District 9

mcast123 said:
Transformers meets a cheesy political message (apartheid was bad mmmkay), then shoves your face in it every 5 minutes.
Click to expand...

How in any way what so ever was it like the toss that was Transformers. It's a stunning technical achievement especially considering the budget constraints it had, it was the first film I had seen thast mixed CGi and live action seemlessly, at times I forgot Christopher Johnson wasn't a guy in a suit. It discovered Sharlto Copley who gave a superb performance as Wikus and was directed very well by Neil Blomkamp giving the story decent pacing and flow.
 
Tefal said:
It's very meh tbh.
Click to expand...

Agreed, entirely predictable, found it hard to sympathise with the lead character because, he was just a douchebag. He's not quite Gareth from the office, but he's not far off, the loser no one cares about and walks all over.

Most of the plot is stupid, the acting isn't great, the moral messages are dull, the action is, meh. Then you've got the cliche'd final fight, where despite being able to own all around him instantly, he does next to nothing.

It was okay, nothing more or less, it wasn't even close to the best film out last year, it wasn't in the best 10 films out last year.
 
UncertainGod said:
How in any way what so ever was it like the toss that was Transformers. It's a stunning technical achievement especially considering the budget constraints it had, it was the first film I had seen thast mixed CGi and live action seemlessly, at times I forgot Christopher Johnson wasn't a guy in a suit. It discovered Sharlto Copley who gave a superb performance as Wikus and was directed very well by Neil Blomkamp giving the story decent pacing and flow.
Click to expand...

It actually had a pretty huge budget, yes it was only $30mil, if it was made in the states with an A-list cast it would have cost $100. But thats because it would have spent $60mil on the cast, and $20mil on locations and crew's and all the other crap. The $30mil, was almost purely for making the film, giving it a very competitive budget in terms of effects and money to put into sets, locations and all that important malarky.

If it was $30mil done in the states with a few well known actors, then $25mil would have been on them, and the rest would have been a pitiful budget. Considering they removed all the main budget problems, location, crew, wages of major actors, then that $30mil goes a heck of a long way. Basically, the money spent actually making the film would have been the same as any other major film, just the actors fee's would have been vastly different with an A-list cast.

Take any current huge film(bar Avatar) and swap out the actors for unknowns and you'd slash 2/3rds off the cost of the film.

It was similar to Transformers in that it was style of substance, action which jumped around all over the place, while not much happened, the final fight sequence was awful, dragged out and was just flat out stupid.

The main plot points weren't strong, the script wasn't actually all that good, take out all the prawns and the lead stumbling through lines, and not much happens.
 
Last edited:
omerfacepalm.png


Maybe this kind of film is just not your blend....everyone that I have watched it with thought it was great, even people who initially thought it was going to be poor based on the first quarter were drawn in not long after and had to finish watching.

The acting was good, the lead was good, the support was good and the presentation was excellent with seamless CGI.

It was a lot more than just "okay" and its ratings prove it .

Transformers for example is the kind of CGI-fest you watch for brainless entertainment, D9 you watch because it's a bit deeper and smarter than the usual Hollywood SciFi/Alien movie.

Also exactly at what part of the film did the lead stumble his lines? On the contrary, he was picked specifically because he's so good at his lines, something I don't feel any other actor could have pulled off for that role, like Sam Rockwell's "Sam" in the movie Moon - no one else could have pulled it off.

Reads to me like you're just pulling at strings to try to justify your personal dislike for the actor and the movie for no real valid and logical reason. You didn't like it, awesome! but then going on to write about ho poor the writing, acting, and other remarks that don't line up with actual facts?
 
Last edited:
Really great film, more so as it was a bit unexpected (maybe that was jsut me though).

Think imay watch it again after work now :p
 
Good film .. was worth seeing at the cinema but I don't think it was good enough for me to want to buy it on dvd.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Agreed, entirely predictable, found it hard to sympathise with the lead character because, he was just a douchebag. He's not quite Gareth from the office, but he's not far off, the loser no one cares about and walks all over.
Click to expand...

That's the whole point. He's an anti-hero. It's the sort of concept people were entirely familiar with until Gen Y came along and everything was dumbed down for them.

And no, the final fight wasn't clichéd. A clichéd final fight is the one where the hero wins against overwhelming odds, gets his girl back and fixes everything up. A typical Hollywood ending would have resulted in all the aliens escaping to their home planet, Wikus being restored to happily married life in full health and the evil father in law being put on trial for his illegal experiments.

None of that happened. Instead, D9 gave us the exact reverse of the clichéd final fight: he lost the fight, he lost his girl and everything was still completely screwed despite his noble sacrifice. All we needed was for some little alien to run up and kick him in the balls and his misery would have been complete.
 
Last edited:
Evangelion said:
That's the whole point.
Click to expand...
Evangelion has summed that point up perfectly.

I didn't watch this film until just before New Years. I'd heard of it, nothing in-depth, but generally positive comments. I went out for a drink with some mates, two of whom were trying to replicate the "sneaky ****ing prawn" line in a South African accent (and failing miserably). At that point, I hadn't even realised it was all poor attempts at South African accents, despite having grown up in Jo'Burg :D Anyway, I decided to grab a copy the next day.

Maybe it was the setting (I used to work in an office about 10 minutes walk from the Carlton Centre, the MNU building), or maybe it was just a great film, but I was spellbound from the very first minute. To me, it had the added bonus of having captured the language (his Afrikaans swearing was hilarious!), the location and the way apartheid worked in many ways (but was never really that noticeable when you were a part of it).

I felt Wikus was portrayed perfectly - the archetypal dutchman (English term for an Afrikaaner) stumbling his way through English, using Afrikaans when unfamiliar words failed to convey his feelings or he was driven by emotion (in the final battle he was screaming "**** you all!" repeatedly in Afrikaans), blissfully unaware of how poorly he is treating his "inferiors", his stubborn idiocy clear to everyone viewing, but not a single person (not including prawns!) around him. There were even more stereotypes, too many to go through. His performance was simply brilliant.

Bottom line - great film, made even better by the environment it was set in. So much of it was sadly accurate to life as I witnessed it there (but there was also some over-the-top dramatisation - to be expected really!). The CGI was excellent - of the quality where you don't even think about it. The film also had something to say - although I imagine the message might have been different for someone who wasn't brought up in South Africa. Can't recommend it enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom