District 9

virgopunk · Post by **virgopunk** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:50 am

I saw this last night and thought it was great.

A load of Thargoid size plot holes but I couldn't remember being this excited at a sci-fi movie for ages.
The prawn weaponry (how often do you get to say that!?) was excellent especially the battle suit.
What did you make of it?

matthewfarmery · Post by **matthewfarmery** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:33 am

went with a friend to see this a few weeks ago, we are both big scfi nuts, at least I am

he knew it was a documentary style film but that didn't put us off, for me the film was great, and he enjoyed it as well, several things we both liked about it

It wasn't in the US, there was no US we will save the world type BS that a lot of films made my the US have, 2012 comes to mind and many others, and plenty of other good points, we liked it, while some may want a sequel it may be better off not having one, otherwise the format of the first may get destroyed, at first I thought a sequel would be great, there is room for one, but after thinking about it, I would say better not, otherwise it would be spoiled by the US we will save you theme that gets into a lot of films, and spoils them,

anyone not seen district 9, I would say its a must see, 5 out of 5 stars, and very refreshing as I said,

Sendraks · Post by **Sendraks** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:59 am

I enjoyed it, a solid sci-fi film about human behaviour about how the oppressed become the oppressors and with a nice "worm that turned" story.

Refreshingly different - something that wouldn't have happened if this had been made in hollywood.

Governmentyard · Post by **Governmentyard** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:06 pm

It's brilliant, really enjoyed this but then again I also recently loved GI Joe (in a different way but not an ironic one).

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:51 pm

I absolutely hated it.

Yes, as an action film it’s a refreshing take. And having grown up in southern Africa, I was amused at a lead character called van der Merwe.

The problem, though, is that it’s marketed as an allegory over apartheid, and at that it utterly and completely fails. Why? Because as presented in the film, the aliens really are subhuman beasts who need to be kept separate from humanity, with a few rare exceptions. Given how the film was presented, this was an immensely, dangerously, wrong message. It’s a pity, because the original Alive in Joburg was very promising.

If you want to see a good South African film, watch Tsotsi. And if you want to see a film about where I grew up, more or less, watch Wah-Wah. :-)

Website · Post by **DaddyHoggy** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:19 pm

Ahruman wrote:
I absolutely hated it.

Yes, as an action film it’s a refreshing take. And having grown up in southern Africa, I was amused at a lead character called van der Merwe.

The problem, though, is that it’s marketed as an allegory over apartheid, and at that it utterly and completely fails. Why? Because as presented in the film, the aliens really are subhuman beasts who need to be kept separate from humanity, with a few rare exceptions. Given how the film was presented, this was an immensely, dangerously, wrong message. It’s a pity, because the original Alive in Joburg was very promising.

If you want to see a good South African film, watch Tsotsi. And if you want to see a film about where I grew up, more or less, watch Wah-Wah.

I spent a week in the shadow of Table Mountain back in March/April - the difference between the centre of Cape Town and the Townships was heart-breaking and scary and while most of the "white" people I met were wonderful and friendly initially, there was quite a large percentage of them that you didn't have to scratch below the surface before rather unpleasant terms about the indigenous populace came to the fore - I was genuinely shocked.

I never did get round to seeing D9, It'll be one for the Blu-ray when it comes out, given my current schedule.

Sendraks · Post by **Sendraks** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:17 pm

Ahruman wrote:
The problem, though, is that it’s marketed as an allegory over apartheid, and at that it utterly and completely fails. Why? Because as presented in the film, the aliens really are subhuman beasts who need to be kept separate from humanity, with a few rare exceptions. Given how the film was presented, this was an immensely, dangerously, wrong message.

If your dislike of the film wasn't so clearly stated, I'd assume you were being sarcastic. I mean no offense by this remark, but I have a few SA friends (not to mention a partner who was born there) who would feel that the film does capture the apartheid allegory for the very reasons you've stated.

Commander McLane · Post by **Commander McLane** » Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:10 am

Sendraks wrote:
Ahruman wrote:
The problem, though, is that it’s marketed as an allegory over apartheid, and at that it utterly and completely fails. Why? Because as presented in the film, the aliens really are subhuman beasts who need to be kept separate from humanity, with a few rare exceptions. Given how the film was presented, this was an immensely, dangerously, wrong message.
If your dislike of the film wasn't so clearly stated, I'd assume you were being sarcastic. I mean no offense by this remark, but I have a few SA friends (not to mention a partner who was born there) who would feel that the film does capture the apartheid allegory for the very reasons you've stated.

I haven't seen the film, but as far as I understand Ahruman, he particularly disliked that the film seems to have the premise that the aliens are really subhuman (as opposed to: they are only viewed as or are demonized as being subhuman by the humans, which would be basically the ideology of apartheid).

If you say that exactly this captures the apartheid allegory, I would be interested to know which part of the Southafrican population for you and your friends really are subhuman, and need to be kept seperated from humankind? the whites? the indians? the blacks?

Sendraks · Post by **Sendraks** » Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:23 am

Commander McLane wrote:
I haven't seen the film, but as far as I understand Ahruman, he particularly disliked that the film seems to have the premise that the aliens are really subhuman (as opposed to: they are only viewed as or are demonized as being subhuman by the humans, which would be basically the ideology of apartheid).

Would the film have been less dislikable if it had been set in the USA? The aliens would've been treated the same way and that would've illustrated that the "apartheid mentality" isn't something that is restricted to one part of the world. Humanity the world over has demonstrated a boundless capacity to bully/oppress those weaker than themselves. Exploit what resources they have and then cast them aside.

I was surprised that the film didn't show the aliens being used as slave labour, which given their obvious strength, they would be. The film clearly set the aliens up to be weaker. They're confused, directionless, apathetic. Strong, yes, but not organised (the one thing any oppressive regieme fears). The aliens were down and humanity was making sure it kept them down. The aliens, despite obvious physiological differences, share a great many similarities with humans. A desire for housing, concept of ownership, of family, fear of mortality.

I can understand if you feel that using aliens is too blunt a tool to illustrate the point and I would agree that in terms of illustrating the horrors of apartheid, District 9 is not even remotely sophisticated compared a film like Cry Freedom.