MOVIE : District 9

[Leyawiin]

I felt their use of aliens to represent the victims of apartheid was clever, I enjoyed the movie.

What was interesting was the "interviews" at the beginning of the film had all of Johannesburg's residents - regardless of color - down on the aliens and wanting them gone. The bigotry and fear came from all races.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Should have been a lot more popular than it was. I think it got buried in blockbusters when it came out.

I don't think that's why it got overlooked. I think it was two parts. Seemed like everything I saw leading up to it was how it was basically the movie made after they lost out on making the Halo movie and something something Peter Jackson. Which means movie critics and mainstream would basically be like, uh, so they couldn't make a video game movie so they settled for making this? Oh and a first time director? Yeah, we'll skip that... And the people that would have been interested because of it being what Halo might have been weren't happy that it wasn't really Halo without the Halo name. Or apparently did not "get" that the movie was more than just a sci fi action movie.

Hearing the Cape Town locals' reaction on the D9 screening really took away the infatuation for me a lot of people here seem to have about the film.



Not the Cx4. Vektor CR-21s, South Africa's issued rifle painted white.

I'm confused, why did that article do that for you? I'd think if anything it would enhance it, unless you're saying that you feel people don't take into account that aspect and are liking it just because of the sci fi aspect? Which blows me away. Do people seriously not understand how the movie was a parable to Apartheid? Hell, reading a bit of that link, "subtleties", really? That movie is not subtle. It might be less subtle about that aspect than Crash which they could have just flashed "RACISM IS BAD!!!" on the screen for 2 hours and essentially offer the same affect.

Loved Moon. Absolutely hated District 9.

I liked them both (I'd say I probably like Moon more though). To me Moon wasn't really a sci-fi movie (which to me sci-fi is always about the sci fi stuff first). It just had a sci fi setting, but its a character acting movie, its all about Sam Rockwell in that role. From some discussions I've seen, I get the impression that a lot of people think Moon is all about the "twist" which to me it was not even supposed to be a big "twist" (in the sense of how Nolan or Shymalan apparently write their movies so much around them, which I think is probably why people felt that way).

 

[zinfamous]

Yeah, this movie is worth mentioning for several reasons. Location, director, actors, story, budget, FX (doubly nice given the budget)... It's not a top 10 sci-fy movie but it'd certainly make a "must watch" list. It was a pleasant surprise.

yeah, pretty much how I felt.

I don't think it lived up the lofty reviews it received at the time, but it was still a fun flick.

I was drawn in throughout, but the 3rd act teetered to a fizz, unfortunately.

Around the same time, Moon was much better. Very different though.

 

[zinfamous]

I liked them both (I'd say I probably like Moon more though). To me Moon wasn't really a sci-fi movie (which to me sci-fi is always about the sci fi stuff first). It just had a sci fi setting, but its a character acting movie, its all about Sam Rockwell in that role. From some discussions I've seen, I get the impression that a lot of people think Moon is all about the "twist" which to me it was not even supposed to be a big "twist" (in the sense of how Nolan or Shymalan apparently write their movies so much around them, which I think is probably why people felt that way).

I guess it depends on what you mean by "sci fi" stuff. I think Moon is the perfect type of sci fi, because it is about character. Robots and ships and technology do not define sci fi, but merely provide a vehicle for certain speculative stories. There doesn't even have to be technology--the best sci fi explores tenable scientific theories--either predictive, or purely conceptual--and make a story, usually social, typically broad-spectrum humanity type stuff.

I think both are very good sci fi stories--District 9 simply takes the human-created apartheid and refuge structures and tells a story with aliens. Moon, well, don't want to reveal too much there. Isolation is the primary component, and it does explore theories on space travel--what that will actually mean for the explorers that have to survive these missions.

Children of Men--I think the best sci fi since 2001--because it explores 2 very interesting thought problems. The film really has no technology (so, no "sciency" stuff), but explores how humanity adapts to the geographic and geopolitical changes brought about by a drastically changed world climate. On top of that, of course, the main story of humanity facing its own long-sustained, yet mysterious extinction.

 

[FallenHero]

One of the better movies I have seen in recent years.

 

[Sonikku]

To think that they took Halo away from this guy. Guess they were afraid it'd be brilliant and a flop. Time to get Bay!

 

[Muse]

OMG I am so all over this movie it aint funny. It is really a maserpiece, if you havent allready, have your self a trreat and watch this flick,,, its a gem.

Actually, it's waiting for me at the library, a 2 minute bike ride (I put a hold on it after seeing Elysium the other day... people say that District 9 is way better, so...)

I know almost nothing about it, and I prefer it that way. I never watch trailers anymore and am loath to even scan any info on a movie once I decide to see it. I'll have 3 weeks to get it back to the library after I pick it up. I rarely buy a movie anymore, just check them out. The don't have BD's, though. But DVD's are pretty damn good.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "sci fi" stuff. I think Moon is the perfect type of sci fi, because it is about character. Robots and ships and technology do not define sci fi, but merely provide a vehicle for certain speculative stories. There doesn't even have to be technology--the best sci fi explores tenable scientific theories--either predictive, or purely conceptual--and make a story, usually social, typically broad-spectrum humanity type stuff.

I think both are very good sci fi stories--District 9 simply takes the human-created apartheid and refuge structures and tells a story with aliens. Moon, well, don't want to reveal too much there. Isolation is the primary component, and it does explore theories on space travel--what that will actually mean for the explorers that have to survive these missions.

Children of Men--I think the best sci fi since 2001--because it explores 2 very interesting thought problems. The film really has no technology (so, no "sciency" stuff), but explores how humanity adapts to the geographic and geopolitical changes brought about by a drastically changed world climate. On top of that, of course, the main story of humanity facing its own long-sustained, yet mysterious extinction.

I get what you're saying, and I could see saying District 9 isn't really sci fi using my reasoning for why Moon isn't, since District 9 is all about the parable of Apartheid first, just using a sci fi situation to make it.

Yeah I can see why Moon uses real science to make the character so I get why it is sci fi to a lot (maybe that's why it doesn't meet sci-fi to me, there's a lot less fiction to Moon's science I think). I don't think you need to worry about spoiling it, you could give a full summary of Moon and yet its still worth watching for the experience of Sam Rockwell in that role. That's why to me its a character acting vessel more than anything. You should see it for that alone.

I'd agree that Children of Men is science fiction, but I think you do kinda kill your own argument, it does have science. Its just more realistic hard science, although the main premise is highly fictional. Kinda like how basically anything apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic pretty much is, in that its largely because of a strongly fictional and generally scientific based reason (disease, weather/space/nuclear etc cactaclysm). I guess Moon could be argued to be the same way, but again, I just feel like it is all about that role and that actor (which maybe that wasn't the original intention, just that the result is Sam Rockwell playing that role overshadowed it, kinda like Daniel Day Lewis does in...most movies he's in).

Oh, by the way, since I seem to recall you liking Eva Green, did you see Perfect Sense? If not you definitely should check it out. Its got the good "science based fiction but so much more" angle these films do. Plus tits (Eva Green tits, so they obviously Daniel Day Lewis the hell out of that movie).

 

[Chaotic42]

Actually, it's waiting for me at the library, a 2 minute bike ride (I put a hold on it after seeing Elysium the other day... people say that District 9 is way better, so...)

Elysium is the last movie since Down to You where I've wanted to leave the theater in the middle. Keep in mind that I sat through Battlefield Earth.

 

[Eug]

Elysium was at best mediocre. Totally forgettable movie with terrible dialogue.

District 9 was totally awesome. Not perfect but awesome nonetheless. It deserved its Oscar nomination.

Moon was decent but I was not enamoured with it as it seemed a bit boring in many parts and didn't really break any new ground. In fact I'd have to say it was kinda predictable at times.

Tl;dr

District 9 is one of my favorite movies of all time.

Moon is a decent movie worth the watch, but not as interesting as D9.

Don't bother wasting your time with Elysium.

 

[ThinClient]

Hearing the Cape Town locals' reaction on the D9 screening really took away the infatuation for me a lot of people here seem to have about the film.



Not the Cx4. Vektor CR-21s, South Africa's issued rifle painted white.

Oh who gives a shit.

I liked the movie. If you don't like it, don't go see it. Shit happens.

 

[Eug]

That list of comments from South Aftican residents just reinforces that the approach of the movie worked. That they are strongly reminded of the old South African apartheid is good evidence of that, esp. since that was the point in the first place.

BTW I wondered about a few things in the movie because they seemed overly exaggerated but was told later by South Africans who lived in Johannesburg at that time that it was reasonably accurate. It's just that in Canada we are not used to seeing that kind of stuff (eg. psycho superstitious gangsters) so it seems hugely exaggerated to some of us.

The director is South African-Canadian so this stuff is close to him.

 

[IGemini]

I'm confused, why did that article do that for you? I'd think if anything it would enhance it, unless you're saying that you feel people don't take into account that aspect and are liking it just because of the sci fi aspect? Which blows me away. Do people seriously not understand how the movie was a parable to Apartheid?

That's kind of why the movie doesn't work for me. I actually heard the article before seeing the movie. I had no plans to see it but was invited to a friend's to watch it and it just made the experience underwhelming, I guess. It's not a bad movie, just not as great to me.

My main problem with it was I found Wikus nails-on-chalkboard annoying and his circumstances leading to managing the MHU task force to be rather WTF. Kind of like watching a train wreck without the satisfaction afterword.

Oh who gives a shit.

I liked the movie. If you don't like it, don't go see it. Shit happens.

You're giving a shit more than I am, apparently. God forbid someone has a different opinion than you, deal with it.

 

[zinfamous]

I'd agree that Children of Men is science fiction, but I think you do kinda kill your own argument, it does have science. Its just more realistic hard science, although the main premise is highly fictional. Kinda like how basically anything apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic pretty much is, in that its largely because of a strongly fictional and generally scientific based reason (disease, weather/space/nuclear etc cactaclysm). I guess Moon could be argued to be the same way, but again, I just feel like it is all about that role and that actor (which maybe that wasn't the original intention, just that the result is Sam Rockwell playing that role overshadowed it, kinda like Daniel Day Lewis does in...most movies he's in).

Oh, by the way, since I seem to recall you liking Eva Green, did you see Perfect Sense? If not you definitely should check it out. Its got the good "science based fiction but so much more" angle these films do. Plus tits (Eva Green tits, so they obviously Daniel Day Lewis the hell out of that movie).

what I meant by "sciency" stuff, was robots, ships--technology. bright shiny things that, for many people, is all that is needed for sci fi. Toss in a robot, it's immediately sci fi. Children of Men doesn't have that; but it explores contemporary scientific thought problems. A good example of how this mucks up things is Star Wars: tons of "sciency" stuff: ships, space, robots, aliens....but it isn't Sci Fi. It's Fantasy.

hmm, Eva Green. I will check that out. I am not sure if she has ever not-tits (except for Casino Royale) :hmm:

 

[solsa]

district 9 and elysium? had no idea they were so popular. i think i'll see them.

 

[Ichinisan]

It's absolutely terrible. I resent the fact that so many people took the bait and think it's "deep" simply because it references apartheid.

I resent that people accept movies where we don't understand the characters' motivations; or the motivations change without reason. It's clear that whoever wrote the screenplay just kept writing on and on without stopping to fix/rewrite the parts that didn't make sense. If the writer doesn't care about the story and the characters, why should the viewer care? The attitude that "it's OK because it's just a movie" leads to crap like the Transformers movies. Fffffffffuuuuuuu------.

It took Christopher Johnson (the bigger alien) and the little alien over 20 years to collect enough alien fuel from the slum debris to fly the dropship up to the mothership. They emphasized that the very last droplet they collected was absolutely 100% necessary.

So what were they going to do when they got to the mothership? Before they left the mothership, it was stranded on Earth for some technical reason. Were CJ and the little guy going to solve the technical problems by themselves and fly off? If so, why did they ever leave the mothership in the first place? The aliens that emerged from the ship were emaciated and starving, so we know that provisions were completely exhausted. They stopped at Earth in desperation. I don't know how they planned to return to their home world alive.

So Wikus finds the canister of collected fuel. He doesn't know what it is and accidentally sprays himself with it. Hundreds of droplets are wasted. That means they don't have enough fuel to get the dropship back to the mothership...right? I guess not.

Is it actually fuel? I guess not. It inexplicably starts turning Wikus into an alien. Even though Wikus was sprayed in the face, one of his arms turns into an alien arm before any other body part. So, awesome alien fuel does that? OK. Makes sense.

MNU scientists are fascinated by Wikus' arm. They think it might allow other humans to use the alien weapons that won't fire with human hands. For this reason, Wikus is extremely valuable to them. Then they inexplicably decide he's not valuable at all. They plan to chop off his arm and let him die. If they were going to do that, why can't they just chop the arm from any one of the aliens? Clearly they consider the alien lives to be disposable or nearly worthless. They killed several of them while testing the alien weapons.

OK. So Wikus escapes (and they're definitely trying to kill him). CJ thinks he can turn Wikus back into a human. I don't recall if CJ needed Wikus for anything at this point. After escaping the MNU lab, CJ should have parted ways with Wikus forever.

Armed MNU operatives are approaching the shack where Wikus and CJ are hiding. They're working frantically to start the dropship, which is buried beneath the shack. Wikus desperately wants to reverse the gradual transformation and become 100% human again. CJ is the only one that has even hinted that there's any possibility of this. CJ generously offered to fix Wikus when they escape the planet and get to the mothership. While working to activate the craft, CJ reveals that it may actually take a few years to fix Wikus. CJ will probably have to go to his home world first. Wikus flips out and...and...knocks-out CJ. I repeat: CJ is Wikus' only hope of ever being human again. Instead of dragging CJ into the hidden dropship below the shack, Wikus deliberately leaves CJ for MNU to find (and they usually don't hesitate to kill the aliens). Wikus has absolutely no idea how the dropship works or what he'll do when he gets to the mothership. Luckily, his alien hand allows him to pilot the ship with his mind when he dips it into the goo.

The dropship gets shot down by missiles. Wikus has to flee the ship on foot. Wikus encounters the maniac gang leader / warlord that wants to eat Wikus' alien arm -- believing incorrectly that eating alien body parts might give him the ability to fire alien weapons (though it hasn't worked with any of the aliens he has eaten before). While the gang members hold Wikus down so the leader can eat the arm, Wikus manages to get his hand on an alien weapon. He kills everyone in the room (even women)...except the gang leader!? The leader is threatening him. Paraphrasing: "I am unrelenting. I am not intimidated. I will catch you. I will kill you. I will eat that arm." With the alien weapon, Wikus is in a position to quickly and easily solve that problem. He didn't have any issue with killing the gang leader's underlings. So Wikus shoots the leader, right? No. Does the gang leader show up and cause a problem later? Absolutely.

This part is just bad filmmaking: Wikus is taking cover from heavy MNU fire that's directed at him. He's right next to a heavily-armored alien mech / walker thing. The movie cuts back and forth between the fighters outside and Wikus inside. We know he's going to get into the armor, but he doesn't. The movie cuts back and forth a few more times. It's unbearably tedious. When he finally gets in the armor, we see that it's exactly as we expected: It's nearly invincible for a period of time. Why did they waste all that time not advancing the story at all?

For some inexplicable reason, Wikus starts fighting his way back to the dropship that was shot down earlier (when he had been piloting it). Why does he think it will fly again?

Before he goes back to the downed dropship, we have to endure more excruciating bad filmmaking. It has been shown that this armored walker mech thing can withstand a lot of heavy firepower. He sees an opportunity to try to rescue CJ from MNU guys that are about to kill him. For no conceivable reason, Wikus delays and acts conflicted about whether-or-not he should save CJ.

Wikus,

• What are you going to do when you get to the dropship that was shot down?
• What are you going to do when you get to the alien mothership?
• Do you remember that CJ is the only one that even hinted it's possible to make you 100% human again?
• Do you remember that CJ generously offered to do it even though you have nothing to offer him?
• Do you remember that you are the reason CJ was captured in the first place?

Supposedly, the answer is: "Wikus is stupid and impulsive." That doesn't make any sense at all. It seems that his "impulse" is to die and sabotage everything for no reason whatsoever.

Alright. Then they activate a tractor beam to bring the dropship up to the mothership (so the fuel was completely unnecessary). For decades, the dropship had been buried directly beneath the mothership it had been dislodged from. So why didn't they activate the tractor beam in the first place?

I still don't understand why the aliens even left the mothership 20+ years earlier. Why is the mothership suddenly able to leave the planet? Apparently, it's still capable of bringing CJ and his son back to their home world.

 

[BoomerD]

Wall-O-Text.

tl/dr

 

[kage69]

Hearing the Cape Town locals' reaction on the D9 screening really took away the infatuation for me a lot of people here seem to have about the film.



Not the Cx4. Vektor CR-21s, South Africa's issued rifle painted white.

Ahhh, I stand corrected.

Still would like to know why they went with bright white though, just seems really out of place.

 

[IGemini]

Ahhh, I stand corrected.

Still would like to know why they went with bright white though, just seems really out of place.

Maybe they're just racist like that. :sneaky:

My guess is that it's just to be conspicuous, all of their equipment was white, too. Same reason UN peacekeepers paint their vehicles white and wear light blue helmets and vests.

 

[RGN]

The use of bright white Beretta CX4 carbines seemed cartoony to me. Those things suck.

dunno if I'd go right to 'suck.' They pop up in 3-gun from time to time and seem fine. Sure its not an <insert favorite rifle here>, but seems like its a decent pistol caliber carbine.