are plenty of clues and they are the same ones which have continuously showed up in other films, but I would like to start with that feature which would draw a viewer such as myself to the film: the collection of old horror film monsters.
The Curse and the Mummy for more). In those films, however, the "monsters" were usually symbols of abnormal sexuality (as in Nosferatu, please see The Undead: Nosferatu on World War I and homosexuality in the trenches) or other social taboos film makers wanted to keep taboo such as promiscuity (Dracula has often been the primary threat against woman's sexual purity; please see both For the Dead Travel Fast: Dracula and False Light: Interview With the Vampire); now, with a film such as Hotel Transylvania, it's the general population, which is still capitalist, that has become the "taboo faction" of society with socialists inverting the ideas of "normal" and "abnormal."
The film erects a series of diametrical oppositions, such as "good and bad," "black and white," "freedom and imprisonment," "fun and boring," "human and human eater," etc., and guess who comes out on the "positive side" of those oppositions each time (The Dark Knight Rises does the same thing, but demonstrating the positives of capitalism, instead)? While Jonathan is the only human with any real involvement in the story, he's also the one who "livens" up the Hotel and brings fun to the entertainment that makes everyone like him (instead of liking Dracula, the owner, so Jonathan is a better "business owner" than the business owner, even). Jonathan's primary identification as a "socialist" however, comes from his limited possessions (he has only a back pack and no known job) and his staying in youth hostels throughout his wide travels (as well as being a vegetarian, more on that below).
|The Wolf Man, Wayne, and his wife Wanda, are a sore point of contention with me on this film. Werewolves have had three prominent appearances in films as of late: Underworld: Awakening, Dark Shadows and The Cabin In the Woods. Typically, a werewolf symbolized a man unable/unwilling to control his sexual appetite, thereby reducing himself to an animal (please see The Bright Autumn Moon: The Wolf Man). The plethora of bratty children Wayne and Wanda have, as well as her being pregnant again, testifies to Wayne's breeding habits; the terror the children wreck is a message for birth control, possibly even pro-abortion. At one point, Wayne is red-eyed and still awake with his pups all around him in bed, sleeping soundly, and he can't get to sleep. This negative image of not just paternity, but of children in general lays out a pro-socialist/Obamacare agenda of the government implementing birth control amongst Catholics who generally favor large families (myself included).|
Mavis asks Jonathan if he's ever been endangered of being eaten and he says no, except once at a Slipknot concert, a guy was going to eat him; what does that mean? Slipknot has been surrounded by controversies, but, most importantly, they would be considered a product of capitalism because they have been so commercially successfully, introducing the art in capitalism or socialism argument once more. By linking up a controversial, heavy-metal band with being eaten, introduces a lousy moral argument into the fray, namely, that capitalism produces "human eating" art, like the vampire employer/business owners and that such art doesn't exist in socialism. Well, that's partly true, because art doesn't exist in socialism, it's controlled by the government so it's all propaganda.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner