Although Christian belief mandates that a world without the sense of a Apocalyptic setting with exist after the events occur and is the survivors’ reward for enduing tribulation, in order to hold believers accountable for keeping within the prefered behavior patterns, the modern apocalypse movies we viewed for Tuesday’s class suggest that (relatively) calm worlds might exist alongside places of conflict, most likely so we relate to the actions of survivors and possibly keep with the filmmakers’ preferred behavior patterns.

As Professor Quinby noted in her paper, this, like in the Bible, is mostly shown at the story’s end. In 28 Days Later, this is shown in the shape of the house in the hills and the possible rescue by a passing plane. In Apocalypto, this is Jaguar Paw’s new home in the woods and the ships on the horizon. In Children of Men, this is the Human Project’s boat, however it was for a time Jim’s home. Although there was a shown struggle to get to these spots by the protagonists, there is an audience understanding that these settings are manmade, that they existed before during and after the movies’ timeframe and that presence of these settings are at odds with the world’s end.

We live in such settings and as Albert noted, relatability is everything in for-profit media. (It’s difficult to share or rewatch/reread a movie or a novel that we do not enjoy or understand.) I think that a major component of apocalyptic fiction which destroys part of “another world” is to make us more aware of humanity’s current struggles.