Speaking of new shit, the movies lately seem to have none. Not that I'm complaining, but what the hell is with all the comic book movies? In the past decade we've seen 2 Batmans, 2 Hulks, 3 Spider-Mans, Sin City, 300, Watchmen, 3 X-Mens (4 if you count Wolverine as an X-Men movie), 2 Hellboys, Hellblazer (though renamed Constantine), 2 Iron Mans, Ghost Rider...and those are just off the top of my head! Now there are theories all over about the how and why. "Hollywood just needs something safe to showcase their new-fangled CGI and 3-D effects on!" "Comic books are finally returning into mainstream media and being artistically recognized!" "Everyone has no creativity and art is dead!"
You know what? I don't really give a shit why. I like most of them because for the most part, they don't suck as bad as most movies intended for the same 13-30 year-old male demographic. But it is troubling to see so much praise and money dumped into something we already know is awesome. I was really excited this year during the Academy Awards, because some really awesome movies got some really good attention (except Avatar, don't get me started on that piece of shit). There was one movie that was just at the wrong place at the wrong time.
District 9.
District 9 was easily the best movie of 2009. You want interesting and unique story? Check. Killer and tasteful CGI use and special effects? Done. Intelligent and ferocious action sequences? Oh hell yeah. Unique overall presentation and quality. Yes yes yes. D-9 was nominated for 4 Oscars and despite winning none of them, I am happy. Neill Blomkamp's debut is a stunning one, and the exposure just from making 4 Oscar lists (including Best Picture!) will certainly ensure that he brings us another great work. It was just the wrong place at the wrong time.
District 9 was nominated for Best Picture, Best Cinematography, Best Visual Effects, and Best Adapted Screenplay. Right away I knew Best Adapted Screenplay was lost to Precious and even though I have not seen it, I'm sure it would have won even if it sucked (people are suckers for underdog stories). Best Visual Effects, also an obvious loss to Avatar. Anytime James Cameron makes a movie, you can be sure the Academy is tonguing his asshole for that award. Ever since the Terminator movies he just tries to outdo himself in CGI and special effects. I think D-9 had very tasteful use of CGI, exhibiting a certain restraint that we rarely see in films today, especially sci-fi. But they certainly didn't compare to Cameron's epic dull-fest Avatar. I was optimistic about Best Cinematography. D-9 used Neill Blomkamp's now-signature camera technique of switching the action between many different camera types to give the film a more documentary feel. I enjoyed it, it felt fresh and interesting without giving me vertigo like Cloverfield or looking amateur-ish like Blair Witch. But alas it was not meant to be. Lastly, Best Picture, I had my hopes locked away in a fridge (right next to my heart). But as soon as I saw The Hurt Locker on the list I knew it was over. The Academy would take the über predictable route and vote for the Iraq War movie. And I was right.
So overall, a bit disappointing, but I still believe Neill Blomkamp got some great exposure from it, I hope to see something new from him soon.
[/rant]
No comments:
Post a Comment