Slashdot Mirror
"District 9" Best Sci-fi Movie of 09?
Travis wrote in with a story that says much of what my friends have been saying to me all weekend: "Slashdot covered 'District 9' back in July. I was originally excited to see this movie for its exhibition of exoskeleton robot 'mechs' (see images and video at Hizook.com ). After watching the film this opening weekend, I can honestly say that it was an amazing science fiction movie! Everything was spot-on: the plot, the human elements, the alien elements, the technology, and the seamless blend of special effects with real camera capture. This film should vault Neill Blomkamp into sci-fi stardom, on par with George Lucas and the Wachowski Brothers (of Matrix fame). This is certainly a must-see movie — easily the best movie of the year."
This film should vault Neill Blomkamp into sci-fi stardom, on par with George Lucas and the Wachowski Brothers (of Matrix fame).
Are you saying that this movie is as good/groundbreaking as Star Wars orThe Matrix? I am somewhat dubious.
Don't get me wrong, it looks a whole lot better than most sci-fi movies. I especially like how the first commercials I saw for it were public service announcements about District 9. Then commercials with non-human sympathizers being arrested. Then later you see a commercial with "glick gluck mcglorlock" (translation: "We just want to go home.") and you kinda realize that there's going to be more depth to the story than Starship Troopers (the movie, not the book). Looks interesting, I'll definitely Netflix it.
It might be the best sci-fi movie of '09 but you've still got
While a lot don't have release dates yet and could be pushed back and most will probably suck, that's a lot of competition to dismiss at this point. And lastly, I have great hope for Franklyn (to be released here in the states).
My work here is dung.
I think it's a dumb plot and stupidly put together. I think the acting is terrible and the special effects are terrible.
(makes you wish "so I won't comment" follows Didn't see it doesn't it?)
So, the Wachowski brothers are famous, but not famous enough for people to remember what they're famous for?
Go see it. Money well spent. The film was really enjoyable (coming from a person who hates most Hollywood films). I think I was most impressed because it was a completely original idea and not a reboot or a sequel. I have to admit though I was partial I was familiar with some of Neil Blomkamp's earlier work.
FWIW District 9 was based on one of his short films titled "Alive in Joburg. Watch it here.
Also I enjoyed Tetra Vaal, an amaing short film about a police bot in South Africa. Stunning CGI. Enjoy =)
most people have never heard of them since Matrix, which was ten years ago, which means they need to have their claim to fame mentioned. While many on this site know who they are I bet you could find some readers who don't. If anything getting into the same sentence as Lucas is probably more important to the W brothers than their movie.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Ok, comparing them to the Wachowski brothers probably isn't the compliment the submitter intended. I would assume...
The first Matrix movie was superb. I remember literally leaping out of my seat in the theater while watching it. It was incredible. The second movie suggested some fantastic things but really hinged on the third movie to determine whether it was great or not - were those hinted elements executed properly or were those hints just me reading into things? And the third movie sucked so hard that it actually dragged down the first movie's greatness while simultaneously revealing just how terrible the second movie really was. In the second movie, they hinted at and suggested some elements which would have created a wonderful lore for the franchise but their complete lack of ability to craft a story (it's now widely known that the first movie's plot was actually stolen from another author, Sophia Stewart) and their inability to subtly finesse a plot showed through in glaring detail when the third movie came out. Their special effects and fight sequences have had a profound impact on action/sci-fi movies since but, as storytellers, they are enormously subpar, to say the least.
Actually, given that the other comparison the submitter makes is to George Lucas (another absolute master of the visual art but novice of storytelling and script writing...), I'm now forced to wonder if District 9 is just pretty pictures and cool fight scenes with a piss-poor plot and an infantile script... Regardless, I know I'm going to see it but the comparisons to Lucas and the Wachoskis makes me wonder...
I consider myself a avid sci-fi fan, but I thought the movie was crap, and I don't see what all the hype is about. I think the plot had potential, but the execution was dreadful.
Thanks for the heads up about shaky cam. That puts "District 9" on the "maybe when I can watch it for free" list. It was already suspect because of everything I had seen about it "having a message". Generally, I don't watch movies for a message, I watch movies to be entertained. There are exceptions, but so far no one has said anything about the message that puts "District 9" into that elite category.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
this movie was meh.
I smell a viral marketing campaign.
There lies the dilemma... do you avoid the sequels or just the prequels? On one hand the sequels could rock, and the prequels... well, think Prawns bouncing around going "meesa peeeeple gonnna die?!"
Then on the other hand, the sequels could be total crap... it's a tough call.
Shut them down. Shut them all down, R2!!!
Is it just me, or has "science fiction" basically come to mean action/adventure/horror/whatever with rayguns and aliens?
What ever happened to science fiction that used the premise as a tool to tell us something unpleasant about ourselves? Or to explore human behavior taken to extremes? Or to give us a unique perspective on the world around us?
Looking back on what science fiction used to be... I'd suggest that District 9 is the only sci-fi movie of 2009...
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
The best part of the movie was seeing a pig used as a projectile weapon. The movie got some laughs -- probably not intentionally. The base message was sound, but the movie was painful to watch. The first half was tedious, and the second half was just a bunch of special effects with little plot.
...but I thought it was a mediocre movie at best, with good CGI. I walked out with a Starship Troopers taste in my mouth, but maybe that was just remnants of a soldier that got disintegrated by an alien man-zapper.
Firefly proved that a shaky cam can make an otherwise so-so scene appear much more realistic, and puts you (the viewer) in a first person state of mind. I haven't seen the movie yet, but as long as they don't overdo it, I don't find that a shaking cam is such a bad thing if it makes it more realistic.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
I feel that Star Trek and Terminator were both better Science Fiction movies than District 9. Overall, I feel the acting was much better in the Star Trek and Terminator. The fact that the Trek fans hate it because it goes against the Prime Objective and this and that is irrelevant. It was still a great movie if you are completely unbiased about it. As for the best movie of the year, The Hurt Locker was a better movie in my opinion, the acting, plot and filming were all done perfectly in it. It was probably one of the top three recent war movies made with Private Ryan and Letters from Iwo Jima
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.
Thanks for the heads up about shaky cam. That puts "District 9" on the "maybe when I can watch it for free" list.
I don't want to have to concentrate physically to be able to follow the story.
I go to the movies to entertain my mind, not my eye muscles or my vestibular system.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I wish I had points to mod this up; this post is not only hilarious, but hits on a true idea. Jerkiness in cinematography can add realism, but only to a point. Once a perspective is overdone the effectiveness is lost.
I don't mean to sound cold and cynical - but I am, so that's the way it comes out.
The problem with the movie is that the whole premise is flawed. The humans don't act like humans. They have no knowledge of the aliens and don't even seem interested. They shove ET into a ghetto and there are no scholars, philosophers, doctors, scientists or even media trying to gain access to them? No one on the whole globe cares at all, except for an evil haliburton type company. Really? Sitting in the audience I couldn't help but think that someone involved in this glossy, shiny turd would have pointed out that their core audience is going to be made up of people who would be on the first plane to Johannesburg to see an alien.
And that is not a spoiler, that is just the trailers. It felt like it just missed some key plot points. A sequel has the potential to be much better, especially if it explains why the aliens are so ineffectual, another serious gripe.
I love when people miss a critical piece of info and run with it. The alien child is only able to awaken/move the mothership because they had acquired that fuel canister. And it took them 20 years to acquire that much fuel.
And how does the hero being saved by the prawns make this a bad film? You seem to be one of those people who thinks that simply because they can identify something it becomes less valuable. You would be a lot happier in life if you learned to appreciate things more without the strong need to place yourself above everything you encounter.
This was a fantastic film, period.
Glorious Victory Forever.... we also do design. www.coidesign.com
You do realized that everything you just said about the main character are reasons that the movie was good? You weren't supposed to like him by the end. Not to ride the Matrix topic, but Wikus "was only human" and humans are very flawed. Everything he did he did like any of us would do in his situation, ran away scared shitless. The government shouldn't have allowed the gangs to get so strong in the district? Where do you think this movie is set in, America? The governments of southern Africa have very poor control over their countries and there are major gang issues.Evil for no apparent reason? As they stated in the movie Wikus was the first successful combination of human and prawn; and worth billions of dollars. Even people on the utmost moral high ground might be willing to kill a single person for a few billion. Its his wife, how is that not enough of a reason for her to believe her husband? There is this little thing called trust that goes along with being in a relationship with someone. The movie quite well shows that at first she doesn't know what to believe, then she wants to believe Wikus, and in the end realizes that she should trust her husband more than her father. How could you expect tighter government control? By what nation? The united states and/or NATO (or whatever they called it in the movie) can't just take control over a nation because they think the aliens should be interacted with differently.
More like the Evil United Nations, if you get the "slight nudge" of the acronym and the all-white "peacekeeper" vehicles and choppers.
It is not a movie about aliens, it is a movie about humans and humanity. Everything you see in it as human-alien attitude and relationships, already has a precedent in human history. It is a social commentary and not a sugar-coated hollywoodcraprollercoasterride. The violence is unglamorized and borders on sickening.
If you want mindless entertainment with satisfying blows and asskicking, look elsewhere.
If you want to be exposed to the gut-wrenching experiences millions of human beings still face as a part of everyday life, this is just the ticket for you.
After seeing this, I can now say, yes, I can imagine how people in fugitive camps / slums feel. And, if you look at laws applied in "urban gentrification" projects, you will see we treat our "poor" in similar ways. The "social services" scene confiscating the child for it's own good was a brilliant example. Not even made up.
Star Wars gave us an attempt at a solid future universe with magic and technology to match our imagination. The (first) Matrix gave us a satisfying universe based on the core omnipresent premise that we live in a dream/virtual world.
District9 gave us a taste of our dark side, the atrocities we cheerfully commit against each other, the worst kind, coming from the "civilized" good citizens with clean desks. It is not a pleasant one, but important.
It is an important, masterfully created document, wrapped as a sci-fi movie.
Not everyone is ready for it.
very reminiscent of 2001
Whenever someone says this I immediately scratch the film off my list. 2001 was one of the most boring films I've ever seen. Interesting special effects for the time, but that's not enough to hold a 2 hour long film.