District 9: The jakob187 Review (NO SPOILERS)
By jakob187 35 Comments
Let's face it: I play Devil's advocate a lot. When someone has an argument about something, I will tend to rub it the wrong way because someone has to represent the other side. Sometimes I'm right, sometimes not. With that said, I've seen a lot of threads and a lot of reviews saying "best movie of the year" or "if this doesn't win Oscars, I've lost faith in movies" and even folks going so far as to say "you won't see a better movie all year".
Well, fall season hasn't hit, so the last statement seems incorrect, and if you go by aggregate scores, Drag Me To Hell scored higher than District 9. As far as it winning Oscars, I don't really see it happening...especially since none of the CGI characters evoked anything close to Gollum. As for being the best movie of the year...definitely "one of". There is a lot going on in District 9, and even at a somewhat compressed-feeling 2 hour running time, there hasn't been as honest and as vibrant of a sci-fi movie in quite a while.
Without going into details of the plot at all, District 9 starts out as a documentary-style movie, following Wikus van der Merwe as he heads up the eviction of 1.8 million "prawns" from District 9. In the meantime, something bad happens, and he eventually finds himself caught in the middle of something he doesn't want. I could go on and on about the story (especially how I feel that most people walking out of the theatre were wrong about who the villains really were in the film)...but in the end, it was a good and solid piece of filmmaking. There is a handful of stuff that you can tell came from the rejected Halo movie project, as the MNU features familiar-looking assault rifles, and the "prawns" definitely feel a bit like the Covenant in some ways. However, there is something in District 9 that Halo is still lacking: heart. This movie has it, but in some of the oddest ways. There were plenty of times that I found myself conflicted with who to root for, and there were even more times where I was scratching my head going "well yeah, but this and this happened beforehand, so you're wrong!". The movie does have its ridiculous moments (the idea of interspecies sex and a group of Nigerian voodoo believers eating the alien's body parts) that show you Peter Jackson had some involvement in the project. Then again, anyone unfamiliar with Jackson's earlier work like Dead Alive or Bad Taste probably won't understand the necessity for the attention to gross-out vomiting and gore. He definitely proves that he knows how to make it sloppy, nasty, and gag-worthy. It's tough to make me want to wretch, but there's just something about a man's fingernails being ripped off that can do it every time...
The thing that captivated me about the movie was not necessarily the movie, but the contradictions and contrasts found in what the movie is saying vs. the audience's reaction. I found it interesting that the audience would not root for a human killing an alien, nor would they root when an alien killed a human, but they would root whenever our half-man/half-alien (the only spoiler you'll get is that Wikus contracts a disease that starts turning him into an alien, but you probably figured that out from the trailers) kills someone or something. For some reason, that character and his journey end up making it okay to laugh at someone being brutally blown up into bloody chunks. It made me start thinking: have we desensitized ourselves too much with movies and media that something this bad (and you can even see in Wikus' eyes for a while that he hates that he did it) is laughable? Maybe I'm supposed to go into this film and take it in for being just another "hapless character turns into hapless hero" story, but I just don't see it that way...and I also don't see the humans as the bad guys. I don't see them as the good guys either, but I do see them as the victims in an elaborate plan that...to be honest...I think I could be reading too far into and makes me almost feel like a conspiracy theorist digging for answers.
Part of the problem with digging for answers, which many fans of sci-fi will no doubt do, is that the movie could've done for a little more length to explain things a tad bit more thoroughly. Then again, had the movie been longer and explained a bit more, then it wouldn't have that appeal of digging that sci-fi fans enjoy so well. Trying to over-intellectualize something beyond what it may or may not be is science fiction tradition, and it almost feels like Neill and Peter purposefully set District 9 up to do just that. It's a good thing, don't get me wrong, but it will no doubt lead to many pretentious debates and discussions that will make people outside of sci-fi norm say "whatever".
The documentary style of the film seems to turn a lot of people off from the movie (so I've heard from at least seven people), but the movie does eventually land into the action movie cliches that we know quite well. It handles them well, even if the cliches make the film feel a tad bit disjointed from the documentary portions. Nonetheless, the mixture feels fresh enough that people will be misusing the word "original" a lot. In gamer terms, it's kind of like Dead Space: it has few to no original parts, but the parts that it does have happen to be very well done.
Would I recommend District 9 to everyone? No. It's not going to appeal to the group of people that enjoy a typical summer blockbuster. Will sci-fi fans enjoy it? I'm more than positive they'll like it, and there will be many that claim "best movie of the year". They'll hail it as a fucking Messiah for sci-fi movies. It is not a Messiah, however. It's a well-done movie produced by a guy that does well-done movies and helped guide the hand of a director that had a good idea of what he is doing. The film doesn't really break any boundaries either, as it features all the staples you would find in a good sci-fi and action movie.
Therefore, folks, just take the movie for what it is:
A damn good sci-fi movie.
Log in to comment