August 17, 200917 yr I thought it was ok. Pretty boring. Took forever to pick-up. Mediocre when it did. Definitely not as good as everyone says it is, but it's not a Terminator Salvation or Transformers 2 level abortion.
August 17, 200917 yr I've been wanting to see it, I'm probably going to go watch it today or tomorrow.
August 18, 200917 yr So everyone would recommend seeing it???? I think you should go see it right now.
August 18, 200917 yr Awesome, finally a sci-fi movie that's not a complete let down. Like gizmo said, it's full of win!!!
August 20, 200917 yr I actually liked the movie, but it kinda annoyed me that they left the end plot so open for a sequel it's not even funny. I also really didn't like that there was no character development, I mean after the movie I can only remember the main characters name. But overall, a very unique concept, and pretty well executed. Not everybody is going to like this movie.
August 20, 200917 yr I actually liked the movie, but it kinda annoyed me that they left the end plot so open for a sequel it's not even funny. I also really didn't like that there was no character development, I mean after the movie I can only remember the main characters name. But overall, a very unique concept, and pretty well executed. Not everybody is going to like this movie, but if you were into a movie like Independence Day, I believe you will be interested in this (well, with less jokes and humor). Independence Day? Really? I thought it was the complete opposite of something like Independence day, more like The Day the Earth Stood Still (the good one, not the Keanu horrible remake).
August 20, 200917 yr I think ID4 had the kind of action scenes that are at the end of D9. I never saw The Day the Earth Stood Still so I can't compare. I mean obviously ID4 had more character and plot development than D9, but the kind of scenes you see in both movies are similar.
August 20, 200917 yr Not really sure I agree with the ID4 comparison really..... I think D9 was much more emotionally involving with the main character. The Day The Earth Stood Still (original) makes a bit more sense comparison wise. ID4 is more like Godzilla (1998) to me....
August 20, 200917 yr Yeah, I don't see the Independence Day comparison. I would say it was more like The Fly on steroids. And there were points where I felt like I was watching Cloverfield with the jittery cameras. It was billed by the ciritics as a once in a generation sci fi movie. Knowing that and going in to seeing it, it disappointed me. Looking back, maybe I was too harsh, but I just wasn't that impressed. As a strict sci fi movie, Star Trek was better (granted it had a nostalgia factor) and drew a wider audience.
August 20, 200917 yr ID4 was terrible so yeah I hope the comparison isn't a good one. It's not really.
August 20, 200917 yr Fine, I'm not making any more comparisons. Jesus I didn't expect to get attacked for making a damn comparison off the top of my head. I didn't mean to come off like I was attacking you. I just didn't understand the comparison.
August 20, 200917 yr Fine, I'm not making any more comparisons. Jesus I didn't expect to get attacked for making a damn comparison off the top of my head. easy there big fella, just an opinion. Thanks for the review though.
August 21, 200917 yr Author I think it gave plenty of character development. there really arent that many characters to begin with... the two main characters are Wikus and Christopher (the alien). Both characters were fleshed out enough to show what their purpose in the movie was and why they had that purpose. what more do you want? but yeah, this movie does not equal ID4.
August 21, 200917 yr well fluxation, the thing is that towards the end of the movie they make you want to feel sorry for Wikus and have compassion for his situation, yet throughout the movie he had shown himself to be an unlikeable guy. We didn't learn much of a backstory on Wikus, we just found out he had a wife and where he worked. You need more of a backstory to get a true sense on the kind of person he was in order to make an opinion on him. I'm just saying giving a better backstory of Wikus would've given you a better idea on the kind of person he was and would've made for a better story. I just don't feel that Peter Jackson made it so that the movie goer could truely connect with Wikus the way he intended.
August 21, 200917 yr well fluxation, the thing is that towards the end of the movie they make you want to feel sorry for Wikus and have compassion for his situation, yet throughout the movie he had shown himself to be an unlikeable guy. We didn't learn much of a backstory on Wikus, we just found out he had a wife and where he worked. You need more of a backstory to get a true sense on the kind of person he was in order to make an opinion on him. I'm just saying giving a better backstory of Wikus would've given you a better idea on the kind of person he was and would've made for a better story. I just don't feel that Peter Jackson made it so that the movie goer could truely connect with Wikus the way he intended. I disagree actually. Wikus I thought was portrayed as possibly the first "normal" character in a sci-fi film in a long time (in the beginning at least). There was nothing special about him, in fact, he was just a company dork who then undergoes a complete transformation. He was unlikeable in the beginning for a reason (even though I still liked him), because most company men are unlikeable. Heck, most people are unlikeable. I thought they did a good job with the character.
August 21, 200917 yr Just watched it. Kind of upset how they left it open at the end, but that really isnt a big deal. Very emotional film with a lot of underlying themes. The irony was incredible, how the aliens were treated in South Africa was very similar to the apartheid that was only recentley removed in South Africa. 5/5 in my mind, to me it wasn't really about action or characters as much as a huge metephor for how horribly people on this planet treat others.
August 21, 200917 yr Yeah, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_Six,_Cape_Town I mean the movie is a lot deaper than it first appears.
August 21, 200917 yr This movie was actaully based off of the short film Alive In Joburg, which was directed by the same guy and it's only 6 mins long. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1185812222812358837
August 28, 200917 yr Author well fluxation, the thing is that towards the end of the movie they make you want to feel sorry for Wikus and have compassion for his situation, yet throughout the movie he had shown himself to be an unlikeable guy. We didn't learn much of a backstory on Wikus, we just found out he had a wife and where he worked. You need more of a backstory to get a true sense on the kind of person he was in order to make an opinion on him. I'm just saying giving a better backstory of Wikus would've given you a better idea on the kind of person he was and would've made for a better story. I just don't feel that Peter Jackson made it so that the movie goer could truely connect with Wikus the way he intended. I get what you mean, but how much more could they have done? did you want a 30 minute flashback about Wikus from when he was born up until the movie started? They showed just enough to keep people interested in the character and I dont really think it was more of a "oh hey lets feel bad about this guy" type of movie, I think the message on Wikus' character was the old cliche "don't judge a book by its cover". obviously he was a douche bag to the prawns in the beginning, but as time went on and he was forced to live with them he began to learn about them and see that they really arent that different. they look different, but they all have the emotions and feelings that humans have. now he has to spend atleast the next 3 years as one after treating them as 2nd class creatures. btw, the movie was not written or directed by peter jackson, he only produced it.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.