Chappie...

[Warped9]

Anyone else see this trailer? I saw it when I went to see Interstellar. It's called Chappie and it's from the director of District 9, a film I liked quite a bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXwichuGW28

I'm looking forward to this.

 

[The Wormhole]

Meh, I don't know. I'll likely check it out, though the trailer doesn't quite hook me as much as the trailer for Elysium did.

 

[Mojochi]

I'm enjoying Blomkamp's movies. I'm looking forward to this one too

 

[DWF]

It looks like a cross between Short Circuit and Real Steel but it look like it'd be anjoyable movie though.

 

[Trekker4747]

Trailer looks interesting but there is a lot of a "Short Circuit" vibe in the trailer.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Yeah, there's quite a tonal shift between the child friendly Johnny 5 scenes and the District 9 social commentary and intense violence. I don't know how well it's going to handle that transition and whether it can appeal to both those groups without putting some people off.

I'm always interested in Blomkamp's work, though, and even when it falls flat storytelling wise (Elysium) they're still visually gorgeous, have some impressive action scenes, filled with strong social commentary, and feature some great grounded speculative futurism.

He's been working on a variant on this story since he was only known for making some spectacular short films:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jmd8BDiB-qU[/yt]

 

[Trekker4747]

I mean, I know it's all the rage right now but did "Short Circuit" need a gritty reboot?

 

[Warped9]

I mean, I know it's all the rage right now but did "Short Circuit" need a gritty reboot?

That's really an assumption. While it might be conceptually similer this film could be wholly different in detail and execution.

 

[Trekker4747]

I mean, I know it's all the rage right now but did "Short Circuit" need a gritty reboot?

That's really an assumption. While it might be conceptually similer this film could be wholly different in detail and execution.

Humor is a difficult concept.

 

[Christopher]

Not sure what to expect. District 9 was compelling (though too violent for my tastes) but Elysium was pretty terrible (and also too violent for my tastes). It remains to be seen which is more typical of Blomkamp.

 

[JD]

I still haven't gotten around to seeing Elysium, but I did enjoy District 9, and the trailer was very intriguing, so I'm looking forward to this one.

 

[Trekker4747]

It's rarely a good sign when a movie isn't screened for critics.

Chappie wasn't screened for critics.

Here's a review from some viewers following a midnight screening of the movie: (Something the guys on this channel do all of the time)

Cinema Snob Midnight Screening

Rotten Tomato Score: 30%

Most of what I've seen on this movie pretty much says it's a hot mess.

Still may go see it, but not inspired with a lot of hope from the reviews. And, again, lack of a screening for critics.

 

[Christopher]

Darn. I disliked Elysium, so I was disinclined to see this one unless the reviews convinced me it was worthwhile. But it sounds like Elysium was not a fluke, that this is the Blomkamp we're getting from now on: ultraviolent '80s-action homages with great special effects but superficial characters and a halfhearted attempt at social commentary. Which doesn't give me hope for the new Alien movie everyone was so excited about last week.

 

[Trekker4747]

Sounds like he's following in the footsteps of M. Night.

 

[Christopher]

^Well, at least Shyamalan had two good movies (at least major ones) before his decline began.

I feel that the problem is that too many directors today assume they're writers when they actually aren't. They're superb at creating visuals and composition and timing and directing performances and creating cinematically stunning work, but just don't know how to come up with a good story as a foundation for all of that. Actual writers are considered subordinate and expendable, because directors believe they can do it themselves. And so writing, for whatever reason, is the one aspect of feature filmmaking that gets neglected while everything else is done so well. And thus you get all these films that look fantastic but are just dumb or incoherent.

 

[The Wormhole]

Haven't seen the movie yet, planning on checking it out over the weekend. Though I did notice the original trailer and first set of commercials on TV seemed to be promoting the movie as a sort of feel-good family friendly fare, while the commercials of the past few weeks have changed gears and are now promoting it as an action movie. Seems kind of odd to radically change the target audience so late in the game.

 

[Trekker4747]

From what I've seen the movie isn't a Short Circuit-ian family affair and actually gets pretty dark towards the last act.

 

[Unicron]

^Well, at least Shyamalan had two good movies (at least major ones) before his decline began.

I feel that the problem is that too many directors today assume they're writers when they actually aren't. They're superb at creating visuals and composition and timing and directing performances and creating cinematically stunning work, but just don't know how to come up with a good story as a foundation for all of that. Actual writers are considered subordinate and expendable, because directors believe they can do it themselves. And so writing, for whatever reason, is the one aspect of feature filmmaking that gets neglected while everything else is done so well. And thus you get all these films that look fantastic but are just dumb or incoherent.

I think this is a valid point. I would love to be an artist and be able to draw really cool stuff, cause I've seen some talent online whose works really impress me. Unfortunately, I have very few artistic bones in my body. I wouldn't consider writing my strongest point either, but if I have a good idea to play around with I'd like to think I can do okay. I'd feel more comfortable if someone designed an alien or a ship and asked me to help give it a backstory, personally. I wouldn't mind sort of being in the background.

I'm not sure if I want to see this or not. The trailer looked kind of interesting, but most of the reviews I've read so far have been pretty negative. A number of reviewers have commented that Blomkamp has a good visual style and some skill at directing that aspect of it, but as you mention it's the story aspect that falls apart instead of providing the right framework.

 

[Morpheus 02]

^Well, at least Shyamalan had two good movies (at least major ones) before his decline began.

I feel that the problem is that too many directors today assume they're writers when they actually aren't. They're superb at creating visuals and composition and timing and directing performances and creating cinematically stunning work, but just don't know how to come up with a good story as a foundation for all of that. Actual writers are considered subordinate and expendable, because directors believe they can do it themselves. And so writing, for whatever reason, is the one aspect of feature filmmaking that gets neglected while everything else is done so well. And thus you get all these films that look fantastic but are just dumb or incoherent.

I think you're extremely biased on this one.


But you're also extremely right. The writing might be great all by itself (that 's one reason we have adaptations)...but the writer simply needs a good director to translate that fantastic world in a medium to be consumed by the masses. So in some cases, the director should be subservient to the writer (in a sense).


And for the general topic...i'm interested in seeing the movie, though my wife is not.

i might have to see it as a matinee...i think he's a good director, though a bit on the violent side.

Also, surprised no one has mentioned Sharlito Copley (did i get his name right) in another unique role. Blomkamp has at least shown how diverse an actor he is.

p.s. after re-watching Elysium....how much do the robots in Chappie look like the Elysium security robots? i can't tell from google searches

 

[Christopher]

^Well, at least Shyamalan had two good movies (at least major ones) before his decline began.

I feel that the problem is that too many directors today assume they're writers when they actually aren't. They're superb at creating visuals and composition and timing and directing performances and creating cinematically stunning work, but just don't know how to come up with a good story as a foundation for all of that. Actual writers are considered subordinate and expendable, because directors believe they can do it themselves. And so writing, for whatever reason, is the one aspect of feature filmmaking that gets neglected while everything else is done so well. And thus you get all these films that look fantastic but are just dumb or incoherent.

I think you're extremely biased on this one.

Yes, but I have two biases: One as a writer, and one as a filmgoer who's sick of seeing hundreds of millions of dollars and extraordinary filmmaking talents wasted on incoherent and unsatisfying plots. There's a longstanding pattern of films that succeed on every level except the writing.

But you're also extremely right. The writing might be great all by itself (that 's one reason we have adaptations)...but the writer simply needs a good director to translate that fantastic world in a medium to be consumed by the masses. So in some cases, the director should be subservient to the writer (in a sense).

Not necessarily subservient, but partnering with the writer and producer as equal creators, rather than the current system where writers are treated as interchangeable, disposable contractors whose only role is to put the director's story ideas into script form. Make it so that the screenwriter is as hard to remove from the film as the director. These days, every movie's credits open with "A (Producer's Company) Production of a (Director) Film," essentially signing the director's and producers' names as authors of the work, but the writers don't get a similar attribution. We need a system wherein the film is considered to be the writer's work as much as the director's or the producer's. Which, in practical terms, would probably mean instituting a TV-like system where the writers are the producers. It seems to work pretty well there.