Before Sherlock Holmes, I was treated to a preview of the latest Kevin Smith opus "Cop Out". A spoof of buddy cop films, that will no doubt end up instead of a film to mock the formula, show why we shouldn't follow the formula so closely. Almost immediately after, I see Holmes and Watson, together, stopping some sort of demonic ritual. Complete with a deduction that might as well be a one liner, I thought to myself "How about, instead of making spoofs, we go back to actual buddy cop films?"
That's what Holmes is. It's a buddy cop film. It's the story of a unconventional, aloof, brilliant man, and the straightlaced smart-yet-still-average partner. Like Mel Gibson and Danny Glover, Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law have excellent chemistry.
Downey and Rachel McAdams, who plays love interest Irene Adler, not so much. Perhaps a better actress or a more well defined character might be a bit more interesting. She is a perky Femme Fatale who too easily becomes a sad, lovestruck tragic figure. Imagine that character, but played without any sort of real range of emotion. Luckily, her scenes are limited.
Holmes and Watson have just solved their last case together, and Watson is anxious to be free of Holmes and live an average to normal life. Holmes, anti social, arrogant, and overall unlikable to many spends much of the movie trying to find ways to bring his friend back. Meanwhile, Watson keeps finding himself excuses to join Holmes as a former Villain, Lord Blackwood, seems to have risen from the grave.
After a first act that sort of lingers on for way too long, our heroes fight and think their way through a series of brawls, secret passages, deductions, and deathtraps that could have only come out of republic serials. As much as an ode to the classic adventure film as "Indiana Jones" (but without the quality, unfortunately), it's a fun little film. With enough of that Classic Sherlock Holmes style to, if not please, satisfy the purists.
*** out of ****
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Saturday, December 19, 2009
The Princess and the Frog
Tiana seems to be the exact opposite of a Disney Princess. She was not born into royalty, she does not dream of some prince to make everything perfect for her, and she doesn't spend hours singing about how there must be something more. Instead, she works dilligently so that one day, she may open her very own restaurant. She has almost no social life, so it seems, as her only interest in Mardi Gras is serving Gumbo.
Meanwhile, we have the visiting prince. He's foolish, lazy, and has spent his last dollar. He has been cut off from his family fortune. Needing money, he makes a deal with a witch doctor known as the Shadow Man. Apparently, he didn't understand the subtext to such bold statements as 'I see green in your future" and the various hop puns.
It's only a matter of time before Tiana comes into contact with Prince Naveen, who convinces her to give him on kiss, so that he may turn human. But there is a catch- Tiana is no Princess. Only a Princess can change him back, after all. Seems that frog-kissing by non royalty has unexpected side effects. This is the extent of what you have seen in the previews for the last year and a half.
Tiana and Naveen search for a kinder, gentler Voodoo practicioner in hopes for a way to change them back. What else should be expected then them falling in love. Still, it's not the what, but the how. In a different movie, there would be one moment where the hearts and minds change. This film manages to show it gradually, between comical interludes by the necessary talking animal companions (a poetic cajun firefly, and an Alligator who wants to play Jazz).
This movie, while it suffers from being not a return to the classic Disney film but a return to formula, works. It's light, positive, and very well put together. Though I find I'm more interested in seeing the characters interact, and any time the story progresses I feel they were not done with the previous moment. Some bad jokes meant to appease the immature male audience take away from more tender moments.
I doubt this film is the beginning of a new Disney Renaissance. It's a very flawed, imperfect film. Perhaps it needed just a few more (or less) rewrites to reach the level of some of the classics I remember watching as a kid.
Well, at least we got a good little film out of it regardless.
*** out of ****
Meanwhile, we have the visiting prince. He's foolish, lazy, and has spent his last dollar. He has been cut off from his family fortune. Needing money, he makes a deal with a witch doctor known as the Shadow Man. Apparently, he didn't understand the subtext to such bold statements as 'I see green in your future" and the various hop puns.
It's only a matter of time before Tiana comes into contact with Prince Naveen, who convinces her to give him on kiss, so that he may turn human. But there is a catch- Tiana is no Princess. Only a Princess can change him back, after all. Seems that frog-kissing by non royalty has unexpected side effects. This is the extent of what you have seen in the previews for the last year and a half.
Tiana and Naveen search for a kinder, gentler Voodoo practicioner in hopes for a way to change them back. What else should be expected then them falling in love. Still, it's not the what, but the how. In a different movie, there would be one moment where the hearts and minds change. This film manages to show it gradually, between comical interludes by the necessary talking animal companions (a poetic cajun firefly, and an Alligator who wants to play Jazz).
This movie, while it suffers from being not a return to the classic Disney film but a return to formula, works. It's light, positive, and very well put together. Though I find I'm more interested in seeing the characters interact, and any time the story progresses I feel they were not done with the previous moment. Some bad jokes meant to appease the immature male audience take away from more tender moments.
I doubt this film is the beginning of a new Disney Renaissance. It's a very flawed, imperfect film. Perhaps it needed just a few more (or less) rewrites to reach the level of some of the classics I remember watching as a kid.
Well, at least we got a good little film out of it regardless.
*** out of ****
Avatar
Sam Worthington provides a monotonous narration at the beginning, where he essentially tells you everything you are seeing on screen. He also talks with a certain awareness of what is to come, and maybe this narration is actually part of his final video log. It didn't feel like that to me. Then again, you can move any sequence of the movie to any point and it would still be the same. There is actually one case where a monolog is cut within a thought, a scene stuck in the middle, then continues on as our hero is chased onward by a giant bird-like creature.
This is a "Woo" moment for Worthington, as he only has two settings in this movie- apathetic and woo. No matter how much emotion is in the words, he seems to be reading the script from a teleprompter. Sam Worthington is a much better actor than this movie leads you to believe. Sigourney Weaver manages to steal scene after scene, hopefully earning her an Academy Award Nomination. Zoe Saldana, who recently got the in with the nerd crowd (the same target audience in this film) by playing Uhura in Star Trek, also proves she is more than a pretty face by giving a performance that transcends the many layers of animation.
Worthington's Jake Sully is a disabled officer of the U.S. Marines who is put into this "special project" on a distant planet. He is to put himself into the physical body of a Navi, a member of the native race, and try to win their trust. Though he is working with a group of scientists with good intentions, his loyalties remain to the Marines, who want him to force the Navi out of their homes so the Marines can plunder a rare mineral. That mineral is called "Unobtainium." The mineral doesn't matter, which is why they gave it the only possible name more honest and to the point as "McGuffinium". Perhaps the could have called it "Plotdeviciton".
When he gets in, we have ritual after ritual, while he wanders through a mystical glow in the dark forest. There were times when I wondered if I was actually watching a cartoon. Cameron's CG landscapes are convincing by day, cheesey by night. Not once, however, did the Navi seem even one third as real as District 9's "Prawns".
They say this movie is all about it's graphics. While I will say that they fail to deliver, they are great to look at nonetheless. James Cameron would have you believe that the only way to see this movie is in IMAX, in 3D. Save yourself the up charge and appreciate the beauty without distorting it.
After a while, Jake has a change of heart. Or so he says. Truth is, there is nothing in his character that shows he ever had any allegience to the Marines at all, which robs us of a decent, albeit cliched, character arch. The Marines are vague bad guys. So void of personality, with a lack of a clearly defined motive this might as well be about zombies. We have the Corporate interests telling the Marines to get the Unobtainium. The Marines, however, are simpletons who only want to kill. And if the fact that that's essentially all they do isn't enough, they pretty much say it flat out. Because apparently America can't understand things any other way.
Why does the Colonel hate the Navi so much? If you give him a real motive, it doesn't diffuse your satire. It actually helps bring it to a whole new level. I had the same problem with District 9, but at least you saw the slums, you saw the crime, you can actually imagine how somebody can think of them as subhuman at some stretch. Not even General Custer would treat the Native American's with such disdain.
The evil, cliched Colonel, when given scientific evidence that the ecosystem is actually an intelligence, says "It looks like a bunch of trees to me." That dialog should set the tone of something like "Ferngully: The Last Rain Forest". Not a 300 million dollar action epic. Not a film that has been called an Oscar contender even in pre-production.
The movie isn't without it's high points. There were some sequences that were so fantastic they gave me that sense of awe and wonder that I look for in any great epic. But they were too far, too few. It's a real shame when you can't get into a movie until the Third act.
** out of ****
This is a "Woo" moment for Worthington, as he only has two settings in this movie- apathetic and woo. No matter how much emotion is in the words, he seems to be reading the script from a teleprompter. Sam Worthington is a much better actor than this movie leads you to believe. Sigourney Weaver manages to steal scene after scene, hopefully earning her an Academy Award Nomination. Zoe Saldana, who recently got the in with the nerd crowd (the same target audience in this film) by playing Uhura in Star Trek, also proves she is more than a pretty face by giving a performance that transcends the many layers of animation.
Worthington's Jake Sully is a disabled officer of the U.S. Marines who is put into this "special project" on a distant planet. He is to put himself into the physical body of a Navi, a member of the native race, and try to win their trust. Though he is working with a group of scientists with good intentions, his loyalties remain to the Marines, who want him to force the Navi out of their homes so the Marines can plunder a rare mineral. That mineral is called "Unobtainium." The mineral doesn't matter, which is why they gave it the only possible name more honest and to the point as "McGuffinium". Perhaps the could have called it "Plotdeviciton".
When he gets in, we have ritual after ritual, while he wanders through a mystical glow in the dark forest. There were times when I wondered if I was actually watching a cartoon. Cameron's CG landscapes are convincing by day, cheesey by night. Not once, however, did the Navi seem even one third as real as District 9's "Prawns".
They say this movie is all about it's graphics. While I will say that they fail to deliver, they are great to look at nonetheless. James Cameron would have you believe that the only way to see this movie is in IMAX, in 3D. Save yourself the up charge and appreciate the beauty without distorting it.
After a while, Jake has a change of heart. Or so he says. Truth is, there is nothing in his character that shows he ever had any allegience to the Marines at all, which robs us of a decent, albeit cliched, character arch. The Marines are vague bad guys. So void of personality, with a lack of a clearly defined motive this might as well be about zombies. We have the Corporate interests telling the Marines to get the Unobtainium. The Marines, however, are simpletons who only want to kill. And if the fact that that's essentially all they do isn't enough, they pretty much say it flat out. Because apparently America can't understand things any other way.
Why does the Colonel hate the Navi so much? If you give him a real motive, it doesn't diffuse your satire. It actually helps bring it to a whole new level. I had the same problem with District 9, but at least you saw the slums, you saw the crime, you can actually imagine how somebody can think of them as subhuman at some stretch. Not even General Custer would treat the Native American's with such disdain.
The evil, cliched Colonel, when given scientific evidence that the ecosystem is actually an intelligence, says "It looks like a bunch of trees to me." That dialog should set the tone of something like "Ferngully: The Last Rain Forest". Not a 300 million dollar action epic. Not a film that has been called an Oscar contender even in pre-production.
The movie isn't without it's high points. There were some sequences that were so fantastic they gave me that sense of awe and wonder that I look for in any great epic. But they were too far, too few. It's a real shame when you can't get into a movie until the Third act.
** out of ****
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Fantastic Mr. Fox
George Clooney leads an all star cast of voice actors who are genuinely portraying the characters on the screen. That's a relief. "Kung Fu Panda" and "Shrek 3" had me worrying that, from now on, the characters would be based around the actors they found instead of vice versa. Clooney is good in the role, despite being constantly outshined by co-star Meryl Streep.
Together they are Mr. and Mrs. Fox, who are (as you can guess) foxes. Mr. Fox is a former chicken thief who, at the request of his wife, found a different line of work. He is an unsuccessful columnist who wants nothing more than to move out of his hole in the ground, and into a nice tree. A nice tree in a bad neighborhood, it seems, as he finds himself next door to Boggis, Bunce, and Bean. Three farmers so mean the local children sing songs about them.
The Farmers are uninterested in their new neighbors until Mr. Fox is unable to keep his desire to steal chickens in check. His actions alone cause his family, and all his neighbors to move deep underground. Mrs. Fox reminds us that the story will end when everyone dies, unless Mr. Fox can change his ways.
The rugged, often flat (it is a Wes Anderson film, after all), look of the film just adds to the growing absurdity of a film that starts with talking foxes and ends with an assault-by-pinecone war against the three farmers. At what point was it made clear that the animals could talk to the farmers? Most of the film, you get the impression that the farmers see the animals as just primal beasts. Irrelevant, really. The film never quite jumps the shark. If it does, it's such a gradual take off I didn't even notice.
The film is funny, as it is also very touching. There aren't many jokes or punchlines, just classic situation-based comedy mixed with witty dialog. This is a film where, you can honestly see all the elements working together to form something better than the sum of it's parts. Perhaps the greatest thrill of the film, however, is the fact that I am now convinced that, despite advancements in cell and computer animation, Stop Motion is hear to stay.
*** out of ****
Together they are Mr. and Mrs. Fox, who are (as you can guess) foxes. Mr. Fox is a former chicken thief who, at the request of his wife, found a different line of work. He is an unsuccessful columnist who wants nothing more than to move out of his hole in the ground, and into a nice tree. A nice tree in a bad neighborhood, it seems, as he finds himself next door to Boggis, Bunce, and Bean. Three farmers so mean the local children sing songs about them.
The Farmers are uninterested in their new neighbors until Mr. Fox is unable to keep his desire to steal chickens in check. His actions alone cause his family, and all his neighbors to move deep underground. Mrs. Fox reminds us that the story will end when everyone dies, unless Mr. Fox can change his ways.
The rugged, often flat (it is a Wes Anderson film, after all), look of the film just adds to the growing absurdity of a film that starts with talking foxes and ends with an assault-by-pinecone war against the three farmers. At what point was it made clear that the animals could talk to the farmers? Most of the film, you get the impression that the farmers see the animals as just primal beasts. Irrelevant, really. The film never quite jumps the shark. If it does, it's such a gradual take off I didn't even notice.
The film is funny, as it is also very touching. There aren't many jokes or punchlines, just classic situation-based comedy mixed with witty dialog. This is a film where, you can honestly see all the elements working together to form something better than the sum of it's parts. Perhaps the greatest thrill of the film, however, is the fact that I am now convinced that, despite advancements in cell and computer animation, Stop Motion is hear to stay.
*** out of ****
Friday, November 6, 2009
The Men Who Stare at Goats
The Men Who Stare at Goats is based on a true story. How true? That's debatable, though you can certainly tell that more of it is false than true. But then again, before the title we are informed that more of this is true than you realize. Somehow I felt that, in my crowded theater, about 70% of the people may have been trying to determine fact from fiction. If you do this, you might be missing the point entirely. This isn't a docudrama, but a hilarious, feel good farce.
Ewan MacGregor is a reporter who has something to prove to himself, and to all then people around him. He wants to show that he can be just as much of a man as everyone else. For this reason, he hops the first plane to Iraq to be a War Correspondent. It's there he meets Lyn, played by George Clooney, a former army "psychic soldier". And thus, a road comedy is born.
A road comedy through War Torn Iraq, of course. Inept security details, hostage situations, general combat, and general incompetence are given the highlight as MacGregor's Bob Wilton and Clooney's Lyn Cassady. While locked in a windowless room, Cassady reveals to Wilton the true reason he is in Iraq- He is on a secret mission from Bill Django.
Bill Jango is a man we learn about through a series of flashbacks. Interested in pioneering combat alternatives, he begins training psychic soldiers (but, of course, they have to dance first). Django did a great deal of research into the subject-by using LSD, living in communes, and becoming part of the new age movement. Played by Jeff Bridges, we know have a glimpes of what would have happened if "The Dude" joined the Army.
At this point your probably wondering what part of this story is true. Please try your best to stay away from such a counterproductive train of thought. This movie is about soldiers who were trained to be psychic soldiers, people who were referred to as "Jedi Warriors." So clearly, we are not supposed to care about the true or false aspect of it. Early on in the film, Jeff Bridges recites his Oath as a Jedi Warrior. It's played up for laughs. When the Oath is revisited, it's nothing short of triumphant.
*** out of ****
Ewan MacGregor is a reporter who has something to prove to himself, and to all then people around him. He wants to show that he can be just as much of a man as everyone else. For this reason, he hops the first plane to Iraq to be a War Correspondent. It's there he meets Lyn, played by George Clooney, a former army "psychic soldier". And thus, a road comedy is born.
A road comedy through War Torn Iraq, of course. Inept security details, hostage situations, general combat, and general incompetence are given the highlight as MacGregor's Bob Wilton and Clooney's Lyn Cassady. While locked in a windowless room, Cassady reveals to Wilton the true reason he is in Iraq- He is on a secret mission from Bill Django.
Bill Jango is a man we learn about through a series of flashbacks. Interested in pioneering combat alternatives, he begins training psychic soldiers (but, of course, they have to dance first). Django did a great deal of research into the subject-by using LSD, living in communes, and becoming part of the new age movement. Played by Jeff Bridges, we know have a glimpes of what would have happened if "The Dude" joined the Army.
At this point your probably wondering what part of this story is true. Please try your best to stay away from such a counterproductive train of thought. This movie is about soldiers who were trained to be psychic soldiers, people who were referred to as "Jedi Warriors." So clearly, we are not supposed to care about the true or false aspect of it. Early on in the film, Jeff Bridges recites his Oath as a Jedi Warrior. It's played up for laughs. When the Oath is revisited, it's nothing short of triumphant.
*** out of ****
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Ponyo
Ponyo is a magical goldfish who befriends a five year old boy named Sosuke. Sosuke is a bright young boy who seems to be more capable than anyone in his age bracket. Sosuke's mother, Lisa, tries her best, but is often times very absent. Even early on in the film, when you see Sosuke walking himself to school while his mother runs off to work, you never get the feeling that she doesn't care. Still, you wonder why she thinks the strange little fish he found-the one with the human face-is not out of the ordinary.
That little fish is, of course, Ponyo. Ponyo develops a crush/friendship with the young boy, and decides she must become human to stay with him. This, of course, causes a tear in the fabric of reality. Ponyo's father, Fujimoto, tries in vain to steal Ponyo back to the Ocean, before her life on land leads to cataclysms that are less from the mind of Hayao Miyazaki and more from the mind of Roland Emmerich.
The films does everything it can to be "precious" and effect even the most cynical people. I doubt anyone will leave the theater without a smile, and I have no doubt that most people will find something to like about Ponyo. I compare it to E.T. Like Elliot, Sosuke's father is gone (though in this film, he's merely out to sea). He has the same sort of hard working, but still caring mother. And it is a film about the child getting over real world problems while bonding with a strange creature.
Imagine, though, if E.T. simply picked up the phone and called home. Sure, we'd still have some of our favorite moments. We'd still have a cute little story. But the movie wouldn't be the same. It would be a loaded conflict without a real resolution. Ponyo gives us a cute little story with high stakes. And, to Ponyo's credit, they don't give us the horrible details. Think of Hurricane Katrina, if all the footage was people rowing happily. We understand that there is a real problem, but we are spared the grimness. For reality, that doesn't work. For the movie, it works out best. But that doesn't mean we can't have a genuine resolution. We don't need a large action scene, or millions of lives shown to be hanging from a thread. We just need something more than "It's all over, we can go home."
Fujimoto also makes statements about his hatred for humanity. These aren't followed up on. The Pollution in the ocean is brought up several points early on, but it turns out only because it's a Miyazaki film and he always throws in the enviromentalism. Fujimoto is fearful about meeting Ponyo's mother again, and Ponyo describes her as having a temper, but we never see that in the slightest.
As I made it clear, I'm not looking for action. I'm not looking for violence. No, that would ruin what is a genuinely likable, cute story. I just wanted them to live up to the build up that they gave us. A much harder choice, or perhaps a puzzle. Who knows? In a fantasy film, they sky is the limit.
*** out of ****
That little fish is, of course, Ponyo. Ponyo develops a crush/friendship with the young boy, and decides she must become human to stay with him. This, of course, causes a tear in the fabric of reality. Ponyo's father, Fujimoto, tries in vain to steal Ponyo back to the Ocean, before her life on land leads to cataclysms that are less from the mind of Hayao Miyazaki and more from the mind of Roland Emmerich.
The films does everything it can to be "precious" and effect even the most cynical people. I doubt anyone will leave the theater without a smile, and I have no doubt that most people will find something to like about Ponyo. I compare it to E.T. Like Elliot, Sosuke's father is gone (though in this film, he's merely out to sea). He has the same sort of hard working, but still caring mother. And it is a film about the child getting over real world problems while bonding with a strange creature.
Imagine, though, if E.T. simply picked up the phone and called home. Sure, we'd still have some of our favorite moments. We'd still have a cute little story. But the movie wouldn't be the same. It would be a loaded conflict without a real resolution. Ponyo gives us a cute little story with high stakes. And, to Ponyo's credit, they don't give us the horrible details. Think of Hurricane Katrina, if all the footage was people rowing happily. We understand that there is a real problem, but we are spared the grimness. For reality, that doesn't work. For the movie, it works out best. But that doesn't mean we can't have a genuine resolution. We don't need a large action scene, or millions of lives shown to be hanging from a thread. We just need something more than "It's all over, we can go home."
Fujimoto also makes statements about his hatred for humanity. These aren't followed up on. The Pollution in the ocean is brought up several points early on, but it turns out only because it's a Miyazaki film and he always throws in the enviromentalism. Fujimoto is fearful about meeting Ponyo's mother again, and Ponyo describes her as having a temper, but we never see that in the slightest.
As I made it clear, I'm not looking for action. I'm not looking for violence. No, that would ruin what is a genuinely likable, cute story. I just wanted them to live up to the build up that they gave us. A much harder choice, or perhaps a puzzle. Who knows? In a fantasy film, they sky is the limit.
*** out of ****
District 9
For the first twenty minutes of the film, we are watching the greatest mockumentary conceived. More intelligent than "Forgotten Silver" and funnier than "This Is Spinal Tap." The Mockumentary footage serves to set up our hero, a well meaning but misguided man named Wilkus Van De Merwe. It serves as Backstory, a huge flying saucer had shown up over Johannesburg twenty years ago, stranding large amounts of aliens here on Earth. The Aliens end up living in slums. Have become the targets of prejudice. Where there is poverty, there is crime. It sets up the organizations that hopes to contain them. The conflicts that have arisen because of them, and several insights on the causes of certain sociological problems in the world today. Particularly, ones close to the heart of people in South Africa
The sequence starts out with a very even handed, detached perspective, but leans more towards the side of the Aliens as victims as it goes on. These creatures, of course, aren't innocent. They kill people. It's made very clear that they really don't have a problem killing some unlucky sap who wanders on their property, or if they simply have something they want. We are not shown what is a misunderstanding, what situations they may or may not have been merely defending themselves. It's irrelevant.
Now that we have the set up, we enter a more traditional narrative with bits of the mockumentary mixed in. This is the road not traveled. The film was more interesting before it became an action film. Instead of taking the "Twilight Zone" route to show De Merwe's change of heart (which is something I will not reveal, as it is set up like a plot twist when it is in fact the plot itself), how about merely have him learn through constant exposure to the creatures?
Instead of having violent shoot outs, how about continue with this amazing mockumentary? You've already show off superior direction, superior acting, superior writing, do we really need to add more violence to a film that justifies it's R rating within twenty minutes?
I know I am being unfair. These twists were unwanted by me, but I still enjoyed them. I still think they pulled everything off the best way possible. I should be thinking about the movie on screen, but I keep thinking back to the movie it was originally, the movie I thought would end up being a classic. A movie that deals with moral complexities. De Merwe could have easily been a bad guy, based soley on ignorance alone.
Instead, we get bad guys who are heartless for no reason. Prejudice without purpose. That does not address the real issues at hand. Perhaps that's the film's greatest weakness (as opposed to my perceived weaknesses). It's not optimistic to think that people wouldn't be this evil. In fact, I'm sure a fraction of the people would. But everyone in some sort of uniform is a bloodthirsty killer? Now that is doubtful. Villains who are ignorant, well meaning, but horribly misguided people are far more interesting. It would make not only for a more complex story, but it would be a better conflict for De Merwe, who was once just like them.
The film is beautiful. It takes us to a very real world (in fact, the slums in this film are actual South African Slums. Only one, where the interiors are frequently used, was built for the production). Sharto Copley is a name we've never heard before, and I hope that changes. His performance was probably the best I've seen all year. With some of the better effects of the year. Compare to Transformers, which cost several times District 9's budget.
Visually astonishing, with a great performances, and a thoughtful story that doesn't go far enough dealing with it's moral complexities. A classic? Unfortunately not. But it's still one of the best films of the year.
***1/2 out of ****
(Edit- This review still contains my exact feelings for the movie. However, the film has managed to grow on me quite a bit despite it's flaws. You can now consider this a four star review)
The sequence starts out with a very even handed, detached perspective, but leans more towards the side of the Aliens as victims as it goes on. These creatures, of course, aren't innocent. They kill people. It's made very clear that they really don't have a problem killing some unlucky sap who wanders on their property, or if they simply have something they want. We are not shown what is a misunderstanding, what situations they may or may not have been merely defending themselves. It's irrelevant.
Now that we have the set up, we enter a more traditional narrative with bits of the mockumentary mixed in. This is the road not traveled. The film was more interesting before it became an action film. Instead of taking the "Twilight Zone" route to show De Merwe's change of heart (which is something I will not reveal, as it is set up like a plot twist when it is in fact the plot itself), how about merely have him learn through constant exposure to the creatures?
Instead of having violent shoot outs, how about continue with this amazing mockumentary? You've already show off superior direction, superior acting, superior writing, do we really need to add more violence to a film that justifies it's R rating within twenty minutes?
I know I am being unfair. These twists were unwanted by me, but I still enjoyed them. I still think they pulled everything off the best way possible. I should be thinking about the movie on screen, but I keep thinking back to the movie it was originally, the movie I thought would end up being a classic. A movie that deals with moral complexities. De Merwe could have easily been a bad guy, based soley on ignorance alone.
Instead, we get bad guys who are heartless for no reason. Prejudice without purpose. That does not address the real issues at hand. Perhaps that's the film's greatest weakness (as opposed to my perceived weaknesses). It's not optimistic to think that people wouldn't be this evil. In fact, I'm sure a fraction of the people would. But everyone in some sort of uniform is a bloodthirsty killer? Now that is doubtful. Villains who are ignorant, well meaning, but horribly misguided people are far more interesting. It would make not only for a more complex story, but it would be a better conflict for De Merwe, who was once just like them.
The film is beautiful. It takes us to a very real world (in fact, the slums in this film are actual South African Slums. Only one, where the interiors are frequently used, was built for the production). Sharto Copley is a name we've never heard before, and I hope that changes. His performance was probably the best I've seen all year. With some of the better effects of the year. Compare to Transformers, which cost several times District 9's budget.
Visually astonishing, with a great performances, and a thoughtful story that doesn't go far enough dealing with it's moral complexities. A classic? Unfortunately not. But it's still one of the best films of the year.
***1/2 out of ****
(Edit- This review still contains my exact feelings for the movie. However, the film has managed to grow on me quite a bit despite it's flaws. You can now consider this a four star review)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)