In episode 42 of Dystopian Fiction Has Been Moved to Current Affairs, Clare and Masha go back to an animated classic, the 2008 Disney Pixar film Wall-E.

As well as exploring how the central ecological message of the film has fared in light of 2026 consumerism, we talk about the roles of advertising, corporate power, and human apathy have contributed to the state of the world in the era of late-stage capitalism.

We also discuss how an 18-year-old film foresaw the rise in screen-addiction, increased automation, the loss of expertise, and the reliance on vs the potential threat of AI.

In the episode, we refer to ways to better inform ourselves with respect to waste production. Among other sources, we suggest checking out: https://www.earthday.org/how-our-trash-impacts-the-environment/.

If you enjoyed this episode, please do rate and review us. You can get in touch via Instagram, Bluesky, or Substack.

It's 2026 and the world is as dystopian as ever, so we're back from our brief hibernation with a brand new episode looking at recent film from director Katherine Bigelow and writer Noah Oppenheim, A House of Dynamite.

In this episode, Clare and Masha consider attitudes to nuclear arms in the post-Cold War era. We engage with the literature on the film's relationship to real life protocols in the face of a nuclear attack on the US. We consider in particular the personalities depicted in the film, and how each strategic leader and individual involved in the response to a missile heading for Chicago reacts and advocates for a different next step, while also dealing with their own particular concerns for family and friends. In particular, we compare these characters to those in power in real life in 2026, especially in light of recent international actions from the US under Donald Trump.

We drew widely on recent literature from experts in atomic weaponry and US politics, and cite the following in particular:

Kathryn Bigelow's House of Dynamite Is Wake-Up Call on Nuclear Weapons

A House of Dynamite: The Netflix movie is terrifying. Is it realistic?

A house of mistakes: what Kathryn Bigelow’s 'A House of Dynamite' gets radically right—and dangerously wrong—about nuclear war

What we should be talking about after watching Bigelow's 'A House of Dynamite' nuclear thriller - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

The “House of Dynamite” sequel you didn’t know you needed - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Cover Story: Kathryn Bigelow And Her Cast On Why ‘A House Of Dynamite’ Should Disarm The World

Trump executive orders 2025: Why creating a U.S. version of Iron Dome makes no damn sense.

Here's what experts say 'A House of Dynamite' gets wrong (and right) about nuclear war

If you have your own thoughts about A House of Dynamite or nuclear disarmament, we'd love to hear from you. You can find us on Instagram, Bluesky, or Substack, or via our website, where you can also find links to our KoFi account or support us by buying our merch.

In this milestone 40th episode, Clare and Masha are discussing the visually-stunning Oscar-winner of 2024, Flow. Despite this animation having no dialogue and minimal explicit narrative, we follow the travels of the Cat and their rag-tag bag of animal companions to see what they might tell us about survival, the climate crisis, found-family, and mutual support between very different characters.

We consider the way in which collaboration and community benefit everyone. We situate the mythical circumstances of the film within a real-life crisis of rising sea-levels and extreme weather phenomena, from both our usual anthropocentric standpoint and the impact on flora and fauna.

We follow the Cat's arc, as they become more resourceful and courageous, and learn the benefit of having others in their lives. We look at the Capybara as a symbol of generosity and the Lemur as representative of consumerism. We explore the Dog's journey away from the group-think of the Dog Pack, considering the true nature of friendship. And we pick at the strands of spiritual and religious narrative that seem to underpin the depiction of the Secretary Bird.

Flow is far from being allegorical and even defies some metaphorical interpretation. If you have your own ideas as to how we might learn from this film, please let us know your thoughts via our website and social media, and don't forget to rate and review if you enjoy this episode!