District 9

Well, I watched District 9.  I didn’t like it. Please read on and find out why I didn’t like it.

I fast forwarded through a lot of the film. First, large parts of the movie were just dialogue. Second, there was too much foul language in the film. Perhaps I am in the minority, but I find this language offensive and unnecessary. Especially in the quantities and varieties that were in District 9.

So, on to the reasons I think its a badly written movie .

First, I don’t like bait and switch. The whole reason I watched District 9 was the flying saucer on the cover and the extraterrestrials in the ad. The flying saucer serves as pure backdrop only. The movie is not science fiction.(I’ll explain this later.)  Its some sort of political statement with a sci-fi veneer.

Second, the movie is mostly a political statement. I don’t mind movies having political agendas, but this whole movie was a political statement. At first I thought it was had a political agenda about apartheid. I was okay with that. Day After Tomorrow had a political agenda about global warming. But it still had the elements for a good movie. Which it was.

I now believe District 9’s political statement was about the Iraq War. The vehicles, the military contractors, the emphasis on the search for weapons, the tactics of the Nigerians and the “ghetto” look of the alien area remind me of certain actions in Iraq. Political statements are okay, but bait and switch is not.

Third, the movie unimaginatively broke all modern sci-fi rules. The aliens are act like humans. Come on. I mean, we stopped having aliens act like this fifty years ago. Inter-species prostitution? Remember the lobster space aliens that were always going after the blond females in the 1950 B movies? Come on, can’t these writers come up with something better? This is only the most blatant example. There are many others.

Fourth, is it supposed to be a documentary?  One moment you have camera footage, then interview footage, the next we’re seeing action that couldn’t be recorded by cameras in the film. Maybe this was supposed to be some noveau art style. That’s the only explanation(or excuse). This definitely had the feel of an art house film masquerading as a sci-fi feature film.

Fifth, it was too slow. There was too much dialogue. The writers told too much and showed too little. They turn the eviction process into a giant exposition. There are high school students who can write better. They should have folded the exposition into the action.

Sixth, the movie insulted science fiction fans by relying on CGI aliens to make it “sci-fi.”  In fact, there’s a good chance they used one actor to portray all the aliens. The only real sci-fi comes in near the end as the saucer lights up. If you replaced the aliens with poor humans and took out the space ship you could have the very same movie.

Seventh, the protagonist was portrayed as a weak, indecisive, unimaginative, foolish idiot. The first thing he does when he escapes is use a cell-phone. Oh come on! Everybody knows those things are traceable.  How big an idiot are we supposed to think he is.

This guy knows the system. He knows what his pursuers will do. But does he use any of this knowledge? Nooo. My only explanation is that the writers want to depict him as a bumbling idiot. They want us to think of him as an incompetent political appointee. I also watched Salt. Evelyn Salt is in the same situation. Everything has been taken, she is a stranger not belonging to either world. What does she do? She makes a plan and follows it. She triumphs. Oh, and she doesn’t use her cell-phone when she’s on the run.

I don’t know much about these writers. But I’m going to assume they are competent individuals who know their craft. Therefore I’m going to assume they are making a political statement, since to assume they set out to write science fiction would be an insult to them. This leads to the question who are they meaning to insult? Who is the protagonist supposed to be? Who is MNU? The Special Features clearly state it is not a commentary on apartheid. They purport it to be intended as pure sci-fi. Hmmm. I certainly hope not.

This brings up another issue. According to Wikipedia all the critics loved District 9. One even called a lone dissenter a “troll.” What kind of movies do these people like to watch? This movie drug along with no action, an incompetent protagonist who we don’t like and aliens who are painted with disgusting human traits. This movie actually won four Academy Awards and Star Wars won none. How is that even possible?!?!? Evidently these critics want science fiction to service some agenda and let the story fall by the way.

Well, this ran too long. But there is one thing I did like. The fluid that splashes the protagonist evidently has enough recombinant alien DNA to start his transformation. This makes sense. Since their weapons are biometrically controlled, the ignition capsule would contain very active DNA. Sighhhh. If only this logic had pervaded more of the film. It could have been much, much better.

Let me know what you think. Everybody seems to love this film(Except Nigerians). Whether you agree or disagree, let me know.