Comments on: Film Junk Podcast Episode #231: District 9

By: Scott H.

Scott H. — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:24:40 +0000

Hey Guys,

District 9 was phenomenal. All I really wanted to say was that I wish you guys would have Reed on more frequently or every episode because he’s the perfect antithesis and the interaction and rapport is fun to listen to.

Thanks.

By: Lukas (from Poland)

Lukas (from Poland) — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 20:37:19 +0000

Hi,
You were talking about “Legion” and I just want to mention Australian 2007 movie “Gabriel”. If you like low budget movies you would love this one Director Shane Abbess described the budget as “the catering budget on a Hollywood film” The film was shot for $150,000!! But it looks quite good though –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_Lp07USFr8&feature=related

So If you want to see some Angels with guns you should check this movie

By: Reed Farrington

Reed Farrington — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 22:11:16 +0000

To make up for any lack of clarity in my voiced opinions of “District 9″ on the podcast, here are my lists of likes and dislikes.

Things I liked about “District 9″:
- Initial premise of dealing with a large number of compliant, “despicable” aliens.
- Visual effects.
- Cinematography.
- The ending of the film.

Things I did not like about “District 9″:
- The style in which it was shot, notably the hand-held camerawork.
- Dialog was ordinary.
- Story did not branch into interesting territory.

The other elements of the movie like the music didn’t make an impact on me. So based on all of these limited judgments, this is why I do not have enthusiasm for “District 9.”

One final thing. From the comments, I think I understand why I irk so many Film Junk podcast listeners. I’ve tried to improve, and I appreciate the guys accommodating me on the occasional podcast, but I have to concede that the Film Junk podcast is better off without me. Let the rejoicing begin.

By: D.Wayne

D.Wayne — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 04:39:52 +0000

If you check out the blog http://www.mnuspreadslies.com written by none other than our favorite alien, Christopher Johnson, then you will see a lot of details that you didn’t get in the movie. It may help shed some light on the alien’s situation in District 9.

By: jaime

jaime — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 05:22:18 +0000

Fuck this movie it was not that great! 1 out of 4.

By: rus in chicago

rus in chicago — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 22:17:48 +0000

Reed – “I read today that a Canadian visual effects company did the bulk of the visual effects for District 9″ sounds like a new career path…just think of all the leftovers in the company frig. that are going to waste.

By: Sean

Sean — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:57:38 +0000

Reed, this is true, you really did like District 9. 2.5 stars is basically a 4 out of 4 in your world.

By: Reed Farrington

Reed Farrington — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:41:44 +0000

Holy crap! Matt Gamble, in discussing what makes a “good” science fiction film, I wasn’t saying that I disliked District 9 because of scientific nitpicks. Read the last paragraph of my comment 48 again. Get off my back, you Prawn!

And I’m not using Blomkamp’s views as a reason to dislike his film. Blomkamp seems to be a reasonably intelligent guy, who I don’t necessarily agree with. He just made a film that seemed ordinary to me. And before this goes too far, if I’ve said that I disliked District 9, then I didn’t really mean it. I gave it 2.5 stars on the Film Junk podcast. Oh, god help me if people start accusing me of backtracking. (And no, I don’t believe in god. Today, anyway.)

BTW, I read today that a Canadian visual effects company did the bulk of the visual effects for District 9. Apparently, WETA was too busy on Avatar. Everything is cheaper in Canada, even special effects. (Canada is the Third World of the Western nations.)

By: rus in chicago

rus in chicago — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:06:40 +0000

“and part of the fun of this kind of film is filling in the blanks yourself through speculation. None of it means anything and serves no other purpose than geek fellowship, but there it is.”

quite right, people on these boards tend to jump all over people bring up issues with the film even after they have said they loved it when in reality most just want to geek out and enjoy the movie more by discussing it and ways it could be different.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:05:38 +0000

Also, Reed, I am not going to dictate to you what questions you should be asking about a film. I was just hoping you would move away from the goofy technobabble and more into the expansion of the movie’s universe. Blomkamp has repeatedly stated the goal of this movie is entertainment first, and part of the fun of this kind of film is filling in the blanks yourself through speculation. None of it means anything and serves no other purpose than geek fellowship, but there it is.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:02:33 +0000

“He claimed to be motivated to get back to the ship to stop his â€œpeopleâ€ from being used as medical experiments. Then he and his son go to the ship and it becomes this â€œI will be back in 3 yearsâ€?!”

He didn’t want to come back to stop the experiments until after he learned about them in the second act. It was a shift in his motivation, which originally was solely to leave Earth and never come back. Honestly I’m not sure he gave a fuck about the rest of his kind *until* he learned what MNU was doing to them. As for coming back in 3 years, he made a promise to fix Wikus’ DNA but only after returning to his home system first. He says the line at the end of the film after Wikus’ sacrifices his safety so that CJ and his son can escape. CJ was reiterating his original promise to help Wikus for helping them. Regardless of how you feel about Wikus at the start of the film, you can’t deny that at the end he is completely different internally as well as externally.

By: Matt Gamble

Matt Gamble — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:43:23 +0000

For example, and this goes with District 9, if I say that I didnâ€™t like how the action was filmed, people would expect me to justify this. What can I say? That I thought the editing was too quick? That the camera placement was wrong? Obviously, it worked for other people, so why bother saying stuff that people will guffaw at?

Well if you articulate your opinions Reed Farrington won’t think you are an idiot. So, there’s that.