5 Lessons Hollywood Can Learn from District 9
While some of you are no doubt getting sick of all the talk about Neill Blomkamp’s District 9, I continue to be fascinated and inspired by it. It may not have demolished the box office in quite the same way that say, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen did, but I truly think it is an eye-opener for both people who make movies and people who watch them. Based on the critical praise and the fact that it was able to reclaim its production budget in just a single weekend, I can only hope it will have an impact on the kinds of movies we see getting made over the next few years.
As sort of a follow up to Jay’s list of 5 Reasons Why District 9 Will Be Better Than Transformers 2, here are some of the lessons that I think studio execs and filmmakers should take away from District 9 now that we’ve seen it. If people can apply these ideas to their future projects, I think we will all end up having a much more consistently enjoyable experience at the movies. And really, who doesn’t want that?
1. Audiences Appreciate Originality
It’s easy to pinpoint a large number of films that influenced District 9, from Alien Nation and Black Hawk Down to The Fly and Aliens, but at the end of the day this is a movie that took a lot of existing ideas and mashed them together to create something new and different. It was not based on an existing property or brand, which in this day and age, is nothing short of a miracle. People have been ranting about the endless stream of sequels and remakes for years now, but this time someone finally delivered a summer event movie that wasn’t either of those things, amd moviegoers responded with enthusiasm.
2. Experience Isn’t Everything
It has been said that the reason the Halo feature film fell apart was because studio execs didn’t want to put the movie in the hands of first-time director Neill Blomkamp. While I don’t know if I buy that completely, there’s no doubt that a lot of people questioned Blomkamp’s ability to deliver a feature-length blockbuster even though he had a stellar resume of short films and commercials to back him up. In the end, his lack of experience was probably a strength because it allowed him to think outside the box and avoid simply serving up more of the same old crap. This also applies to the cast, which primarily consisted of unknowns, and lead actor Sharlto Copley who turned in an amazing performance with his first major role on screen. Talent can be found in many different places, sometimes you just have to give people a chance to prove themselves.
3. Blockbuster Budgets are Bloated
This probably goes without saying, but Hollywood blockbusters are getting to be way too expensive nowadays. Spider-Man 3 supposedly cost over $250 million to make, and you have to wonder where all that money went when District 9 cost just $30 million by comparison. Obviously a lot of the money went to the actors’ salaries, but as D9 proved, you don’t necessarily need big names to sell a tentpole film. If more movies had smaller budgets, studios could afford to finance more projects, and take more risks with them too.
4. Mystery Draws People In
Last year Cloverfield proved that viral marketing can be a very successful way to promote a movie, and District 9 also featured a unique and creative marketing campaign that got people talking. The key here is that both movies maintained a certain level of mystery right through to their release date, and resisted showing off all the most impressive visual effects in commercials and trailers. Let’s stop spoiling the entire movie for people ahead of time. You can still get them into the theatre by hinting at the possibilities, and your reward will be strong word of mouth after they see it.
5. Action is More Thrilling When It’s Rated R
One of the things that really struck me about District 9 is the fact that it does not pull any punches in terms of action. It is rated R for a very good reason, and that is because it is gruesome and violent at times — but not in a cheap or exploitative way. It makes the experience more visceral and exciting. Although I’ve defended PG-13 action movies in the past, this just reminded me how awesome it is to see a movie like Terminator 2 on the big screen and truly feel shocked and involved in the action. Peter Jackson of all people knows that a little gore goes a long way!
What do you think, will District 9 be a true wake-up call to Hollywood, or is it just another flash in the pan?
Comments (32)
Jay and Greg are right, Reed is so wrong that he actually makes the entire geek culture movement look bad. That’s right, an entire generation of D&D players, Trekkies, and computer club members are spitting at you, Reed. District 9 is one of just a small handful of 5/5 films (or 4/4 on your scale) including the first two Star Wars movies (IV & V), Aliens, and the Fifth Element. Each one of Reed’s ridiculous and cumulatively unfounded arguments against this film were eviscerated by Jay & Greg (hereafter referred to as The Dynamic Duo) but Reed didn’t seem to get it. This movie hit every point I could ask it to, with high action content, beautiful cinematography, gritty realism, a believable lead character, and special effects that blend seamlessly into the background.
As for the spoilerific questions, I’d just like to agree with Greg in pointing out that the aliens in the camps were -workers-, they even mentioned the ship being full of them just laying around starving. If they couldn’t use the technology of the ship to feed themselves, they probably couldn’t use their weapons intelligently enough to overthrow 6 billion humans with guns and missiles and nukes. I too got the impression that Christopher and his kid were the only two ‘leader type’ prawn, but that’s not so odd when you think about the docile and obedient nature of the worker prawn. Jay & Greg rule, Sean you’re alright too. Reed, you need to hop on the interwebz and L2geek, or STFU.
Posted by Apocalypse Dan on August 19th, 2009I agree with point no. 5 the most. It was refreshing to hear people say Fuck in an american studio film again. It’s jsut not the same to hear somebody go “Damnit” or “Jerkoff”, it feels completely unnatural.
Posted by Henrik on August 19th, 2009Was District 9 filmed in South Africa, or just located there? If so, I wonder if the location cut the budget down tremendously.
Posted by mrbenning on August 19th, 2009I disagree with Reed’s assessments and I think most people here do as well, but I’d rather stop the pounding on Reed. He will continue to have these offbeat opinions and it’s like pounding your head against the wall trying to argue with him.
Posted by Maopheus on August 19th, 2009As to whether or not it will be a wakeup call, uh, pessimistically, I’d say probably not. The only thing that will cause the studios to re-evaluate budgets for movies is for a big financial collapse. Well, we’ve already had one, and it sure seems to have not affected Hollywood. In fact, box office receipts are better than ever. So therefore, there is no incentive for Hollywood to tighten its belt.
However I think there will be a bigger influence within the genre side of the industry. Especially if there continues to be a concerted by people like Jackson to identify and mentor people like Blomkamp and give them the opportunities. I think that there will be a more critical analysis of the use of FX/CGI in movies. How to use it more economically, and more creatively, and to also realize that there are still limitations to how well it works in conveying a seamless, believable image. Simply throwing a lot of money at an FX house is not the answer.
Also there is another thing to think about. Blomkamp has an opportunity here similar to what Robert Rodriguez had. Rodriguez stunned the film world by making a pretty damn good movie for $10,000. He set himself up as a guy who could shoot fast and cheap. He has established a pretty decent reputation in the genre world, in addition to his innumerable kid movies. However I don’t think he has really lived up completely to his potential. I don’t think he’s as gifted and talented as Blomkamp is, even now. He’s more limited in his range. Blomkamp’s challenge is to pick his next projects carefully. Of course there is the inevitable demand for District 10. Well that kind of violates lesson 1. But he may have no choice in that matter. What he shouldn’t do though is do someone else’s sequel/remake/reboot whatever. He can do as many District movies as he wants and that’ll be great but the next one will never be as cool as the first one. I think it’s a good move for him not to do Halo. He has the cred now to stand up for himself and seek his own projects.
I believe District 9 was shot in South Africa and probably with a fully South African cast/crew. Post production was probably done mostly in New Zealand at WETA. This is part of a trend in the last decade in moving film production to the southern hemisphere. I believe that the Star Wars Episode 1-3 movies were partly shot in Australia. I think the last Matrix movie was shot down there as well.
Posted by Maopheus on August 19th, 2009I think you are overestimating things Sean on point #1. D9 is a fluke, helped by a great marketing campaign. And tons of remakes making tons of cash say otherwise as well.
Posted by Swarez on August 19th, 2009I definitely agree with more low budget movies, then they can give us a Serenity sequel for 30-40 mil and maybe also widen the general idiots interest in movies beyond ro-coms, comedies and big franchise movies
Posted by pcch7 on August 19th, 2009I meant to say “rom-coms” before anyone flames me for my spelling
Posted by pcch7 on August 19th, 2009I’d like to see even more A list, rainmaker directors do what Peter Jackson did on D9, Quentin Tarantino w/ his Asian and Eli Roth horror and even what Anthony Minghella, Steven Soderbergh did for Tony Gilroy’s Micheal Clayton. That is use their taste, ideas and power to FORCE Hollywood to take a chance on yong directors and NEW material that isn’t meeting the hollywood formula. Shit make it like the baseball farm system. Throw back to the 70s when all the great directors like Coppola helped their little brothers and sisters.
How bout it Fincher?
Posted by rus in chicago on August 19th, 2009What up Cameron?
Got something to say Lucas?
I think audiences do appreciate originality, but sometimes they don’t know it until they sit down and watch a movie that’s unlike anything they’ve seen before. The problem is getting them to the theatre to see it… that’s where the creative marketing comes in.
Posted by Sean on August 19th, 2009The problem with guys like Lucas and Cameron is that they make their big hits and then they devolve into self-indulgent egotism, taking years if not decades to produce something new. And then the new thing comes out and it’s not impressive and they wonder why. Lucas had the best chance to create something like a farm system. He had the money to operate outside of the studio system and fund and produce the projects that he really wanted to do. Or at least that’s what he said he wanted to do. He had the chance to involve some fresh talent to either write or direct the Star Wars prequels but no, he had to horde them for himself. The thing is that I’m not so sure that directors who become producers are the best people to find and groom new filmmakers because I suspect that they are too insecure and do want to help a guy out who might end up competing with them. You look at Lucas, he’s groomed no one. Spielberg, I would say only Robert Zemeckis. Cameron produced Kathryn Bigelow, but that’s a different situation becaused they used to be married. That’s why I give Jackson a lot of credit because he’s helping out Blomkamp and to a lesser extent, Del Toro. Don’t forget that Del Toro is another VFX master. Look what he’s done with relatively small budgets on his films as well, like Pan’s Labyrinth and the Hellboy franchise. Jackson has an eye for guys who can use VFX and enhance the storytelling as a whole instead of simply doing it in a connect-the-dots kind of way. Jackson and Del Toro are also helping to tap areas of new talent like the Southern hemisphere and Latin America respectively.
Posted by Maopheus on August 19th, 2009I think that in addition to the five things the studios could learn from D9 (which I found to be an excellent movie because of its emotional versatility) is that a movie that forces you to think will live much farther than a big screen. If you look at the types of movies people tend to see and then own, they are movies that in some way wake up the brain or the heart in ways it had not been accessed before. The movies that you remember are not necessarily the ones that you sit back and say “wow! Those effects were awesome!” or “I wonder how they did that?”. It’s the movies that you come out of and say “God, what would I do if that were me?”. This was a movie that showed humanity in it’s full range of emotions and actions, from the true grace that we can exhibit towards one another, to the true horrors that we both experience and inflict on each other. Human beings are the most fascinating things on the earth. Hollywood, can we have some more movies about them please?
Posted by opener on August 19th, 2009I agree with most of the points you have mentioned Sean.
When I think about what you have written I feel people will be dissapointed by Avatar which has a 250 million budget and is PG-13 yet suppose to be amazing and all. Maybe James Cameron should have made a smaller film like D9 rather than what he is doing.
Avatar is original and does have a lot of mystery as hardly anything has been shown. Though that might change after tommorrow. But I don’t agree with you saying that D9 didn’t show its big vfx scenes. They showed a lot on tv spots and featurettes etc.
I personally loved D9 and am hoping Avatar is also awesome movie though it won’t be the blood soaked violence we got in D9.
My expectations for Avatar were already low and now they are all time low after D9.
Crosses fingers that Avatar will be an experience to watch.
Posted by JoJo on August 19th, 2009There is one more lesson, and that is that Hollywood itself is the problem. By that I mean that Peter Jackson is not a Hollywood guy although for distribution and funding purposes he needs Hollywood. Neil Blomkamp is a South African and clearly not a Hollywood guy. The Hollywood studio system itself is the problem because they’re locked into a predictable formula for blockbuster summer movies. So basically avoid Hollywood as much as possible, minimize their input, and make your own movie, and only when you need to, go to them for funding and distribution.
Posted by Maopheus on August 19th, 2009>> Avatar is original
If it’s even remotely like the script treatment, Avatar is Quigley Down Under with Thundercats/Ewoks. Except sappier.
Posted by Damndirtyape on August 19th, 2009Anyone who doesn’t see the strengths of D9 over the weaknesses is a self-indulgent asshole. This is one of the best SyFys (SciFis, if you’re old like me)since Alien. While Aliens and the Abyss were entertaining, and Blade Runner wonderfully dark and intriguing, D9 is so much more intelligent and contains so many rich elements. A harsh critic of this film is probably too dumb to see the timely Orwellian allegory that so beautifully describes how our current media leave the masses completely clueless as they help reify the machinations of a gov’t/corporate fusion. The casting of Copley was perfect. What a great stooge. What a brilliant performance. What a brilliant movie.
Posted by Eric on August 19th, 2009I’ve seriously had enough of Reed, he ruined the D9 episode of the podcast. His trivial complaints replaced what surely would’ve been a great discussion. The only time he should be on the show is when you guys are reviewing a shitty movie that none of you care about. I don’t want him destroying a conversation about a good film.
Posted by Sam on August 19th, 2009I think big budgeted films allow visual effects to be advanced. Following films can benefit from these advances with lower budgets.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 19th, 2009As much as I hope D9 has taught Hollywood a lesson, I don’t hold out hope for it changing much. Fortunately the rest of the world is catching up in terms of good genre film making and using small budgets to great effect. France, Germany, Russia, England, Sweden, Spain, and Australia have all produced great genre films in the last few years (Martyrs, Inside, 13 Tzameti, Froenties, Sheitan, Mesrine, Calvaire, Backwoods, Storm, Antibodies, Eden Lake, The Children, El Orphanato, Gomorra, Flame and Citron, Bronson, Let the Right One In, Embodiment of Evil, Dead Snow, Sauna, Tell No One, Rec, Taxidermia, TimeCrimes, The Zombie Diaries, King of the Hill, Valhalla Rising, The Horseman and MANY MORE)and the Asian market continues to produce dozens of great films every year.
Hollywood will always be the place to go for big, loud, bloated spectacle films as well as some great genre and dramatic efforts, but the rest of the world is just as good, if not better, at making stuff that keeps the brain healthy and happy. I think now that genre films in general are the new moneymakers EVERYONE is taking a stab, and it really is a great time to be a film fan. I was listening to Jay(on the Horror Etc podcast) talk about how cheap it’s becoming to make these types of flicks and the influences on his work and it really made me hopeful for the future of genre films. It seems like more and more younger directors are learning their craft and bringing their influences into their movies and now that they can afford to take risks at a far lesser cost we can expect to see some REALLY interesting work.
So hopefully if anything, D9 will influence the younger generation of film makers and show that being creative and original as well as learning from just watching older films is important. Leave the Transformers and GI Joe’s to Hollywood. And if Hollywood DOES decide to take a few more risks on said young film makers then that’s all the better!
Hallelujah for Neill Blomkamp!
Posted by Fatbologna on August 19th, 2009and Hallelujah for Peter Jackson’s willingness to take a chance on something different!
Mr. Farrington did not perform well in this episode of the show. He did pretty well on the Orphan podcast, speaking confidently about the discussed films. Regarding District 9 however, he seemed uncertain about his preposterous gripes. I wish he’d just take a stand with his crazy opinions instead of wasting a bunch of time skirting his issues for fear of negative reaction from the filmjunk community and the outrage of his buddies.
A nice set of points. I agree with all of them especially that this film was well marketed. I hope that in the future we do get more action and sci-fi films with budgets around 30mil helmed by fresh/up and coming directors.
Posted by Ovenball on August 20th, 2009I don’t disagree with the lessons that Hollywood needs to learn from movie making, but the truth is that THIS movie, District 9, didn’t hold up any of these principals well enough to be considered a model for advanced, innovative moviemaking. It was not a good production. It was a good thought, ridiculous for the message it was attempting to convey. Absolutely ridiculous. It was racist, it didn’t have a message. First of all, in the documentary, they talked about how calling the aliens prawns was a racist term, but it didn’t dawn on them that transferring aliens from concentration camps is also racist? They said it was for their own good, but who believes that? For some reasons the stupid characters did. That ruined it for me.
Posted by Spaxydaxy on August 20th, 2009Good article! Get this Terminator Salvation cost $250 million plus another $50 million to market and promote! Yet that film lacked any real heart, or vision and ended up being a very crass and flat film going experience. I’d like to see Hollywood embrace directors like Neill Blomkamp instead of hacks like Mcg!
Posted by Marc on August 20th, 2009http://www.moviefill.com/5-Lessons-Hollywood-Can-Learn-from-District-9-18173/
they took your article, and now its the 2nd top story on DIGG. They credit filmjunk at the bottom. was this authorized?
Posted by Goon on August 21st, 2009Yea, moviefill made it to the top stories on digg with your story. There was a small link at the bottom of the page to filmjunk but no mention of your being the writer. Hope that this was posted with your permission as y’all seem to get overlooked when it comes to the top movie sites.
Posted by Nathan on August 21st, 2009Fucking internet.
I’m sorry to say I agree with Sam and Ovenball. I like Cantakarous and the occasional Reed in a regular Film Junk podcast, but the D9 episode suffered from the silliness.
Posted by Bas on August 22nd, 2009But to stay on topic: I agree with your 5 points Sean, but Hollywood will not change their ways. Even Blomkamp will not turn down a big budget for his next film, for better effects and a nice fat paycheck for himself and the lead-actors.
Posted by Bas on August 23rd, 2009SpaxyDaxy # 21
It is actually very believable that the characters would believe it is for the aliens’ own good. Early 2007 there were many xenophobic attacks in South Africa (at the same time as when D9 was shot, I believe some of footage was actual footage taken during these attacks), thousands of Somalian and other immigrants were attacked in townships across SA. In Cape Town, they were all placed in a refugee camp for their own safety. Now they are still staying there and are unwilling to move. The government wants to move them, for their “own good”. I am not saying who is right and who is wrong, but from the view of these immigrants, if government forcefully removes them, then the government would seriously seem like the ‘bad guys’. On the other hand, they are living in squalor and moving them would actually be for their own good. I don’t know, I’m just saying it is not that unbelievable as you are trying to make it out to be.
Posted by Louis on August 23rd, 2009I agree with the comments. We need to revise the film industry , we need to know what people wnat and not what we want as film makers. And we have to know that those who are on top started somehwere, so give chance to the firsttimes as well , the new comers.
Posted by John Wani on September 11th, 2009I sure hope its wake-up call to Hollywood. I, like you, am continually fascinated and inspired by D9. Can’t get enough of it – everything about it is just moving.
Posted by Snake Eyes on September 22nd, 2009Stumbled upon this and I must say, as a long time fan of good moviemaking and gripping stories… this movie was boring and tiring to watch throughout about 90% of it.
I can not, for the life of me, understand why anyone could praise this for anything other than originality, the only thing it has going for it. As far as my opinion goes.
I am not one to speak my mind when it’s negative, as I often think it’s a waste. But watching this movie, for me at least, was a huge waste of time and money.
Posted by Petur Hinrik on October 7th, 2009Great Post..
I for one was pleasantly surprised when i watched this movie.
The very fact it was based in South Africa and not some big Us city was original enough in itself.
STOP THE FREAKIN’ REMAKES HOLLYWOOD!!!!
Posted by Maffy on October 12th, 2009well for me the bottom line with ‘District 9′ is that it’s plan overrated and here is a simple reason WHY it is…
for the first 38-ish minutes, it’s just plain BOOOOORING. i was about to turn it off but then it got better but given that the first 38minutes is really boring, that pretty much hurts any long term value of this film even though the rest of the film was not bad.
all in all… i gave District 9 a 6/10 (i cannot go any higher simply because of the long boring stretch from when it started til around the 38ninute range in the film). it’s one of the most overrated i seen in 2009 along with Watchmen which is just plain boring as i turned that off with about 20-30minutes left in the film as i was saying to myself ‘it’s got to get at least a little better’ but it never happened. i gave Watchmen a 4/10.
p.s. and no, i am not one of those people that needs a lot of action to enjoy a film either.
Posted by ThaCrip on November 8th, 2009Leave a Reply