• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Neil Blompkamp's Chappie

Violence and cursing. There are a few bits of gory violence.
 
Critics are your greatest friend or worst enemies depending on your bias..

It's always been like that & will always be like that, it's like the director who enjoys looking at positive reviews but avoids the negative ones like the plague, I think it's just inherently human, a lot of people like to think that they're beyond it, but it's always nice when you like a movie that other people like it too, it's a vicious circle this validation thing.

In the Chappie situation, I have no idea what's going on but there are positive reviews as well, and it always fascinates me how two people for example can have extremely opposed views on the same movie, for one, it's a piece of trash, for the other, it's a great movie. Expectations, personal bias, different outlook, there are just so many parameters at hand.

I kind of naively dream of a world where critics wouldn't exist (lol, like that would ever happen) and everyone would be free to think what they think without having to justify themselves all the time (hell, it's almost like it's taboo for example to say that you love Elysium or Avatar, or whatever). In the end, critics really matter awards wise, and even then, it's not that important, what saddens me with Chappie for example is those trolls who go "I knew it" or "Blomkamp keeps descending" when they have NOT EVEN SEEN the frickin movie, people just using RT as a barometer as to whether or not they should see a movie or not, what happened to free will man?
 
It's always been like that & will always be like that, it's like the director who enjoys looking at positive reviews but avoids the negative ones like the plague, I think it's just inherently human, a lot of people like to think that they're beyond it, but it's always nice when you like a movie that other people like it too, it's a vicious circle this validation thing.

In the Chappie situation, I have no idea what's going on but there are positive reviews as well, and it always fascinates me how two people for example can have extremely opposed views on the same movie, for one, it's a piece of trash, for the other, it's a great movie. Expectations, personal bias, different outlook, there are just so many parameters at hand.

I kind of naively dream of a world where critics wouldn't exist (lol, like that would ever happen) and everyone would be free to think what they think without having to justify themselves all the time (hell, it's almost like it's taboo for example to say that you love Elysium or Avatar, or whatever). In the end, critics really matter awards wise, and even then, it's not that important, what saddens me with Chappie for example is those trolls who go "I knew it" or "Blomkamp keeps descending" when they have NOT EVEN SEEN the frickin movie, people just using RT as a barometer as to whether or not they should see a movie or not, what happened to free will man?

Are you serious? The critics liked those movies, unless only a film with some 90% in RottenTomattoes counts as a fresh rating, the thing with those films is that fanboys hated them, so if anything, the fanboys in the internet are the ones not letting you enjoy whatever you want...
 
I didn't know that this was critically panned until after I came here because I enjoyed it. If you guys are worried that Neil did his poor/rich/apartheid theme here again, HE DOESN'T. Sure the setting is in a poor area with a gangster/hip-hop culture, but the themes are more like
corruption of innocence or does the kind of person will a child grow up to be really depend on the child's environment? There's also a theme of existentialism in there.
 
It's not the country, it's that he seems to keep doing the same theme.

There's been a fair amount of talk on the last page alone about the setting, so I do think it is something that is focused on quite a bit.

Concerning his themes though, again I find it very simplistic to reduce all of his films down to doing the exact same thing. True, there are obvious elements in each of his films tackling inequality, discrimination, corruption of those in power and others, but I find it hard to take seriously the claim that Elysium, District 9, and Chappie are all the exact same film, and it seems to me nothing more than a very superficial reading of his films overall that, frankly, could be applied to many filmmakers over the course of their filmographies as well.

It seems to me that these people have a problem overall with filmmakers having a recognizable style, or sort of story that they are interested in, which to me seems to be a preference of a filmmaker not being all that present as much as it is a valid criticism. It would seem no different that criticizing Woody Allen for continuing to do dialogue driven films, or Terrence Malick for more visual and poetic fare, which I understand people do, but when does that become a valid criticism of the films themselves instead of just a preference?

I guess I'm not so much denying the similarities as much as I am questioning why it bothers so much the very same people who are as eager as for Blomkamp to helm District 10, or the latest entry in the Alien franchise.
 
Last edited:
This isn't getting panned so far. Reviews seem to be skewing towards a mixed reception.
 
Currently sat at 40% on RT. Still lots of reviews to come yet though.
 
This isn't getting panned so far. Reviews seem to be skewing towards a mixed reception.

Sounds like critics are more frustrated at Neill, because I think the consensus on his talents is still pretty high but he's kinda 'reaching beyond his grasp' when it comes to his writing skills
 
Once again, that's just subjective, thing is when you pull off a first feature like D9, expectations are going to be insanely high, and if said expectations are not met for some people, the backlash will only be bigger, you can see it online already, people who haven"t seen Chappie, but are already mocking Blomkamp, saying he's a one hit wonder and that he's going to ruin Alien.

I hate the Internet sometimes, so much cynicism........
 
I find Faraci to be an obnoxious Marvel and Del Toro shill but I agree with his reviews more often than not.

Judging by other reviews as well Chappie is reading like Elysium except worst and I just don't know if I can do that. I've been thinking about it and it's just not making enough sense to see this when I've had doubts in the first place.
 
With Neill, I think he's saying what most people are thinking but are afraid to say..

Again, I haven't seen Chappie but boy did Elyisum disappoint me. At least it wasn't Transformers 2 bad but it was bad in a 'I'm a teen and I've got these rad doodles in my notebook' kinda a way.

However, I'm not trying to write him off…yet. Unlike Faraci.
 
critics are all well and good until they dislike a movie youre looking forward to

Eh, they panned films in the past who are now considered classics. I'm not saying this is the case here. I usually go see the films first then go back and read both the positive and negative reviews. After Ebert passed away, my list for critics is down to only three. Oh lawd.
 
With Neill, I think he's saying what most people are thinking but are afraid to say..

Again, I haven't seen Chappie but boy did Elyisum disappoint me. At least it wasn't Transformers 2 bad but it was bad in a 'I'm a teen and I've got these rad doodles in my notebook' kinda a way.

However, I'm not trying to write him off…yet. Unlike Faraci.
I'm not going to write him off yet either. That's a premature move in my opinion.
 
Elysium, even though I love it, felt less personal because of the bigger budget and the fact that it probably had to be more mainstream, it still had fantastic visuals, solid acting & really cool action.
 
I want to see this in the theaters and will regardless of the critics or my own feeling that ELYSIUM was less than compelling. What I won't do is write this film off because Neil is working "themes" he's done before. What I say to that criticism is 1. Many directors often do exactly that... Make films which work with some theme or themes that they have done in the past. 2. I think it's more a case of people not liking the particular themes in Neil's films to which I say... At least he's one director out of so many that work in Science Fiction, that is tackling the issues and themes that he does. Kudos I say. It's not like every other Science Fiction/Fantasy film is covering this ground. We had SNOWPIERCER... And that's pretty much it when it comes to recent films of the genre. So I think I will judge the film on it's own merits. Now some of the reviews I have read seem bad. It sounds like he overestimated how well people in the wider world were going to embrace this NINJA group as performers on film. I will have to see for myself.
 
I wouldn't call him a hack. Maybe a little too self-indulgent. Great sense for visuals but less so for story.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"