It’s hard to say exactly when, why, or how it happened, but somehow “the hero’s journey” just became the predominant mode of storytelling. It appears first in stories like the Aeneid and the Odyssey, but has continued into modernity with some of the most famous stories ever written. The structure of the Hero’s Journey stands on four pillars:

1. The Hero is a person, just like you or me. One day, an external force thrusts them out of their comfort zone, forcing them to embark on a quest. 

2. The Hero goes through a series of trials in their attempt to stop the aforementioned external force. They struggle because that force is inherently stronger than them.

3. After failing in their trials repeatedly, The Hero reaches a low point, where they must gain a powerup of some kind which evens the power balance between them and the external force.

4. The Hero achieves their ultimate goal, defeating the force, and returns to a happy life which is almost certainly ‘better’ than their position at the beginning of the story. 

Sounds simple enough. But you read the title, and let’s be real, we’re all here for some good ol’ Karl Marx. Let’s go through the three tenets of Marxism:

1. Throughout history, there has always been an upper and a lower class. The proletariat has always been exploited by the Bourgeoisie and Aristocracy (who control the economy), and will continue to be until….

2. The working class grows tired enough of the upper class’ abuse that they start a revolution.

3. The working class reforms society under Communism: a system where the ‘little guys’ have an equal stake in the means of production. 

You, dear reader, can probably see where I’m going with this. I will be arguing that 90% of hero’s journey stories are just Communist Revolutions in disguise. Let’s run through a few examples:

The most obvious example in both regards is Star Wars - specifically part 4. Luke is forced on an adventure after his home is destroyed by the Empire. He goes through trials and eventually destroys the death star, joining the rebellion who are working to overthrow the empire. 

The Hunger Games is another iteration of this principle, with Katniss Everdeen working to very literally start a rebellion and overthrow an oppressive government who treats its citizens like commodities for entertainment. 

We can also look at the legendary classic Shrek. Shrek is a representative of the fairytale citizens of Far Far Away, who are presently being oppressed by the preeminent Lord Farquad. He goes on a variety of quests and shenanigans before overthrowing the tyrannical government at the end of the movie.

The list goes on: Dorothy reveals the wizard and relinquishes the government to the munchkins. Neo and the Freedom Fighters unite to stop the far-reaching Machine Army. Frodo must deliver the ring to Mordor and stop the advancing reach of the godlike Sauron. Daniel and his mentor Mr. Miyagi launch glorious warfare against the rich kids of the Cobra Kai dojo. Indiana Jones fights against whatever historical juggernaut is ruining archaeology at that moment. Almost every modern classic features a big, scary government in opposition to our protagonist.  

Now it seems strange that this pattern occurs so often but the more I think about it, the more I realize that Marxism and the Hero’s Journey are inherently inseparable. At the core of both ideas, we see a disadvantaged ‘little guy’ taking on an antagonistic ‘bigger guy’. In the Hero’s Journey, there would be no story if the antagonizing force was less powerful than the protagonist, or if they didn’t have opposing goals. Likewise, a Communist Revolution would never happen if the ruling government adequately cared for its citizens. Both Marxism and the Hero’s Journey are based on a power imbalance where the weaker side is ready to fight back against their oppressors. 

Great.

So why does this matter? 

Well, every movie reflects the time in which it was made. What does it say about our society that we consistently want to read stories where the common man overthrows the powerful bad guys?

As much as I want to conclude something about society’s increasing mistrust in the system, I think the rise of the “evil empire” is due entirely to power creep. To illustrate, let’s look at the exception to the Hero-Marxism bond: Fairy Tales. 

In fairy tales, there’s still an imbalanced power dynamic between the protagonist and the antagonist. The difference though is that in older stories, the bad guy is just one person; one wolf, one evil stepmother, one witch, etc. These highly personal villains will suffice for a time, but you can only hold an audience’s attention for so long with the same kind of story. 

So fast forward to the 1970s. Postmodernism is in vogue, along with bell bottoms and lava lamps. Released only a few months apart, Jaws and Star Wars: A New Hope create the idea of the summer blockbuster. Hollywood of this era is subsequently characterized by an abandoning of the idea that the villain was just one person, opting instead for larger, more imposing threats. 

It isn’t so much that we stopped trusting the system and wanted to see media that featured a hero overthrowing a puppet of our governmental stresses, but more that we’ve always preferred watching the underdog, and Hollywood is just perpetually trying to one-up itself. 

Now, as we enter the era of Meta-Modernism (post-Postmodernism), the film industry is on the move again. No material threat can be bigger than an imperial regime trying to destroy the world, but the scariest threats were never material to begin with. What I’ve observed is that the most successful original titles in the past few years have abstract antagonists. 

In Everything, Everywhere, All at Once, the protagonist Elenor has to fight the impending concept of hopelessness. The most concrete antagonist we get in The Barbie Movie is the cognitive dissonance of being a modern woman. In Oppenheimer, the villain is arguably man’s ability to destroy himself. 

These new movies are still about fighting against something more powerful than the individual, but unfortunately, revolting against these threats is even harder than rising up against an abusive government. The good news for us though - as both movie patrons and citizens of Earth - is that society is catching on to its failures. Moreover, we’re learning to discuss them in a format that’s accessible to everyone. So let’s celebrate the fact that our movies are growing out of a Marxist Subtext, and hope that we learn something in the process.