I want to take a break from talking about how modern politics and the culture war is ruining society to explain how modern politics and the culture ruined one my favorite book to movie adaptations: The Long Walk. I can’t think of a more perfect example of uber modern politics brain destroying the soul of a work of art.
FULL SPOILERS FOR THE LONG WALK BOOK AND MOVIE AHEAD
The Long Walk was written in 1979 by Stephen King. In the plot, 100 boys, aged 13 to 19, compete in a game run by the government. The boys all volunteered to play and were selected by lottery. Everyone walks along a road in Maine (of course), if their walking speed falls below 4 mph, they get a warning, and if they get three warnings, they get executed by escorting government soldiers. The last boy standing gets anything he wants from the government for the rest of his life. There are a few other rules to the game, but that’s the gist of it.
The story takes place in an alternate US run by a military figure called The Major. It’s implied that the government is authoritarian, or even totalitarian, and that the economy isn’t in a great state. The protagonist’s father was arrested by some sort of secret police force and was never seen again. The Long Walk game is televised to the nation as a form of inspiration for the people, and throughout the book, crowds of onlookers cheer the walkers on.
Despite the above, the politics of The Long Walk is distinctly and purposefully vague. The boys participating in the game are young men who are generally clueless about the larger state of the world around them, let along the politics of it. Even the protagonist whose father was presumably killed by the government doesn’t have any particular animosity toward the state. None of the kids talk about politics or think about government/societal reform. While many of the players do eventually turn against the game and The Major, they do so out of an almost animalistic rage at their suffering, a desperate attempt to throw their pain back onto the world, rather than out of any principled protest against authority figures.
So why do the kids play the game (in the novel)? The book is wonderfully vague about this question and it serves as the core thematic element of the book. Readers are left to their own devices to piece together clues and sentiments to figure out their interpretation.
Sure, the kids are partially motivated by the prize, but even a dumb-ass teenager knows that their odds of winning are so low and unpredictable that the prize isn’t worth entering. IMO, their desire to play the game is a representation of the raw masculine urge to embrace danger and adventure for the sake of glory. That is mostly what the kids talk about, along with sex and alcohol and what they are going to do with their prizes, which I think is very accurate to what a bunch of teenage boys would think about. At the start, just about all the players are hyped up and gung ho to walk and win, and it’s only when their minds and bodies fall apart that they begin to question their desires.
At the end of the book, the protagonist ultimately wins after all of his friends and biggest competitors fade away and die, either by exhaustion or gun shot execution. The protagonist is left all alone as the victor, but he’s in such a distraught state that even after the Major appears to congratulate him, the protagonist keeps walking past him in a zombie haze, vowing to never stop. The implication is that winning the contest is pointless. Whoever makes it to the end will probably die anyway from the ordeal, and even if they do survive, they will be a physical and mental husk of themselves, and therefore unable to enjoy their prize. Thematically, IMO, the ending cements the futility of the urge that drove the boys into the contest in the first place. I can’t possibly do it justice here, but it’s a haunting, phenomenal, thematically rich ending (for an author who is notoriously bad at writing endings) to a great book.
That’s The Long Walk novel. What I think happened with The Long Walk movie is that a modern person with modern left wing culture war views read the book, and he couldn’t get over the fact that the politics was vague. The politics can’t be vague. If there is politics in a story, then it MUST relate to the current day. And it MUST be the focus of the entire story.
So in the movie, you have the same basic set up with the Long Walk contest. But now, we get an early scene where we learn more about the political situation on the radio. There was some sort of war years ago that left America in an economic depression. An authoritarian military government has taken over the country and enforced strict top-down totalitarian control over the population, including extensive censorship of books and music. This action has saved the nation from division in the words of the government’s propaganda. The Long Walk game is a symbol of hope to inspire the people.
How is watching a bunch of kids get shot on tv inspiring? Well, in the movie, this is directly explained to the boys and the audience by the Major. Mark Hamill as the Major explains that the United States has an “epidemic of laziness.” The country is in an economic depression because people aren’t working hard enough. The Long Walk inspires people to work hard because of how hard the kids walk. The Major concludes the speech by shouting that he believes the Long Walk could get the nation to raise the GDP until the US is the number one economic power in the world again. It is difficult to overstate how close the Major gets to outright saying the Long Walk will Make America Great Again.
Shortly after the contest starts, some of the boys get together and talk about how they were chosen to play. In the book, only some boys across the country sign up, and only 100 are ultimately chosen to compete, and every contestant is honored by the country as a hero. In the movie, every boy in the country applies to play. Why? Because, as one of the characters explains, they were socially conditioned to do so. The government and society brainwashed them. All that subtext about the male desire for glory and adventure and the willingness to endure pain goes out the window. The boys compete in the Long Walk because of politics.
Next, we get the changes to Ray Garraty, the protagonist. In the book, he signs up for the Long Walk for the same reason as everyone else, and he’s apolitical despite his father being killed by the state. In the movie, Garraty signs up because he’s a REFORMER. He wants to change the government and society with his prize. How? By getting a gun and personally shooting Trump, I mean the Major. To show the audience this deep motivation, we even get a flashback scene where the secret police drag Garraty’s father out of his house in front of Garrety, and then the Major PERSONALLY executes Garraty’s father. You know, sort of like how Hitler would follow around Gestapo squads and personally shoot German dissidents in the head.
To the movie’s legitimate credit, there is an attempt to add some thematic depth here. Garraty’s best friend in the game, McVries, learns of Garraty’s plan, and tries to talk him out of it. McVries makes the case that rather than martyr himself by assassinating the Major and then presumably immediately being gunned down, Garraty should win the contest, take the money and prize, and then live a happy life with his mother. Reading between the lines, McVries essentially argues to not let political worms eat your brain. He tells Garraty to touch grass. He urges him to see the “beauty” in life all around them and try to love every moment for what it is rather than killing himself for a cause. McVries vows that if he wins, he's going to use the winnings to charitably help people like himself, orphans who grew up in poverty.
In the end, in a twist from the book, Garraty dies and McVries wins with competition. McVries is congratulated by the Major and offered anything he wants. McVries asks for a gun and then assassinates the Major to fulfill Garraty’s plan. McVries then keeps walking along the road in a weak and nonsensical imitation of the book’s ending.
My interpretation of the thematics of the ending is that Garraty’s politics-obsessed martyrdom is not ideal, but in a world of sufficiently bad politics, everyone inevitably becomes a politics-obsessed martyr. The same social conditioning that made everyone sign up for the Long Walk (in the movie) also causes everyone to lash out against the political system, even a philosophically stoic/cheerful McVries.
I don’t hate the movie overall, but I HATE HATE HATE how the thematic core of one of my favorite books was trashed. A contemplative story about the nature of man (in both senses) and suffering and glory and the meaning of life and what’s worth pursuing and our self-destructive natures, was transformed into yet another story about fighting political oppression. Because that’s the most important thing on earth in all contexts.
p
I want to take a break from talking about how modern politics and the culture war is ruining society to explain how modern politics and the culture ruined one my favorite book to movie adaptations: The Long Walk. I can’t think of a more perfect example of uber modern politics brain destroying the soul of a work of art.
FULL SPOILERS FOR THE LONG WALK BOOK AND MOVIE AHEAD
The Long Walk was written in 1979 by Stephen King. In the plot, 100 boys, aged 13 to 19, compete in a game run by the government. The boys all volunteered to play and were selected by lottery. Everyone walks along a road in Maine (of course), if their walking speed falls below 4 mph, they get a warning, and if they get three warnings, they get executed by escorting government soldiers. The last boy standing gets anything he wants from the government for the rest of his life. There are a few other rules to the game, but that’s the gist of it.
The story takes place in an alternate US run by a military figure called The Major. It’s implied that the government is authoritarian, or even totalitarian, and that the economy isn’t in a great state. The protagonist’s father was arrested by some sort of secret police force and was never seen again. The Long Walk game is televised to the nation as a form of inspiration for the people, and throughout the book, crowds of onlookers cheer the walkers on.
Despite the above, the politics of The Long Walk is distinctly and purposefully vague. The boys participating in the game are young men who are generally clueless about the larger state of the world around them, let along the politics of it. Even the protagonist whose father was presumably killed by the government doesn’t have any particular animosity toward the state. None of the kids talk about politics or think about government/societal reform. While many of the players do eventually turn against the game and The Major, they do so out of an almost animalistic rage at their suffering, a desperate attempt to throw their pain back onto the world, rather than out of any principled protest against authority figures.
So why do the kids play the game (in the novel)? The book is wonderfully vague about this question and it serves as the core thematic element of the book. Readers are left to their own devices to piece together clues and sentiments to figure out their interpretation.
Sure, the kids are partially motivated by the prize, but even a dumb-ass teenager knows that their odds of winning are so low and unpredictable that the prize isn’t worth entering. IMO, their desire to play the game is a representation of the raw masculine urge to embrace danger and adventure for the sake of glory. That is mostly what the kids talk about, along with sex and alcohol and what they are going to do with their prizes, which I think is very accurate to what a bunch of teenage boys would think about. At the start, just about all the players are hyped up and gung ho to walk and win, and it’s only when their minds and bodies fall apart that they begin to question their desires.
At the end of the book, the protagonist ultimately wins after all of his friends and biggest competitors fade away and die, either by exhaustion or gun shot execution. The protagonist is left all alone as the victor, but he’s in such a distraught state that even after the Major appears to congratulate him, the protagonist keeps walking past him in a zombie haze, vowing to never stop. The implication is that winning the contest is pointless. Whoever makes it to the end will probably die anyway from the ordeal, and even if they do survive, they will be a physical and mental husk of themselves, and therefore unable to enjoy their prize. Thematically, IMO, the ending cements the futility of the urge that drove the boys into the contest in the first place. I can’t possibly do it justice here, but it’s a haunting, phenomenal, thematically rich ending (for an author who is notoriously bad at writing endings) to a great book.
That’s The Long Walk novel. What I think happened with The Long Walk movie is that a modern person with modern left wing culture war views read the book, and he couldn’t get over the fact that the politics was vague. The politics can’t be vague. If there is politics in a story, then it MUST relate to the current day. And it MUST be the focus of the entire story.
So in the movie, you have the same basic set up with the Long Walk contest. But now, we get an early scene where we learn more about the political situation on the radio. There was some sort of war years ago that left America in an economic depression. An authoritarian military government has taken over the country and enforced strict top-down totalitarian control over the population, including extensive censorship of books and music. This action has saved the nation from division in the words of the government’s propaganda. The Long Walk game is a symbol of hope to inspire the people.
How is watching a bunch of kids get shot on tv inspiring? Well, in the movie, this is directly explained to the boys and the audience by the Major. Mark Hamill as the Major explains that the United States has an “epidemic of laziness.” The country is in an economic depression because people aren’t working hard enough. The Long Walk inspires people to work hard because of how hard the kids walk. The Major concludes the speech by shouting that he believes the Long Walk could get the nation to raise the GDP until the US is the number one economic power in the world again. It is difficult to overstate how close the Major gets to outright saying the Long Walk will Make America Great Again.
Shortly after the contest starts, some of the boys get together and talk about how they were chosen to play. In the book, only some boys across the country sign up, and only 100 are ultimately chosen to compete, and every contestant is honored by the country as a hero. In the movie, every boy in the country applies to play. Why? Because, as one of the characters explains, they were socially conditioned to do so. The government and society brainwashed them. All that subtext about the male desire for glory and adventure and the willingness to endure pain goes out the window. The boys compete in the Long Walk because of politics.
Next, we get the changes to Ray Garraty, the protagonist. In the book, he signs up for the Long Walk for the same reason as everyone else, and he’s apolitical despite his father being killed by the state. In the movie, Garraty signs up because he’s a REFORMER. He wants to change the government and society with his prize. How? By getting a gun and personally shooting Trump, I mean the Major. To show the audience this deep motivation, we even get a flashback scene where the secret police drag Garraty’s father out of his house in front of Garrety, and then the Major PERSONALLY executes Garraty’s father. You know, sort of like how Hitler would follow around Gestapo squads and personally shoot German dissidents in the head.
To the movie’s legitimate credit, there is an attempt to add some thematic depth here. Garraty’s best friend in the game, McVries, learns of Garraty’s plan, and tries to talk him out of it. McVries makes the case that rather than martyr himself by assassinating the Major and then presumably immediately being gunned down, Garraty should win the contest, take the money and prize, and then live a happy life with his mother. Reading between the lines, McVries essentially argues to not let political worms eat your brain. He tells Garraty to touch grass. He urges him to see the “beauty” in life all around them and try to love every moment for what it is rather than killing himself for a cause. McVries vows that if he wins, he's going to use the winnings to charitably help people like himself, orphans who grew up in poverty.
In the end, in a twist from the book, Garraty dies and McVries wins with competition. McVries is congratulated by the Major and offered anything he wants. McVries asks for a gun and then assassinates the Major to fulfill Garraty’s plan. McVries then keeps walking along the road in a weak and nonsensical imitation of the book’s ending.
My interpretation of the thematics of the ending is that Garraty’s politics-obsessed martyrdom is not ideal, but in a world of sufficiently bad politics, everyone inevitably becomes a politics-obsessed martyr. The same social conditioning that made everyone sign up for the Long Walk (in the movie) also causes everyone to lash out against the political system, even a philosophically stoic/cheerful McVries.
I don’t hate the movie overall, but I HATE HATE HATE how the thematic core of one of my favorite books was trashed. A contemplative story about the nature of man (in both senses) and suffering and glory and the meaning of life and what’s worth pursuing and our self-destructive natures, was transformed into yet another story about fighting political oppression. Because that’s the most important thing on earth in all contexts.
More options
Context Copy link