mikeian Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 i saw this right after watching inglorious basterds and enjoyed both. before going to see the movie, i had no idea what it was about other than that it was an alien movie and that it got good reviews. i like how the advertising campaign involved signs saying "for humans only". a few months ago i saw one of the signs on some cafe window and didn't even know it was a movie, as there was just a phone number and a web site (which i didn't check out). of course as the release date came up, i started seeing more signs and found out it was a movie, but i liked how they marketed it, although I don't know a thing about the trailer because i don't watch tv. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclz Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I thought the voodoo thing was well done too. It happens all over the world where people eat shit off of rare or endangered animals because it gives them a boner (or is supposed to) not just endangered animals, some places they eat dead humans after their funeral Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamlikesmusic Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 then the ending just left too many things unanswered What do you feel was left unanswered? (I'm not asking in an argumentative tone, just curious. I can think of one or two loose ends, but I wouldn't say that's too many.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadetapplesauce Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 then the ending just left too many things unanswered What do you feel was left unanswered? (I'm not asking in an argumentative tone, just curious. I can think of one or two loose ends, but I wouldn't say that's too many.) i wouldn't say unanswered, but i think i see how this complaint could be found. the ending of the movie is very open, as there's not a definite end to the story. yeah, christopher leaves and wikus becomes a prawn, but i think the main thing is that wikus never finds redemption from the humans. logically, the government would be on the search for him, and there's a reason he's gone into hiding. it's definitely not a hollywood ending, as its pretty obvious that this story is not over. they left it wide open for a sequel, but i really hope they don't. at first i was somewhat disappointed with the ending, but as i let it brew in my mind, i realized how great it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamlikesmusic Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 That's what I'm saying - I loved the ending, but I keep seeing people say they hate the ending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brennan Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 As far as the aliens not utilizing their weapons earlier and stuff, I also understood Chris to be more intelligent than the other aliens. It seemed like the equivalent of a jet with like 200 people crashing. There's a good chance nobody on it would be able to repair or fly the jet. As for the weapons I'm not sure why the prawns would have even thought to immediately attack the humans as they were giving them aid, then by the time it went south most of the weapons had been rounded up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rise3905 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 cutting to and from the interviews with the "experts" was almost like one of those mock tv interview shows making fun of some outrageous issue and i didn't think it fit the rest of the movie well at all. just gave the whole film a kind of comical and mocking tone. those interviews were used to give the events context. if those weren't in there, we wouldnt know what the situation was as the film started. sure, they could've star wars'd or blade runner'd it and actually put text describing..THIS is what happened before what you are about to see. or they could have had shown a ten minute scene with a bunch of old government guys sitting around "evaluating" the situation. but it didn't and i thought it was an interesting choice. it also goes with the idea that big events in the movie are intercut with "news" footage and the event actually "happening" in front of us (if that makes sense). yeah i get why they did it that way, i just don't think it was done well is all... What do you feel was left unanswered? (I'm not asking in an argumentative tone, just curious. I can think of one or two loose ends, but I wouldn't say that's too many.) i wouldn't say unanswered, but i think i see how this complaint could be found. the ending of the movie is very open, as there's not a definite end to the story. yeah, christopher leaves and wikus becomes a prawn, but i think the main thing is that wikus never finds redemption from the humans. logically, the government would be on the search for him, and there's a reason he's gone into hiding. it's definitely not a hollywood ending, as its pretty obvious that this story is not over. they left it wide open for a sequel, but i really hope they don't. at first i was somewhat disappointed with the ending, but as i let it brew in my mind, i realized how great it is. ok so maybe there wasn't TOO many unanswered questions, but i like resolution and no loose ends for me to ponder after a movie. did christopher come back for wikus? did wikus survive as a prawn? did wikus' wife wait for him? i just thought these were pretty standard things that should have been answered as they formed the most part of the movie. i don't like that they left it open for a sequel because i don't think it's a good candidate for a sequel. i think that the one movie would have been enough (and not just because i didn't dig it that much). but, just my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadetapplesauce Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 those interviews were used to give the events context. if those weren't in there, we wouldnt know what the situation was as the film started. sure, they could've star wars'd or blade runner'd it and actually put text describing..THIS is what happened before what you are about to see. or they could have had shown a ten minute scene with a bunch of old government guys sitting around "evaluating" the situation. but it didn't and i thought it was an interesting choice. it also goes with the idea that big events in the movie are intercut with "news" footage and the event actually "happening" in front of us (if that makes sense). yeah i get why they did it that way, i just don't think it was done well is all... i wouldn't say unanswered, but i think i see how this complaint could be found. the ending of the movie is very open, as there's not a definite end to the story. yeah, christopher leaves and wikus becomes a prawn, but i think the main thing is that wikus never finds redemption from the humans. logically, the government would be on the search for him, and there's a reason he's gone into hiding. it's definitely not a hollywood ending, as its pretty obvious that this story is not over. they left it wide open for a sequel, but i really hope they don't. at first i was somewhat disappointed with the ending, but as i let it brew in my mind, i realized how great it is. ok so maybe there wasn't TOO many unanswered questions, but i like resolution and no loose ends for me to ponder after a movie. did christopher come back for wikus? did wikus survive as a prawn? did wikus' wife wait for him? i just thought these were pretty standard things that should have been answered as they formed the most part of the movie. i don't like that they left it open for a sequel because i don't think it's a good candidate for a sequel. i think that the one movie would have been enough (and not just because i didn't dig it that much). but, just my opinion i see what you're saying. and i agree to an extent, just on the opposite end of the spectrum. haha. i said it before, but i'll say it again.. i dont think they should make a sequel to this. the way the played out the first was great. imagine if the second back to the future was just a complete disaster. true, it wouldn't hurt what the first movie was, but it definitely overextends the characters and story for longer, and can ruin what was established in the first one. at least that's how i see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjustinxschwierx Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/aug/26/district-9-handheld cool article about the hand-held camera look to how this was shot...kinda cool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monk0nuggets Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Sent to see this again last night. Still amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devinr Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Finally saw it. Great film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.