Neill Blomkamp’s next project... ELYSIUM?

Rate the Movie

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not sure what I'm looking at in this pic from wired.
dystopian.jpg
 
Obviously it's.....umm.... Neill Blomkamp. They didn't get a good angle.
 
I was joking with my response. I wonder if that was Wired or Blomkamp's idea to do that to his pic.
 
Variety:
So close and yet so far, the colony of Elysium hovers just outside Earth’s atmosphere, a mere 19-minute shuttle ride away but figurative light years for the downtrodden proletarian masses of the 22nd century. So begins the much-anticipated second feature from South African writer-director Neill Blomkamp, whose 2009 “District 9” was one of the few recent sci-fi/fantasy pics (along with “Inception” and “Children of Men”) that deserved to be called visionary. Here, Blomkamp delivers a less dazzling but nonetheless highly absorbing and intelligent, socially conscious bit of futurism, made on a much larger scale than its $30 million predecessor, but with lots of the same scrappy ingenuity. Result confirms the helmer as much more than a one-hit wunderkind.
The Wrap:
Science-fiction is, of course, often used as a vehicle to tell stories about the here and now disguised as tales of the future -- and lest anyone miss out on Blomkamp’s thoughts on contemporary immigration and health care, “Elysium” underlines and italicizes them before going over them again in yellow highlighter.
Blomkamp is a master of creating action out of a grimy, quotidian kind of next-gen hi-tech, but when it comes to metaphors, he prefers the sledgehammer.
Hollywood Reporter:
A politically charged flight of speculative fiction makes an exciting launch, only to tailspin into an ungainly crash landing in Elysium. Coming in the wake of After Earth and White House Down, this marks Sony's third big-budget disappointment of the summer, the problems this time stemming from very deflating final act script problems that one would think could have been easily identified. Like Neill Blomkamp's out-of-nowhere sci-fi triumph with District 9 four years back, this one puts rugged action and convincing visual effects at the service of a sociologically-pointed haves-and-have-nots storyline, but when the air goes out of this balloon, it goes fast.
Screen:

As with his 2009 debut, the Best Picture-nominated District 9, writer-director Neill Blomkamp’s follow-up mixes sci-fi action and social parable — not consistently successfully but always emphatically. Recalling Mad Max 2 (aka The Road Warrior) by way of WALL-E, Elysium is best appreciated as an intense, brawny, effects-heavy spectacle that benefits from Matt Damon’s sympathetic performance. Unfortunately, the film’s higher aspirations — dramatic grandeur, political commentary — never come across as anything less than heavy-handed, more enjoyably overblown than genuinely captivating.

 
Just saw a commercial with a qoute from Rolling Stone saying "the director of District 9 has done it again". Even though this wasn't shot in IMAX, I'm looking forward to seeing it in that format.
 
Weak. Super weak. Can't believe the same guy wrote/directed D9.

Story was uber-cliched and very light but stretched out way too long. Characters were underdeveloped. Accents were awful. The visuals were amazing until they were overdone and turned into a CGI mano-a-mano fight. Bleh. So let down.

Overall 2 out of 4 stars.
 
I'm guessing this will divide people because I'm seeing lots of positive reactions on twitter now. They say some negatives but don't seem to hate it like you. Hope I like it.
 
Didn't say I hate it, I said I was let down. There's a lot of good in there but mostly on the visual side of things. Hope you like it too killer
 
Weak. Super weak. Can't believe the same guy wrote/directed D9.

Story was uber-cliched and very light but stretched out way too long. Characters were underdeveloped. Accents were awful. The visuals were amazing until they were overdone and turned into a CGI mano-a-mano fight. Bleh. So let down.

Overall 2 out of 4 stars.

That's disappointing to hear really liked the look of the trailers and thought this was going to be huge, bit of a wait till we get to see it though.
 
That's disappointing to hear really liked the look of the trailers and thought this was going to be huge, bit of a wait till we get to see it though.

Eh, Poniboy's opinion is his own.

There have been far more reactions from many other people, including others here on the hype.

We'll see though.
 
Weak. Super weak. Can't believe the same guy wrote/directed D9.

Story was uber-cliched and very light but stretched out way too long. Characters were underdeveloped. Accents were awful. The visuals were amazing until they were overdone and turned into a CGI mano-a-mano fight. Bleh. So let down.

Overall 2 out of 4 stars.


Who is this complaint pertaining to? I'm just wondering because EW mentioned that Foster's character was French.
 
Last edited:
Since Jodie Foster speaks perfect french, the complaints about her accent make me laugh, Sharlto is South African and has the accent corresponding in the movie so, oh and Poni_Boy's opinion is worth nothing considering his latest opinions.
 
Eh, Poniboy's opinion is his own.

There have been far more reactions from many other people, including others here on the hype.

We'll see though.

Exactly. This is not meant to come off snarky towards Poniboy but here's a round-up of most of the notable opinions on Elysium so far (some of this is judging from their Twitter reactions as not all of them have published their reviews yet):

MOSTLY POSITIVE:
Scott Foundas (Variety)
Tim Grierson (Screen International)
Rich Cline (Shadows on the Wall)
Kevin Jagernauth (The Playlist)
Eric Kohn (Indiewire)
Jordan Hoffman (Screen Crush)
Alonso Duralde (The Wrap)
Rene Rodriguez (Miami Herald)
David Poland (At the Movies)
Erin Darling (Popfix)
Niki Cruz (The Inquisitr)
The Shmoes Know guys (though i guess you could count Kris as somewhat mixed at 3 out of 5, Mark was 5 out of 5)

MIXED/MOSTLY NEGATIVE:
Todd McCarthy (Hollywood Reporter)
Poniboy
some random dudes on Twitter

i'm sure some more primarily negative reviews and reactions will surface soon, but so will more positive. to each his own.
 
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/02/elysium-review?abthid=51fbd83cca0167455c00000b

ign gave it a 8.5

I actually completely agree with their review which never happens. I thought the story was very clichéd but if you do it right, I have no problem with that and I thought they did it very right. The characters are awesome especially Krueger. The idea and the visuals are what steals the show here. Its a very scary real idea, that I have no problem seeing as a reality down the road. The visuals are just wow, how is he able to do such complex cg work with a small budget but then you look at movies like The Lone Ranger which I thought had very eh cg at best. He's easily up their with Michael Bay at understanding how cg works and how to get the best out of your animators. Its incredible what he and his animators are able to. This will hands down win the Oscar for best visual effects, it has absolutely no competition. My complaints are Jodie Foster, not that she is bad, she's fine but I'm not a Jodie Foster fan so she is always a complaint. And there is almost 0 humor, most of the time that doesn't bug me since that sometimes ruins the movie for me (all Marvel Studios movies) but here I was kind of hoping that it would have a little bit. Suffice to say this is an incredible film and top 5 of the year easily. 9/10
 
Since Jodie Foster speaks perfect french, the complaints about her accent make me laugh, Sharlto is South African and has the accent corresponding in the movie so, oh and Poni_Boy's opinion is worth nothing considering his latest opinions.

He isn't alone in his tastes, but I don't exactly count his disappointment as a bad sign.
 
Eh, Poniboy's opinion is his own.

There have been far more reactions from many other people, including others here on the hype.

We'll see though.

Yes I am aware of that, but I have tended to agree with most of his so I know I can trust his opinion.

But no it doesnt mean I will like it or dislike it as a result, but it can give an indication.

As I said we shall see once its out, its currently 63% on RT so it could go either way.
 
you can't put too much stock in RT percentages, at least in terms of trying to judge the merits of various polarizing films in relation to each other. it's just kind of a weird system that has an illusion of accuracy because it aggregates and uses a percent # but the results can be pretty wonky and while i think you often can get a sense of whether a movie is good or has broad appeal versus the negative alternatives, sometimes a lot of the movies in the middle ground have a score of 60% or whatever simply because they are divisive or aren't to everyone's tastes or there's a compounding critical rhetoric that just gets regurgitated by a number of the reviews (in this case, the prime complaint with Elysium seems to be "heavy handedness," but if the heavy handedness doesn't bother you then suddenly a lot of the reviews won't have much relevance to your opinion on the film). for instance, i really, really enjoyed Les Mis and The Hobbit last year and they had really mediocre RT ratings because there were a couple criticisms that bothered a lot of the reviewers (for Les Mis it was being too straightforward or bombastic an adaptation, for The Hobbit it was being too long) but didn't bother me nearly as much. with Elysium it is way too early for the RT % to really mean much of anything at all. heck, one of the 3 "rottens" is a 2.5 out of 4 and has a lot of positive things to say about the movie, so it just kind of goes to show how easily that percentage number can be skewed. you kind of have to read through the reviews and, of course, formulate your own opinion when you see the film.
 
which it seems like you plan on doing, btw, i just tend to get worked up about RT percentages and how some people pay way too much heed to that rather than what reviews are actually saying. sorry.
 
which it seems like you plan on doing, btw, i just tend to get worked up about RT percentages and how some people pay way too much heed to that rather than what reviews are actually saying. sorry.

No need to apologise, we all want everyone to love what we love but films just dont work that way. Dont worry Ive been around long to know reviews can be something you agree with or disagree with, not right or wrong.

RT is not even something I have started to look at until recently its all new to me so its kind of a new play thing. After reading reviews of some "top critics" of late of films I have watched I know my opinion can be vastly different.

Critics loved IM3 I didnt think much too it
Critics seemed to hate MoS I though it was decent
Critics were mixed about The Wolverine I loved it

So from that alone I can tell I cant learn a lot about a film from RT really but then as I said its all new to me since using this site and people talk a lot about it.

I tend to listen more to reviews from fans on here, again you still may not agree with them, but they tend to be more on my wave length.

And welcome to the boards:up:

I hope Elysium is good and I enjoy it:up:
 
i know people who basically just look at the RT percentage to gauge whether they will watch a movie or not. "oh, less than 70%? no way i'm seeing that..." and then they'll say stuff like "i heard such and such wasn't very good," even though such and such may have had like a 68% RT rating and maybe over half the rottens weren't even that negative, they just had a few more caveats than positives. but i get it, some people don't like to spend time actually reading film criticism and just want the quick-fix solution to finding out whether a movie is considered "good" or "bad." me, i enjoy reading reviews (and i write them, too), even if i end up completely disagreeing with them, so it unfortunately bothers me a little when people i know can be so reductive or glib about it because they glanced at a number on some website. so i bottle it up and then vent about it on messageboards :woot:.
 
i know people who basically just look at the RT percentage to gauge whether they will watch a movie or not. "oh, less than 70%? no way i'm seeing that..." and then they'll say stuff like "i heard such and such wasn't very good," even though such and such may have had like a 68% RT rating and maybe over half the rottens weren't even that negative, they just had a few more caveats than positives. but i get it, some people don't like to spend time actually reading film criticism and just want the quick-fix solution to finding out whether a movie is considered "good" or "bad." me, i enjoy reading reviews (and i write them, too), even if i end up completely disagreeing with them, so it unfortunately bothers me a little when people i know can be so reductive or glib about it because they glanced at a number on some website. so i bottle it up and then vent about it on messageboards :woot:.

Oh yeah I hear you, the way RT works is odd, I know reviews get to say if they think it is rotten or fresh but some site can score a 3/5 and say fresh and another 3/5 and say rotten, so its highly subjective and open to interpretation and manipulation.

And I would never judge going to watch it at the cinema from a review, thats just mad, unless maybe every single person panned it, critics and fans. But there are very films that bad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"