Did District 9 make their message clear?
- August 17th, 2009
- Posted in Uncategorized
- By Mark Carras
- Write comment
Is your message clear?
Yesterday I wrote a review of the movie District 9 that has offended a few people. Seems the movie has some really important message about apartheid. I had no clue. My review still stands though. The movie was a total bummer and I don’t like getting hammered over the head with heavy drama when I am expecting to be entertained. The thing you must now think about is why did most viewers of the movie not have a clue that it was going to be a pseudo-documentary about something as heavy as apartheid? I am pretty damn sure that most had no clue going into it or even after the movie was played. This means that the movie was more of a failure than I originally thought. If they had a message they thought was so important why didn’t they make the message more clear? Why? because they knew that the movie would have not been seen by even a tenth of the amount of people. Maybe their own greed got in the way of this message that was so important?
I mention this to make one point clear to you bands. if you have a message, make that message clear. Don’t be a wuss and hide it like the people behind this movie did. Especially if it is such an important message. Say it loud and say it proud!
Now let me make this clear, I in no way mean to belittle the importance of apartheid. I do however mean to belittle the extremely massive ego’s of people that get on their high horse and look down on me because I didn’t get some really vague message buried under a movie that didn’t offer what the previews suggested it would. I listened to more podcasts than I can count that talked about the movie and not one mentioned apartheid. I watched every promo I could find on the movie and never once saw a mention of apartheid. I heard interviews with Peter Jackson and he never mentioned apartheid. Not one movie poster says anything about apartheid. Like 99% of the people that went this weekend, if I would have known it was going to be SECRETLY about apartheid I would have stayed home. Not because I don’t care about apartheid, but because I don’t need to be beat over the head with the message that it is bad. I already know it is bad.
Rage Against The Machine talked all the time about how their songs had some big heavy message. You want to know why? Because they knew that no one would have a clue otherwise. It is not my fault that the creators of this movie let their greed get the best of them. it is not my fault that they let the message get so buried that the great majority have no clue that it is secretly about apartheid. Of course maybe I am wrong since that has happened more times than I care to count as well. So I am making a poll. Please send this message to as many people as possible. I want to know how many people had a clue that this movie had something to do with apartheid. If nothing else we can do what the movie makers obviously failed to do. Get their message out. It is an important message after all…which would explain why it was such a bummer of a movie.
Hello Mark,
First of all I must say that I liked your review, but I would like to discuss some points with you. This is going to be a long comment, so I hope you can bear with me
I think that you try to make a point of sci-fi needing to have lighthearted moments to be considered part of the genre, and that an overly serious tone detracts of the fun that we should have when we see a sci-fi movie, and I think that point of view is seriously narrowing of what we should expect from sci-fi in general.
I think it all comes to what where the expectations you had on the movie. Of course, based on the trailer alone, and without knowing nothing else of the background in the history, one could think that D9 was whatever Men in Black should have been. I was aware of the message, but I was also aware of the whole viral campaign that took place since months ago.
Now, I also don’t like movies that you have to be aware of the whole background, and check all he sites and easter eggs and videos and whatever else the marketing department think is trendy to “get the message”. I mean, if you can’t make the whole message in the movie apparent, then this movie is seriously lacking in the narrative department. I probably would have the same opinion of this movie if I went to see it like you did.
The point I’m trying to make is perhaps that sci-fi is a very rich genre, and sometimes, as lighthearted as a space-fantasy can be, like in the SW series, also serious issues can (and should) be portrayed in it.
Now, any artist likes to think that whenever the product is “finished”, then the whole interpretation thing is “out of his hands”. Movies, as any artistic effort, are supposed to appeal feelings on the viewer. Yes it was depressing and didn’t met you expectations of fun, but I wouldn’t call it a failure if the movie made apparent to you and me the feelings I could have in the remote case this story became real. And I was entertained for it. I may be one of the drama queens you mention in your review, but I think this movie is as valid sci-fi as any other movie in the genre, and perhaps is a good sign to see more movies trying to get the genre out of the general clichés it seems to be associated with.
PS. Not that it really matters to the discussion, but Jackson did not direct it, relative newcomer Neill Blomkamp did.
Wow! That has to be the most intelligent negative response to something I’ve written ever. Please comment here more often. I do think you misunderstood something though. I wasn’t trying to say that 100% serious Sci-fi wasn’t “real” sci-fi. I was just saying I wish there was a way to tell if it was going to be a total bummer like the recent re-boot of BSG or District 9. That way people like myself could avoid it. So if (for example) 100% serious sci-fi was called syfi, and Sci-Fi that used the Shakespeare style (of interweaving comedy to soften the delivery of a strong message and make it more easy to swallow) was called Sci-Fi, then fans could make a more informed choice.
I didn’t mean to bash fans of that style. I just wish it wasn’t so damn trendy to avoid the Shakespeare method of delivery in Sci-fi.
As I said before, I loved your comments and hope you continue to post. How did you find this blog btw? Do we know each other?
You’re right, I misunderstood your point. And I also agree that it is difficult to enjoy something when you go for it with completely misplaced expectations. But I see it kind of like the “it’s metal or not” perennial arguments (your debate with @vikingfist was the first time I read your site BTW, I follow you on twitter since). With a genre so rich and varied as Sci-Fi is, I agree that it really needs some sort of finer categorizing. I see the same problem on literature, where Sci-Fi is even more varied than it actually is in the movies or on TV.
On to the topic of “the message”, well, I would say you have found out one of the main issues of getting out a product that relies so heavily into many different mediums to get its point across. You should never neglect the main product and hope that the “complements” will patch it for you, it will just make the faults of your main product more evident.
Thanks for the posts Mark, as you can see, besides being a metalhead, which was the first reason I wanted to read your opinion on District 9, I’m also kind of a Sci-fi freak and movie buff, and you had made some nice points on your post about the BSG series. Did you knew that they are rebooting it once more in a movie?
PS, I’m @hkkhell on twitter, although I’m much less talkative there, 140 char limit and all, I usually limit myself to a couple blips about metal I enjoy and a couple bilingual posts a day
Cheers