Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

District 9

Saw it Sunday night. Looked great. At one point I wondered if it was digital, but not because it looked digital, only because of Peter Jackson. I was entertained through the movie but...

...I thought the story was dumb. SPOILER ALERT - if the prawns have mastered space travel, then they're way ahead of us. Why do they act like sub humans when in fact they're an intellectually superior species? And don't give me that "their leaders" died.

And about a hundred other things. Just don't think about it. The harder you do, the more disappointing it will be. A twinkie can be satisfying until you read the label and see what's in it.

Still, it's worth seeing and fresh. But as sci fi? It's not good sci fi. Sci fi should have a scientific premise at it's heart and then the story should spin off that premise "what if..."

Technically, the production design, direction, editing, acting, sound, etc. - terrific. Though that sound for the ship sounded suspciously similar to Close Encounters, and the "mother ship" looked similar too.
 
Dale Launer said:
Saw it Sunday night. Looked great. At one point I wondered if it was digital, but not because it looked digital, only because of Peter Jackson. I was entertained through the movie but...

...I thought the story was dumb. SPOILER ALERT - if the prawns have mastered space travel, then they're way ahead of us. Why do they act like sub humans when in fact they're an intellectually superior species? And don't give me that "their leaders" died.
Click to expand...

Well they are from a different culture. When the Dutch first arrived in Japan the Japanese marveled at their technology but thought they were filthy and rude.

Technological advanced doesn't always mean "polite".

Of course, there is the larger concept that was mention that they are somewhat if a group mind, and that indeed their leadership is missing, it's a part of the film that remained a mystery even to the human researchers.

Also, it seems to be related to how they are coped up and more or less kept in cages and treated like criminals.
 
Another spoiler...

The film didn't get specific, but essentially said the prawns were the equivalent of the "workers" or grunt labor. They all arrived in poor health and it had been nearly 30 years, we were given no information about the lifespan of their species or cultural background. I will agree that they were mostly portrayed as being crude and dull-witted in most cases within the film.

Anyway, I've seen District 9 twice now. It definitely has its little flaws in the story and things that could be nitpicked. It's a decent story, not great. But it's also a hell of a lot better than 99% of the so called sci-fi crap Hollywood has shoveled out over the past 20 years or so. I thought the hand-held shaky barf-cam was a bit overdone. I know they were trying for the whole war zone documentary feel, but I think the went a little too far with that. Watch any real-world war zone footage or footage from disaster areas, slummy encampments of people, etc.. It's just different.

I thought the performances by the pretty much unknown cast were phenomenal. The FX work was very, very good too. Only one or two little things really jumped out at me and they're mostly due to limitations of current technology and not any lack of skill by the FX artists. For a film that cost somewhere around $30M, it was really well done.
 
Last edited:
I loved it. Yes, there were some flaws (we started as a documentary...somewhere we switched), but mostly it was a great, fun, adventurous escape with a lot of thought put into it.

It looked good, too, though a lot of it was meant to not look good on purpose.
 
I think anyone that is heavily critical of this movie should post a link to their best work.

Jim
 
Ha! I do think that is funny, though maybe a little bit unfair. :-)

Whew. Glad I said I liked it.
 
Dale Launer said:
Saw it Sunday night. Looked great. At one point I wondered if it was digital, but not because it looked digital, only because of Peter Jackson. I was entertained through the movie but...

...I thought the story was dumb. SPOILER ALERT - if the prawns have mastered space travel, then they're way ahead of us. Why do they act like sub humans when in fact they're an intellectually superior species? And don't give me that "their leaders" died.

And about a hundred other things. Just don't think about it. The harder you do, the more disappointing it will be. A twinkie can be satisfying until you read the label and see what's in it.

Still, it's worth seeing and fresh. But as sci fi? It's not good sci fi. Sci fi should have a scientific premise at it's heart and then the story should spin off that premise "what if..."

Technically, the production design, direction, editing, acting, sound, etc. - terrific. Though that sound for the ship sounded suspciously similar to Close Encounters, and the "mother ship" looked similar too.
Click to expand...

WTF, why don't you do some research before you come here spouting that trash. I hate it when people come on forums and bad mouth something they obviously know nothing about. Twinkies rule.

I do have to say, I was a little disappointed by the film... it definitely wasn't bad, but I was expecting more I guess.
 
I think it's quite OK to be critical of movies that have been released / distributed. Filmmaking is a craft and it's often informative to disseminate what went wrong or right with it. We're all called on to use our judgements in creative positions and it's only edifying to develop your critical faculties. What makes good composition, or lighting, or writing and structure? What's original and what's cliche? What did you feel worked and didn't? These are important questions and most astute people will gain more from listening to a critical analysis of a movie, than a blind "That's great. Wow! Best movie ever!" or "That totally sucked!". My writing friends always take a film's structure apart after a movie, and even though I may NOT agree with them, I usually see their points and re-synthesize the movie in a way that promotes my appreciation for the craft! Critiques and discussion are stimulating and it's very much a part of the movie going experience. What's the first question you ask - "Did you like it? - Why not?" Office workers around the World gather around their water coolers talking about these movies "critically". I usually like movies in parts - the parts that work and even the parts that don't. If I ever saw a perfect movie, I think I fell asleep - that might have been the English Patient!! :svengo:
 
Dale has earned the right to be critical of the writing... plus, I think he was very complementary of it technically.

I was referring to a few others. Nothing is perfect and criticism is normal and acceptable. But sometimes people get a bit carried away...

Jim
 
---Spoiler---

Why did the aliens trade their superior weaponry to the nigerians? why didn't they point their Nuke gun at them and say "give me your fucking cat food!"???

---End Spoiler---

I was disappointed with the flick, but that was do to having very incorrect expectations. I don't enjoy action flicks and had hoped this would be something of a sprawling political/philosophical drama based on an extremely interesting premise. Unfortunately it's an action film with some substantial logic wholes and some on-the-nose propagandizing (views I of course agree with and would find interesting in a less formulaic film).

THAT SAID, the action scenes were pretty thrilling :) I really dig Blomkamp's style of action and as long as the characters were shooting at each other instead of talking, i was distracted enough to enjoy myself. I also thought the lead actor was extremely good, and found it interesting that they would make their lead character so unsympathetic. This felt to me to be evidence of it's foreign origin. I imagine it being a Wingnut Films production, shot in South Africa with a South African director and south african crew, that there might have been fewer concessions to average american sensibilities.

If you love action movies, this one must be the best one you'll see this summer and probably the best I've personally seen in the last few years, save Dark Knight (although I haven't seen that many). But action movies aren't my thing and I felt I was left with a buddy picture featuring puking security contractors, puking aliens, even puking mechanized battle armor, and lots and lots of pink giblet clouds. Felt like a missed opportunity to make a much more insightful film.

EDIT: OH, I forgot to say that the production looked top notch. The footage looked great on the big screen and felt perfect for the material. All the costumes and set design were perfect. Excellent CG characters as well. There's a scene where a adolecent alien is digging though cabinets while being illuminated by a flashlight that I felt was particularly impressive. :)
 
Brandon Fraley said:
Why did the aliens trade their superior weaponry to the nigerians? why didn't they point their Nuke gun at them and say "give me your fucking cat food!"???
Click to expand...

Who is going to get more Cat food after they kill all the Nigerians? Not to mention, once they start killing humans, what happens?

MNU shows up with overwhelming force, and even if the lightning gun can take out a dozen guys, what are they going to do about MNU air support and heavy vehicles? That Mech could easily take out tanks, but MNU still took it down from a distance.

The Aliens have superior weapons, but MNU has superior support and numbers.
 
Wesley Scoggins said:
Who is going to get more Cat food after they kill all the Nigerians? Not to mention, once they start killing humans, what happens?

MNU shows up with overwhelming force, and even if the lightning gun can take out a dozen guys, what are they going to do about MNU air support and heavy vehicles? That Mech could easily take out tanks, but MNU still took it down from a distance.

The Aliens have superior weapons, but MNU has superior support and numbers.
Click to expand...

it's a very good point, except that they DO kill humans. You're explanation is a very logical one, and if the filmmakers didn't choose to show me aliens attacking humans I wouldn't have thought to bring it up at all. I feel that several missteps like this might have taken place and lead to my perspective on the film.
 
my question... why did the main character make grunting noises and noises like he was personally being injured while inside that mech warrior thing? it was being shot at.. NOT him, who was nestled safely inside of its armored protection.

its the little things.
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
my question... why did the main character make grunting noises and noises like he was personally being injured while inside that mech warrior thing? it was being shot at.. NOT him, who was nestled safely inside of its armored protection.

its the little things.
Click to expand...

anime audiences have been asking this question for generations ;) Interestingly, THIS I didn't have a problem with, lol
 
If I had some technical issues with my space ship, and needed to land on an alien planet with some trigger happy guys with nukes, I too would act dumb.
 
Zakaree I assumed that there was some fragmentation and penetration happening. The prawns seem to be able to take quite the beating and I assumed he was just being resiliant. After all when he got out of the suit he couldn't even stand. (Alternate explanation from the Battletech universe: The extent that the neural links required for that level of dexterity means that noise and disruptions in the signal can be painful.) (Alternate Alternate explanation: By causing a minor amount of pain (grunt worthy) the pilot is sufficiently motivated and physiologically conditioned to handle the stress. There is a reason our body releases fight or flight endorphins--it helps us fight or flight. Roughing up the pilot a little bit but not to the point of actual pain could stimulate them enough to better react to the situation.) (Alternate Alternate Alternate explanation: The suit was designed for another species. It was riding up a bit on his crotch like an illfitting climbing harness or sailing trapeze harness and was crushing his balls every time the thing moved around too quickly. :D)

As to the catfood. I agreed I assumed it was because they were inside a prison and needed someone to bring them supplies. Weapons were illegal and they were too disorganized to really fight back. A few alien weapons wouldn't do any good against an aerial bombardment. So if weapons are useless then they might as well be exchanged for food.

Why they didn't just ask the government for help to fuel their ship up from the start? I assume it was because they didn't trust them with the keys to pilot them. I sort of felt like the Prawns were only kept around long enough to figure out how to get their technology to work and then would all 'go away' in an incident or confrontation if the secret to their technology was unlocked.

Story dissection without body of work? Well then I guess Roger Ebert has no business reviewing movies. And personally even as a professional artist I find criticism universally acceptable on my work. After all we all have eyes, ears and brains. We're all experts on experience. Criticism is just an assessment of how well a work of art conforms to our own experiences. And personal experience is something everyone is an expert on.

Personally I loved it. I thought it had great mood and character to it. They definitely took some short cuts plot wise to get where they wanted to go but I was willing to suspend credibility in exchange for such a rich cinematic experience. If you take any one small part of it I think it was weak but as a whole it was excellent. Another way to look at it was I felt like there were a lot of plot holes, but not plot flaws. That there were things left unsaid that could explain it. Some movies are dumb and have multiple things that are impossible to reconcile--I felt like all the major problems with the story were just gaps in explanation instead of being contradictory with logic.

I thought the RED footage looked great. It stood up really well even in really high contrast outdoor shots I thought. I thought it looked more like film than video.

From a technical standpoint I think this movie was mind blowingly insanely good. The VFX were excellent across the board. There were only a few shots in the entire movie that I would even describe as average and only one which was below average. Image Engine, Embassy and Weta deserve some serious accolades--especially considering their budget.
 
Guys, about the Transformers suit at the end :-), I thought that like the gun, there was some bio-connection from his body to the suit to control it. So, I think that makes total sense he might feel pain & weakness as the suit is hit and that it isn't much of a criticism. I mean, it is fantasy. As long as they stay within their rules they create, I'm fine with it story-wise and they definitely touched on this techno-meets-bio deal with the guns.

I also think the catfood thing was so bizarre that it worked. IF the aliens were not planning on fighting humans, then why not barter the weapons for food? It made sense, I think, especially in the context that they were a bit dumb but mostly peaceful.

Now, as far as "if they're so capable to have weaponry like that and to travel in space, how can they also be so dumb?" Well, I'll remind you of the good ole' US of A. If we ever did a ship with thousands of people, hopefully we're not sending mostly the WCW, Jerry Springer, backyard wrestling crowd. :-) So, that didn't bother me either. A bunch of stupid aliens with a few really smart ones mixed in.

Some holes in the script, but overall pretty darn cool. If you were watching that movie analyzing it during the film, it wasn't working for you. I think that about most movies, actually.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Story dissection without body of work? Well then I guess Roger Ebert has no business reviewing movies. And personally even as a professional artist I find criticism universally acceptable on my work. After all we all have eyes, ears and brains. We're all experts on experience. Criticism is just an assessment of how well a work of art conforms to our own experiences. And personal experience is something everyone is an expert on.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true. And while I certainly consider my opinion of the movie valid, I also understand it's not terribly valuable. I don't like action films. This is an action film. Many people love action films. Sentence B + C - A = Lots of people will probably love this movie.


Gavin Greenwalt said:
Another way to look at it was I felt like there were a lot of plot holes, but not plot flaws. That there were things left unsaid that could explain it. Some movies are dumb and have multiple things that are impossible to reconcile--I felt like all the major problems with the story were just gaps in explanation instead of being contradictory with logic.
Click to expand...

Very interesting point. I think those unsaid things were the things I had gone to the theatre to see, unfortunately, but for the story they decided to tell, I suppose you are probably right.
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
my question... why did the main character make grunting noises and noises like he was personally being injured while inside that mech warrior thing? it was being shot at.. NOT him, who was nestled safely inside of its armored protection.

its the little things.
Click to expand...

The aliens use biotechnology. If you notice in the scene where he is copping enemy fire, the heads up display shows every bullet that hits the armour. Assuming that pain is the best sensory instrument for survival, the suit would transfer the "pain" signals to the user in a mild manner so that they may act and do as if they had no shield.

I saw this movie last night. Thats not a movie *points to hollywood*, This is a fucking movie. Bloody amazing.

Sharlto's performance was great. But the Prawns performances were fantastic.

The body language alone in this movie told a story within a story without the prawns speaking a word. And thats something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top