• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Early District 9 Reviews

hey, Im thinking of using the EW cover as an avatar here, would it be considered too spoilery?

Im gonna go watch it on Sunday.
 
If it's a possibility, please don't! I seriously want to stay unspoiled for this movie! In fact, I'm going to bow out of this thread until I see it I think.
 
Interesting concept and presentation, but I hope the trailers are over-representing the level of mindless action in the film. I don't want to see Transformers-lite.
 
OdoWanKenobi said:
First negative review...and oh gee, look who it is: Armond White. This movie still has a 100% as far as I'm concerned. Look at this guys review history if you don't believe me.
Click to expand...

I checked it out and sure believe you now:guffaw: then :scream:

" G.I. Joe must be understood as an authentic measurement of our cultural values. Its appeal to the pop-commercial synapses also demonstrates livelier filmmaking than such utter banality as Iron Man and Star Trek and Harry Potter’s Half-Blooded Chintz."— New York Press
Posted Aug 12, 2009
Rotten

District 9 (2009)
" District 9 represents the sloppiest and dopiest pop cinema -- the kind that comes from a second-rate film culture." — New York Press
Posted Aug 12, 2009

This guy basically rates movies exactly the opposite of almost every other critic. What a loser. He should be fired from his job for inaccurate journalist opinions.

And the worst sacrilege of all he gave our beloved Star Trek a Rotten rating
too, but he gives Transformers 2 and T4 fresh ratings :wtf:

This Star Trek sells cuteness, sentimentality and explosive F/X as if Starship Troopers, Minority Report, Mission to Mars or even Blade Runner or The Matrix (all visionary standard-setters) never happened. Abrams directs action where you can’t see anything— just blur, like in Cloverfield.The overture cuts from a woman giving birth to a space battle (mawkishness and sensationalism) with no aesthetic tension or rhythm. Instead of satirizing sci-fi clichés, Abrams yearns for TV simplicity. Still selling soap, his flimsy imagery zaps substance from the drama of Kirk and Spock fighting to control their emotions while combating mankind’s enemies.
Click to expand...
:mad:

Going further back he gave Ironman and The Dark Night rotten ratings, and even Slum Dog Millionaire, the movie that won an Oscar for best movie for 2008, go figure.

Back to District 9
Current RT rating is 32/31/1 his being the only bad review which as we have shown should be totally ignored
 
Well, Iron Man and Slumdog both sucked. But I do agree the guy is an asshole and wrong most of the time.
 
Well, I just got back from seeing it, and enjoyed it immensely. Probably the best movie I've seen in at least the last year. (Disclaimer: I haven't actually been watching that many movies in the last year.)

Trubinator said:
I don't like the idea of half and half. If they want to film certain portions of the movie in verite/documentary and mix and mash it so it flows well, that's cool. But I think anything else would make it feel uneven and like two films.
Click to expand...

Mix and match is pretty much what they do. The first 30-45 min. or so is mostly doc style, except for maybe a couple of cutaways to the aliens' perspective. Then it starts to transition into "normal", non-doc style. But the transition is so subtle that you don't even know it's happening. The "normal" parts of the movie feel very doc-like anyway, as they largely seem to be filmed with handheld cameras. The documentary and non-documentary parts are really all part of one continuous narrative.
 
Checked both local daily papers this morning--the Toronto Star and Toronto Sun--and they both have positive reviews. My only quibble is I think they're leaking a little too much of the plot in their reviews, but I still want to see this film this weekend.
 
I've only recently become familiar with this Armond White character. There's nothing wrong with having a different opinion than the majority regarding the quality of a film, but he's definitely going out of his way to do it. His reviews are just waiting for everyone to angrily disagree with them.

This film looks really promising, by the way.
 
I wouldn't have a problem with his opinion differing if his reviews were not pretentious gibberish that say nothing about the film.
 
A. O. Scott review:
http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/movies/14district.html?hp

For decades — at least since Orson Welles scared the daylights out of radio listeners with “War of the Worlds” back in 1938 — the public has embraced the terrifying prospect of alien invasion. But what if, notwithstanding the occasional humanist fable like “E.T.,” all those movies and television programs have been inculcating a potentially toxic form of interplanetary prejudice?

“District 9,” a smart, swift new film from the South African director Neill Blomkamp (who now lives in Canada and who wrote the screenplay with Terri Tatchell), raises such a possibility in part by inverting an axiomatic question of the U.F.O. genre. In place of the usual mystery — what are they going to do to us? — this movie poses a different kind of hypothetical puzzle. What would we do to them? The answer, derived from intimate knowledge of how we have treated one another for centuries, is not pretty
Click to expand...
 
Roger Ebert gave it fresh and said this

I’ll be interested to see if general audiences go for these aliens. I said they’re loathsome and disgusting, and I don’t think that’s just me. The movie mentions Nigerian prostitutes servicing the aliens, but wisely refrains from entertaining us with this spectacle.
Click to expand...
:eek:
 
I have to admit Im a bit worried about the supposed gore. I can usually take gore when its sci-fi/fantasy stuff(except for slasher/horror & torture porn), but this is supposed to be a realistic take on the situation & well, I heard there's some nasty stuff in this film. Also most of the times Ive seen gore has been on a small tv, not on the big screen in the dark. I dont know if that will have a totally different effect on me...
 
Blue_Trek said:
Roger Ebert gave it fresh and said this

I’ll be interested to see if general audiences go for these aliens. I said they’re loathsome and disgusting, and I don’t think that’s just me. The movie mentions Nigerian prostitutes servicing the aliens, but wisely refrains from entertaining us with this spectacle.
Click to expand...
:eek:
Click to expand...

Hopefully THAT will be in the extended DVD version!:drool:;)
 
melancholymecha said:
I have to admit Im a bit worried about the supposed gore. I can usually take gore when its sci-fi/fantasy stuff(except for slasher/horror & torture porn), but this is supposed to be a realistic take on the situation & well, I heard there's some nasty stuff in this film.
Click to expand...

You've never seen a documentary on places like District 6 or actual Apartheid, have you? I can guarantee you that this has nothing on actual documentaries on genocide.

Also most of the times Ive seen gore has been on a small tv, not on the big screen in the dark. I dont know if that will have a totally different effect on me...
Click to expand...

Umm, okay?
 
I'm honestly surprised that fictional gore still bothers people in this day and age. It's understandable to be disturbed by the real thing, but come on. Should something like Shindler's List bother you? Yeah. Should exploding heads in a Star Wars-y movie? No.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top