What was so awesome about District 9?
- Thread starter mrjoe94
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It was funny.Wikus is wonderfully unlike the standard movie hero. Typically regular-joe-to-hero stories have a guy who's a bystander or a complicit-but-tangential participant immediately flip out and become a selfless moral paragon as soon as he witnesses an injustice being done to other people. "No," says District 9, "that's not how real people act." Wikus is mired in evil and he doesn't care. He's acting purely on selfishness and desperation for the bulk of the film. It takes Wikus nearly two hours on screen to discover the heroic impulse to altruism, and he only does it once he's been so broken down, feeling like he has nothing left in the world and only seconds away from death. Only then can he pry himself off the ground and stand up selflessly for others. That's fucking big, yo. That one moment (and everything building up to it to make it work) is some of the best character development I've ever seen in any movie. And it's a huge sacrifice because Wikus is giving up something that, for most people, is bigger than life: he's giving up his whole identity. Wikus finally discovers altruism through giving up on himself.
Wedded to that is a larger-scale dialogue about how all of us treat the distressed -- refugees, the homeless, starving "third-worlders", &c. Sure, we sympathize. But they're dirty and frightening and alien to us so we keep away from them and care about them on our own terms -- from a distance and only when it suits us, just like the academics and protesters in the film -- and ultimately our sympathy amounts to nothing because we refuse to engage. In the whole story, only Wikus can overcome that distance, and only because he has all comfort and security and identity stripped away from his own life.
Compared to the theme of other films, especially other sci-fi/action films, this is amazingly, singularly thoughtful.
-- Alex
Wedded to that is a larger-scale dialogue about how all of us treat the distressed -- refugees, the homeless, starving "third-worlders", &c. Sure, we sympathize. But they're dirty and frightening and alien to us so we keep away from them and care about them on our own terms -- from a distance and only when it suits us, just like the academics and protesters in the film -- and ultimately our sympathy amounts to nothing because we refuse to engage. In the whole story, only Wikus can overcome that distance, and only because he has all comfort and security and identity stripped away from his own life.
Compared to the theme of other films, especially other sci-fi/action films, this is amazingly, singularly thoughtful.
-- Alex
Let's see, the aliens were a lot more easy to sympathize with and a lot more human than Avatar's aliens even though they didn't look at all like sex symbols, it may have an obvious political message but wasn't "Der, Iraq War is bad, Aliens + Titanic". The story, while it's concept may be comparable to Alien Nation, is executed in a completely different way. And best of all, it was a downright intelligent Science Fiction movie, something that Avatar wasn't and will never will be...why wasn't Moon nominated for anything yet it got such high critical acclaim...
What was awesome about district 9 for me was the concept of the Alien slums on earth, interesting parallels with real life and such.
What was lame about district 9 was the way it gradually went from being the most intriguing film I've seen for a long time to a generic action film by the end. I am disappoint.
What was lame about district 9 was the way it gradually went from being the most intriguing film I've seen for a long time to a generic action film by the end. I am disappoint.
I don't think District 9 was a bad film, but I do think it's overrated.
My main problems with it were the unlikeable main character, the incredibly dumb way it draws parallels between the Prawns and black people during the apartheid (a race of people who are dumb, lazy, prone to addiction, easily taken advantage of, unable to take care of themselves without strong leadership, etc. is more than a little racist when they're your movie's stand-ins for black Africans -- not to mention that most real blacks in the movie are a bunch of violent drug-dealing cannibals), and the schizophrenic split between 'intelligent' social commentary and a generic action movie
The action was good, the acting was good, and the story certainly had a lot of potential. It's a shame they had to muck it up with shoddy scriptwriting.
My main problems with it were the unlikeable main character, the incredibly dumb way it draws parallels between the Prawns and black people during the apartheid (a race of people who are dumb, lazy, prone to addiction, easily taken advantage of, unable to take care of themselves without strong leadership, etc. is more than a little racist when they're your movie's stand-ins for black Africans -- not to mention that most real blacks in the movie are a bunch of violent drug-dealing cannibals), and the schizophrenic split between 'intelligent' social commentary and a generic action movie
The action was good, the acting was good, and the story certainly had a lot of potential. It's a shame they had to muck it up with shoddy scriptwriting.
Well, that spark is all that is required. I'm sorry if I offended heritage, or anything you value, I merely meant to imply that, having only a fractional GDP of other nations such as the USA, the United Kingdom or Australia, it seems to me that an abundance of wealth there would be unlikely.reg42 said:
That matters not, however, as I have offended you. I apologise.
First problem: your seriously considering even putting up the incredible hulk/iron man against District 9? Second problem Did you not pay attention to the movie? It's freaking awsome, while iron man and the hulk were good they were just blends of nonstop bright colors and explosions and when those werent on it was about character stories that are retarded because no one goes to see the hulk to not see people get their heads torn off and helicopters being thrown at tanks.
What? It parallels apartheid, not black people. It's about how people will mistreat those that are (or are perceived to be) lesser than them. In no way are the Prawns meant to be representative of blacks.Hurr Durr Derp said:
I'm also struggling to understand what you mean by a schizophrenic split. Sure, the film has a very noticeable progression - Social commentary -> Body horror -> Ass kicking. I guess this applies to flamingjimmy as well - It's an intelligent action movie, so naturally they'll be intelligent bits and action bits, you can't really combine the two. And maybe the action is a tad generic (I'd say it isn't, but maybe I've not seen enough gritty sci-fi action films)it's still put together very well.
Also, as Wikus becomes more and more Alien, his personality, for lack of a better term becomes more human. This shows that not only is Wikus more human than he was, but so are the rest of Prawns, even if they eat of a PMC commander's head. They aren't really given the chance to show their humanity because of how the citizens of Jo-burg treat them.Alex_P said:
I agree with what you say about Wikus giving up on himself towards the end. For about a minute on screen, he's guarded Christopher Johnson to the dropship, but has taken so much dam age that he tells him to go on without him. In his mind, he has been given an ultimatum, stay there and fight while Christopher can make it to the Drop ship safely or continue guarding him and they would both end up getting killed. So he ends up deciding to go with the former option, likely rendereing everything he's done in the entire movie pointless because this will likely kill him, so that Christopher can make it back to his son. Christopher understands his plight and promises to be back. "Three years." he says.
Its a lot of character development in one scene, it's truly heartwrenching and it's another reason why District 9 is awesome.
I liked the originality of it, and it was entertaining to watch, but it also took me by surprize, in how the movie as a whole played out. There were just so many things I hadn't expected from it, it was just such a different movie.. I'm in-between wanting to watch it again and feeling like once I've seen it, there's no need to see it again. I think I'd have to see it again just to try and form a better opinion about it.
It was the only halfway decent film (in my opinion) of last year. It actually gets across emotional substance in a way movies like (for example) Avatar didn't, combined with some nice action and a few things you don't see in many modern movies (lead charecter is a jerkass all the way though the film for instance, his motivation being purely selfish).
Films made up of documents/letters? I feel slightly lost here. I never saw the film, though it has sounded quite good (the rarity in my cinema-outings being the main reason I never see these films of interest).Lazarus Long said:
The story was fine and except for the fact that they waited so long to go back home.
Honestly if the ship could drive home right away they could have done it from the very start. It stood there for like 10 years or however long it was.
Didn't care much for the main guy. He was quite a bit of a jerk and specially close to the end.
Still I liked it and the same goes for Avatar but the story has been done before. That Samurai warrior movie with Tom Cruise. I'm sure there are more of them.
Honestly if the ship could drive home right away they could have done it from the very start. It stood there for like 10 years or however long it was.
Didn't care much for the main guy. He was quite a bit of a jerk and specially close to the end.
Still I liked it and the same goes for Avatar but the story has been done before. That Samurai warrior movie with Tom Cruise. I'm sure there are more of them.