District 9

Talk about the good and bad in film & television.

Moderators: AgentHelix, TheRonin, Tracy Fran, Captain Genius

Postby Moonman » Mon Aug 17, 2009 6:30 pm

bangalore_monkey wrote:though i never disliked the character, as he was pretty much a product of his environment, certainly not a dick.


He let's his lacky go into a clearly hostile and dangerous area without a bullet proof vest without the slightest hint of regret or sympathy. The guy's a dick.

I understand why he's a dick. The commentary on the movie isn't exactly subtle about it's purpose. The problem I had was that he didn't change until the movie was just about over and I'd just witnessed too much asshatery by him (and pretty much every other human in the entire movie) in order for it to make a difference. Too little and much too late.

I guess in a sense, that's my problem with the entire movie. In the short, you get multiple viewpoints on the situation (including the aliens). There's a variation on the antagonistic attitude, from annoyance, to ignorance and fear. In the movie, I saw only a blatant and violent hatred. It had a chance to expand on the nature of human/alien relationship, but wound up narrowing it instead.
Image
Moonman
 
Posts: 1531
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 12:14 pm
Location: Manteca, CA...still the middle of nowhere

Postby mateo » Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:51 pm

I guess that was part of the problem i had with the movie, it could not convince me that we made those creatures what they were. I had absolutely no sympathy for them, and if i had been one of the leaders of Earth i would have been trying to help them get the hell off. Forget treating them like shit,( basically giving them what they craved), just communicate with them on a strong, direct and intelligent level, wich we were capable of doing, and send them home. If they couln't destroy us with their weopons they would have surely done it, buy spreading. I know it's just a movie, and it looked great, i just didn't care to much for the plot.
mateo
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 12:59 pm

Postby Captain Genius » Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:11 pm

I liked the part with the robot shooting things.
Captain Genius
Moderator
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:27 pm

Postby HellboyOne » Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:41 pm

Moonman wrote:
HellboyOne wrote:Wow...I thought the guy who played Wikas was amazing.


The actor is yeah, he's a something to behold. But the character he's playing is a complete douchebag that I had a tremendous amount of difficulty sympathizing with. Fact is, it wasn't until the actual finale of the film where he showed any consideration for anyone other than himself, save one very small moment in the middle of the film which I'd attribute more to the stressed conditions he was under at the time rather than genuine compassion.

So basically I had to root for a guy that was stupid, cruel, and naive the first half of the film, then self-centered for the last half right up until the last...what, fifteen minutes of the film?

So...yeah. Great actor, portraying a fully realized character. And that character's a dick.


I think I just know what it's like to get a thankless job and to have to make shit decisions in a bureaucracy. Obviously, he was a bit inept, not qualified, and it's really not his fault that he's in charge. He's married to the boss's daughter. He did the best he could despite being grossly inadequate.

I also wouldn't call him a douchebag. Pathetic, maybe. The scary motherfucker in charge of the military: that guy's a douchebag.
HellboyOne
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11367
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: "Los Angeles is what's happening."

Postby steve-O » Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:00 pm

Know who Wikas reminded me of a whole lot?
David Brent. Ricky Gervais' character from the BBC version of The Office. Just that total dick-type character, who's more pathetic than repugnant. You feel kinda sorry for him, but also kinda offended... That's the vibe I got, anyhow.
Also, because it's worth saying again:
District 9 = Awesome, awesome movie.
steve-O
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Montana

Postby HellboyOne » Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:53 am

steve-O wrote:Know who Wikas reminded me of a whole lot?
David Brent. Ricky Gervais' character from the BBC version of The Office. Just that total dick-type character, who's more pathetic than repugnant. You feel kinda sorry for him, but also kinda offended... That's the vibe I got, anyhow.


Yes, me too. Just not as cluelessly offensive.
HellboyOne
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11367
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: "Los Angeles is what's happening."

Postby AgentHelix » Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:03 am

He's never really a douchebag, he's just ignorant and over his head. He doesn't understand the Prawns at all, and like everyone else, he's led to believe that they're little better than dumb animals to be herded into another holding pen. Even so, he's clearly shown with at least some empathy towards them both during the eviction and when he refuses to shoot the captive (until by physical force) in the medical facility. He's hardly some one dimensional dick.
C'mere, Frankie-Baby! Grab a slice o' these BALONEY TITS! - Clarke Snyder, 7/22/2006
AgentHelix
Moderator
 
Posts: 5154
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 7:52 am
Location: Some Outer Rim shithole or another.

Postby thirteen11 » Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:17 am

I love the main character...He's one of the most "REAL" characters I've seen in a long time..I found him likeable and interesting..Watching him go from what he starts out as to what he becomes is awesome.
thirteen11
 
Posts: 256
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 1:09 pm

Postby robthegreatt » Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:49 am

First off he was put in charge of the operation because he was a half wit that way the MNU could continue their experiments in genetics and munitions. The MNU was in charge to keep things under control and show the people/media that they are no longer hostile. Remember the convo between wikus and his father in law (there were to many deaths, the only thing that left me scratching my head was the marine sticker on christophers head. Which for one reason or another leads me to believe is a hat tip to kubrick's joker character.
robthegreatt
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: small town we talk through tubes

Postby Benjamin » Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:53 pm

saw this movie twice now.

haven't done that in a while at the theatre. Which speaks volumes really.

Wilkus is an extraordinarily well portrayed "loser" who, even though he has a change of heart, true to his character he makes really over-his-head decisions right up until the very end.

it's rare in a movie when it makes complete sense that once inside a mech suit he wouldn't pilot like a god, or even do the obvious: let the ALIEN WHO KNOWS ABOUT THE TECHNOLOGY PILOT THE MECH.

and its pretty damn wonderful and heartbreaking at the same time.

just excellent stuff.
Benjamin
 
Posts: 588
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 9:12 pm
Location: Toronto-ish, Canada

Postby Elliotanimated » Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:51 pm

Well I saw this film this evening and found it to be mostly disappointing.
I think the basic concept is brilliant and the themes they explored were important and fascinating, but I found the film to be full of dumb Hollywood stuff.
Some folks seem to dislike the mecha roboty thing turning up at the end.
They couldn't make it any clearer that it's there when they introduce it towards the beginning.
I think Wikes is more like a bad Murray, from Conchords than anything else.

General comments/questions with spoilers:


* Prawn has been slowly collecting enough fuel to power his spaceship so he can fly back to the mothership (I think).
His spaceship is in a special hidey hole under the ground.
Why doesn't he make his special secret fuel in the hidden spaceship (because making it offsite drives the plot, I guess).
* The fuel turns humans into aliens? What the fuck???
* The Nigerians continue to buy weapons that nobody can use despite 20 years of trying???
* The aliens have weapons that can kick the shit out of all humans but don't use them?? (they do drop in a line about having lost their leader or something so perhaps that's the reason).
* Where does the documentary end and the "film" begin??? Strange film making.

*Aww who knows... I really wanted to like this but neither of us much did.
Elliotanimated
 
Posts: 3612
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: London, New York, Australia

Postby Benjamin » Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:08 am

Elliott, you're right. there is a lot of plot driving logic errors. Yet I felt like it was made with so much charm, wit and craft that I didn't care as much to pick it apart. I am just a little willing to support something that seems so.... great compared to its peers (anything sci-fi/action lately!).

The fluid's changing properties, I actually loved. It speaks more about all of their weaponry and technology as a whole. They have dna powered tech, just makes sense that that fluid is like some super concentrated alien dna formula. Meaning it's so strong it could easily re-write Wilkus's own DNA. It's NOT fuel like you'd think... gas or battery or what have you, its bio-tech!

which i think is the strongest sci-fi aspect of the film. their dna tech. it wasn't that their dna "unlocked" the guns, it powered them.

(I thought you were going the direction with the canister that I did, which was, if wilkus sprayed himself in the face, but the alien needed EVERY LAST DROP up until that point, i.e. didn't leave a drop sooner, how could he still make his trip ? Maybe he changed his plan and only flew himself and son back instead of all the prawn, traveling on lowest means possible...)
Benjamin
 
Posts: 588
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 9:12 pm
Location: Toronto-ish, Canada

Postby Elliotanimated » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:49 am

Benjamin - I admit that I was really looking forward to this film but it didn't end up being the film I was hoping (expecting? wanting?).

From the moment Wikus started talking, I could tell it wasn't going to be what I wanted.

I didn't think it was especially witty or charming or indeed terribly unlike a lot of other stuff.

The whole tranformation thing was really the only thing I actively didn't like though (as opposed to not being excited by).
Cronenberg did the same thing but better, I think.
I understand there's a whole DNA element as part of the plot.
It even invites consideration as to whether the aliens have all been infected by the same ailment and were once something completely different.

You know - it's a very popular film and I'm conscious of shitting on it.
Elliotanimated
 
Posts: 3612
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: London, New York, Australia

Postby CameronStewart » Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:05 am

I was initially confused/irritated at the switch from documentary, but then I considered that it was a narrative device - when we are introduced to the aliens in the opening 15 minutes, we are seeing them through the documentary, which is a biased, semi-propagandist view of them by humans, we see them as animals, parasites, vulgar and violent. It's only after the documentary format is abandoned that we meet Christopher Johnson and his son and find out that there's more to the species than what we've been led to believe. The documentary at the beginning is to set our expectations and assumptions of the aliens so that they can be subverted later.
Image
CameronStewart
Moderator
 
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2001 7:04 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Postby Elliotanimated » Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:36 pm

CameronStewart wrote:I was initially confused/irritated at the switch from documentary,

The thing that I found irritating about this is that it never truly shifts from one style to the other.
It maintains a documentary style throughout.
I kept thinking "Who is filming this?", if you get what I mean.
Elliotanimated
 
Posts: 3612
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: London, New York, Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Movies & TV

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests