The Angry Birds Movie

Gregory Hood

When the West was great, our children were raised with stories and sagas, folk tales and common prayer. Today, they are raised by corporate franchises, worship SJW superheroes, and experience reality through a screen. We must resist and turn to older, better ways. But in The Current Year, all too often the best many parents can do is find some movie that’s not completely pozzed they can take their children to.

That movie has emerged. It’s time to redpill your children. It’s time to take them to see The Angry Birds Movie.

The hero of Angry Birds is Red, who, as you might guess, is an angry bird on an island of happy, carefree, and flightless birds. Distinct in both temperament and appearance (he’s often mockingly called “eyebrows”), Red is a loner, working a job he hates and living far away from everyone else. After unloading on a customer, he’s sentenced to anger management training. Everyone laughs at him, and for his part, Red seems frustrated and contemptuous of the silly birds he’s surrounded by.

One day, a ship arrives carrying two pigs. The ship inadvertently destroys Red’s beachside house, but no one cares because no one likes him anyway. The pigs bring news of a world outside the birds’ island. While Red is suspicious, everyone else is excited. The judge on the island (who is more or less the leader), declares a great celebration, and the pigs charm the birds by displaying their inventions, including a giant slingshot and a pyrotechnics show.

A suspicious Red sneaks aboard their boat and finds there aren’t just a few pigs – there is a whole population. When he tells the other birds about this, he is accused of shaming the entire island with his suspicion. The pigs put on a “cowboy show” with dancing and music and are eagerly welcomed by the birds as once again everyone turns on Red. The pigs become a part of the island’s life, with their leader forming a friendly relationship with the judge, and the pigs building various entertainments to make the birds happy. Red is more isolated than ever.

He embarks on a quest with Charlie and Bomb, two birds he met in anger management training. They seek Mighty Eagle, the legendary protector of the birds’ island, whom many people believe is a myth. After a grueling journey, they find not a heroic protector, but a fat, vulgar, and vain bird who is literally introduced to them (and the audience) taking a long piss into the Lake of Wisdom. Instead of providing guidance, he simply brags about how great he is. In disgust, Red hurries back to save the village himself – though Mighty Eagle’s knowing smirk as he runs back suggests the hero’s vanity may have just been part of a strategy to get Red to take action.

It turns out the pigs are only visiting to steal the birds’ eggs, which they do while everyone is distracted by a dance party. They steal the eggs, which is to say, the birds’ children, and take them back to their home, though not before blowing up the birds’ homes with explosives. Heartbroken, the birds turn to Red, whose anger and suspicion has been vindicated by events. Red teaches them it’s ok to be angry.

The birds sail to Piggy Island, where, using the giant slingshot, they fling themselves over the walls at the pig’s castle to rescue the eggs in a manner familiar to those who have played the game. With the help of the other birds and the returning Mighty Eagle, who drags himself out of retirement to fly the eggs to safety, Red saves the day. The story ends with the much wiser birds reunited with their children and Red a treasured part of the community, honored for saving the future of his society. But the evil leader of the pigs still plots at Piggy Island, suggesting a sequel is on the way.

Fairly straightforward, but shocking. What you’re probably expecting is some great moment where the two cultures come to an understanding. Perhaps the leader of the pigs doesn’t know the eggs are literally the children of the birds. But the king, first introduced as “Leonard” and actually (I swear I’m not making this up) “King Mudbeard,” knows exactly what’s he’s doing. When Red screams at him he can’t eat eggs, the king tells him he can’t be blamed, after all, he’s a “foodie.” Don’t judge other cultures!

The moral lesson of the movie isn’t that we should tolerate other cultures or that we are all the same under the skin. Instead, it’s that we should be suspicious of Ausländers and that some groups are simply enemies, full stop.

Peace was never an option.

The eggs aren’t reclaimed through negotiation with the pigs. Instead, the birds literally bomb and destroy their entire city, with Piggy Island essentially obliterated by the end of the movie. Though you don’t actually see this happen to anyone, the birds occasionally mention the reality of death and the fact they are risking their lives. This also suggests some of the pigs are actually being killed in the firestorm. Though the movie ends with a kind of song and dance number post-credits with some pigs dancing in the ruins, it’s hard to believe all of these pigs are still alive after this war. Violence is Golden, even in Angry Birds.

It’s hard to avoid the idea the movie is simply a giant metaphor for the European refugee crisis. A spoiled island of happy birds doesn’t recognize the threat of interlopers. The island (Europe) is supposedly protected by a giant eagle (America), but the eagle is fat, lazy, and disconnected from what’s going on. The pigs (perhaps a deliberate insult to Muslims?) are lecherous, seem to be all male, and also arrive with tons of explosives. And King Mudbeard is sporting a very Arab looking beard.

640

Red, the suspicious right winger, is persecuted by his own leaders and told “no one cares about your opinion” by the other birds, who are eager to welcome the refugees and party with them. The pigs lounge around the birds’ island, even breaking into people’s houses and using their stuff. No one in charge seems upset.

But though they arrive asking for mercy and tolerance, the pigs end up using terrorism and mockingly thank the birds for their “hospitality” as they flee with the eggs. The West, uh, the birds and the eagle, only reclaim their future through militant action, reclaiming their identity through combat. In a “blink and you miss it” moment, there’s even a Coexist sticker on the van one of the birds drives, with the peace sign turned into a pig’s nose and the Star of David rendered as a knife and fork. And this is the van a bird has to drive into Piggy Island to save some of his friends.

War – war never changes.

Indeed, there’s a kind of larger Narrative about overcoming decadence. None of the birds can fly, and it’s suggested that this is something they have somehow lost. The birds have no predators or enemies, so they have no reason to learn to fly or fight. Besides, there’s always Mighty Eagle.

Instead, they spend all their time talking about how happy they are. The “maximum punishment” under the law is sending people to anger management training, so anyone who finds this way of life unsatisfying is actually pathologized. The judge, the leader of the community, is a tiny pompous bird standing on top of another concealed within a large robe, showing the weakness and vanity of current political leadership. The anger management training is mocked as showily “exotic” and absurd, led by a caricature of an unstable, SWPL woman who surrounds herself with weird Eastern statues and “modern” art to fill the cultural void.

Indeed, the film could be taken as a critique of modern feminism. As some angry feminists have noticed, it’s men who save the day. The female birds are initially attentive to their eggs and to their roles as mothers. However, when they are given a pleasurable alternative, that’s what they choose. The “cowboy show” that first entertained them is a thinly veiled stripper show. As the pigs steal their eggs, the birds, especially the women, are out clubbing, listening to dance music and being titillated by the advances of the lascivious foreigners who have contempt for them. It’s only after their eggs are stolen that the females are reawakened to their roles as mothers, and then they (literally) hurl themselves against the enemy.

Of course, there is another reading. Red is unhappy because he’s a loner. There are a number of scenes where Red looks longingly at happy families or couples on dates, knowing he can never have this. So his inability to form a relationship, either with male friends or a potential female companion, manifests as a kind of superior self-image. His anger is selfish and self-destructive. He sighs at the absurdity of everyone, but if he had a girlfriend, he’d be just as happy to party. Indeed, at the end of the film, Red is living within the village again and is actually friends with Charlie and Bomb, suggesting he’s not so angry anymore. If there was a “bluepill” reading of the film, this is it.

But it’s unconvincing. A few hints suggest there is more going on to Red. During art classes for example, Red is making heroic sculptures of his hero Mighty Eagle while everyone else is making more “modern” art. When the pigs turn the peaceful community into a hub of noisy chaos, it’s Red who is troubled while everyone else seems delighted by the new pleasures to experience. When Red is savaged by his community for expressing suspicion of the pigs, he seems honestly flummoxed by everyone else’s reaction. It’s Red who openly questions the judge’s morality, asking him bluntly why exactly it’s so great that pigs who are so different from the birds have come to the island. It’s Red who expresses belief in the literal reality of Mighty Eagle and who seeks him out while everyone regards him as ancient history or a tale to amuse children. Red has a higher value system and is alienated from his degenerate community because of it.

Red, The Bird Against Time.

Many nationalists can relate to this. The in-joke among Alt Right types that we just stare at a computer all day alternately being angry or watching anime reflects something that’s partially true. If you see a fundamental problem with your society, you are, by definition, somewhat off. You’re not Ted Cruz tier, calling a basketball hoop a “ring” in front of an appalled crowd, but you’re still alienated and not really a part of the culture like everyone else.

“Normies” who see no problem with foreigners replacing their entire society as long as they can still go clubbing and think it’s weird if you aren’t showily happy all the time are fundamentally different from us. That’s why so many nationalists jokingly say if they could go back in time, they would take the blue pill. But once you’re woke, you’re woke. The challenge is, as Red learns, to use that anger and motivation productively instead of just making yourself and everyone else around you miserable.

There’s actually a moment of real pathos when after the eggs are stolen, the judge turns sadly to Red and says, “We need a leader.” For the first time, the outsider Red is now part of the community because when there is real conflict, you need someone actually willing to speak and act on those ugly truths so long ignored. Absurdly, I couldn’t help but think of George Lincoln Rockwell’s tragic belief that he would somehow get his family back if he won a political victory. In a reversal of the usual pattern of movies like Shane or The Searchers, the hero’s struggle actually makes him a part of the community rather than continuing in exile. It also means that if the pigs had never come, Red would still be alone, unhappy, and despised.

So now that I’ve managed to bring up GLR in a discussion of a kids’ movie, the real question – will the children like it? Absolutely. There’s more implied vulgarity than some parents may be comfortable with (“cluck my life” says Red at one point) and some crude jokes (Mighty Eagle’s long piss). But there’s no outright cursing and the more adult jokes (the pigs have a copy of a book called “Fifty Shades of Green” for example) will go over the children’s heads. There are enough silly sounds and comedic bits for the little ones and enough sophisticated humor to keep you interested. Purely as entertainment, it’s just fun for both adults and small children. And some moments, like when Red saves the small birds, are genuinely touching, without being too syrupy sweet.

And this little animated lesson has an important lesson for everyone. When you are faced with a threat, you defeat it, rather than taking refuge in pretty lies. It’s something little kids seem to understand, even if so many of our own rulers seemingly don’t.

Sometimes, anger is ok. Sometimes, anger is necessary. And sometimes, it’s even okay to hate.

Related

God Bless America:The Anger of the Enfranchised

God Bless America:The Anger of the Enfranchised

In "North American New Right"

Red Dawn (2012)

Red Dawn (2012)

In "North American New Right"

Christmas Special Hollywood & the Jewish War on Christmas

Christmas Special Hollywood & the Jewish War on Christmas

In "North American New Right"

Previous Post

Intelligent Stupidity

12 responses

This Man Goddard

May 23, 2016

The pigs are part of “Hamnesty International” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/reviews/article-3588105/Feathery-fun-handle-puns-Angry-Birds-Movie-good-fun-children-adults-writes-BRIAN-VINER.html

I also saw on Twitter (Though no confirmation and I haven’t seen the movie) that there is “COEXIST” bumper sticker to Pig Snout as the ‘O’

Reply

Ray

May 23, 2016

“The pigs become a part of the island’s life, with their leader forming a friendly relationship with the judge, and the pigs building various entertainments to make the birds happy.”

In this respect the pigs remind me of a certain non-Muslim ethnic group.

Reply

Nestor

May 23, 2016

If I had to guess, I’d say that the filmmakers likely are hard-core neocon Likudniks who see Red as Netanyahu (or that Liebermann guy), and the premise of the film is, Israel should murder even more Palestinians and bomb even more Arab nations, to “defend” itself from people foolishly trying to stop the realization of Greater Israel and retain their homelands.

However, what the filmmakers might not have realized is how well this film would work as a metaphor for Europe, with its refugee crisis.

Reply

Deviance

May 23, 2016

It’s no surprise that the Finnish company behind this movie, Rovio, had to finance the movie themselves. They couldn’t get Hollywood to cough up the money. But once the money was on the table the movie got made. He who pays the piper calls the tune …

Reply

Dane

May 23, 2016

I never let my children see any childrens entertainment produced after 1980. But after reading the review on TRS of this movie I took my oldest son to see it, and we both loved it and laughed all the way through. It also provided and still provides a great opportunity to go back over the narrative and talk about how the protagonist was right all along to be sceptical et.c, and how he was met with stigma from the less imaginative and passified lot. Its a fantastic allegory how the pigs get the birds to be preoccupied with hollow entertainment while they literally rob the birds of their future and coming generations, blowing things up in the process. I think this is as alt right and effective as it gets. When it gets out on dvd I´m gonna make it a reoccuring event in my house for the light entertainment, and I´m even going to pay for it.

Reply

Vincent Law

May 23, 2016

Who would have guessed?

Has anyone taken a look at the producers and the writers? What % non-gentile is this film.

Reply

CharlesJ

May 23, 2016

So there still are new mainstream movies that actually side with us. This is good news. I will get the movie and show it to my child when I will have one. The future (and current) parents among us need to have a list of decent movies and toys, as to avoid the SJW and soulless globalist stuff.

Reply

Tory Scott

May 23, 2016

I recently saw this film, and I think Mr. Hood’s write up of it here is pretty on point. The message behind it is surprisingly healthy for a film based on such a large franchise. There’s been mumbling about this film in our circles for somef time ( Radio Free Skyrim talked about it back in March) but I was worried that the film would take a turn towards the end and there would be a leftist finger wagging ending. I’m very glad to say that this is not the case.

Also, I could hardly believe my ears when “Leonard” announced that his name was King Mudbeard, so I’m glad to have confirmation that I heard that correctly.

Reply

Lawrence Murray

May 23, 2016

I still don’t understand how a smartphone app got made into a movie, nor do I understand how such a pro-xenophobic (ie xenoskeptic) script was approved. If you swapped out species for races, this movie would be considered more infamous and horrible than Birth of a Nation.

Reply

Tory Scott

May 23, 2016

We must secure the existence of our eggs and a future for bird children.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3232051&forum_id=2#30541127)

The moral lesson of the movie isn’t that we should tolerate other cultures or that we are all the same under the skin. Instead, it’s that we should be suspicious of Ausländers and that some groups are simply enemies, full stop."

lmao. wat has happened to america

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3232051&forum_id=2#30541838)

http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/24/11763360/angry-birds-book-movie-app-art

The feature film The Angry Birds Movie is not art. It is bizarre anti-immigration propaganda, in which a peaceful Park Slope-esque society of green-juice-swilling, yoga-doing, procreating birds faces near destruction because of its extremely naïve willingness to trust and accommodate foreign visitors with outwardly bad hygiene (pigs, who come en masse in the hull of a ship).

There is nothing in the rudimentary mobile game Angry Birds to suggest such a story. It's a puzzle game. Players of Angry Birds know that pigs are their enemies because they are explicitly told, not because the pigs are gradually revealed to have unsettling cultural dissimilarities to the protagonist.

But I digress, I am here to talk about what surely must be the first book based on a movie based on an app. Human culture has come so far.

"the angry birds movie is candy-coated propaganda"

There is, in the mobile game Angry Birds, a red bird who is angry. He appears in the film as well, and his name is Red! He appears in the free Kindle excerpt of the novelization of the movie as well, and his name is still Red. Very consistent.

Red (in the film The Angry Birds Movie) is the only bird with his beak to the air. No one else is smart enough to be suspicious — smart enough to be angry. That is not consistent with the game Angry Birds, in which all birds are angry. Red is angry, broadly, for no reason (except some bullying about his eyebrows), and lashes out with violence whenever slightly perturbed. That is not consistent with the mobile game, which involves blatant antagonism. Because Red is voiced by the sweetly sardonic Jason Sudeikis and the film is a cartoon, it was easy to play the violence for laughs.

In the free Kindle excerpt of the novelization of this movie, which is based on an app that had no story, it appears very hard to play violence for laughs. Take for instance, this very lame paragraph:

"Once, Red got angry at a bird that was standing too close to him in line at the Early Bird Worms shop and almost punched him. Another time he elbowed a mime in the stomach when he disturbed Red while he was reading. Red was known for chasing young birds away from his house when they made too much noise playing outside his beach hut. He even jammed his popcorn bucket on the head of another bird who sneezed on Red at the movies!

The Angry Birds Movie features a montage of Red committing all of these acts of violence — except the young bird playing too loudly outside his house doesn't get shooed, he gets punted into the ocean. Interesting revisionism! Take heart: the novelization of The Angry Birds Movie will surely be just as politically horrifying as the screenplay it is based on, but some specific acts of violence don't play well on page and will be left out.

The free Kindle excerpt of the novelization of The Angry Birds Movie also contains a prologue, which explains how Red is "an honorary uncle" to a set of blue bird triplets that [SPOILER] had sort of seemed to commit suicide by slingshotting themselves into the ocean at the end of the film. Glad to know they are still alive and being intellectually nurtured by a xenophobe.

The free Kindle excerpt of the novelization of The Angry Birds Movie also makes liberal use of ellipses, which reminds me of many portions of The Angry Birds Movie which were extremely long, boring, and needless.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3232051&forum_id=2#30549463)

This is 180.

I have no idea how the creators happened to slip this past lib Hollywood.

Just looked up the writer -- it is Jon Vitti.

Vitti was a 180^180 Simpsons writer who was part of the original (mostly Harvard Lampoon) incredible writing team.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3232051&forum_id=2#30549669)