This person is the kind of person that would keep wishing on a monkey paw. The rest of Niell Blomkamp's movies have been not great, and a sequel would probably be so bad to make the original worse.
I was Die Antwoord enjoyer until recently when I learned all the recent controversies they’ve been stirring up since at least 2013. It’s worth researching if you’re still riding off that old 2008 MySpace/OG Website high like I was.
In comparison to District 9, Chappie was pretty awful. I was VERY excited for it but left disappointed. It was so campy and...unrealistic? That sounds stupid to say in the same breath as praise for District 9 but I don't mean the settings, I mean the stories. The character writing and plot were just not great.
That was more a scene of his final night of work. It was still kinda weird, but they set it up so that it was supposed to show that he was working all night, every night on the project, and finally hit the right "code" to make it work.
Why? The first one was very experimental. They release a second one they are given two bad choices. They continue the original cinematic vision but being a sequel the plot suffers and it fails or they try something new and it falls flat.
Why ruin a perfectly, self contained, what I would consider masterpiece by trying to expand the universe.
I would be ok with exploring the world some more but maybe in more traditional heros tale type outline. Even then half the audience will think your getting, excuse the bad joke, "district 10."
Tbh, the sequel is the aliens come back and conquer humanity, but since the whole thing is a metaphor for apartheid politics, the sequel plays into a bit of a different narrative than anti-racism.
Though it'd honestly be pretty great if the sequel was the aliens don't come back, but Earth tears itself apart worrying about what will happen if they do.
I'd say more refugees than immigration per se, but yeah, it's about that too. The great thing about a metaphor about "othering" people is it can apply to a lot of things. Racism, immigration, jingoism, homophobia, etc.
It's taken mostly as a metaphor for apartheid because of the, you know, country and the apartheid they did in recent history and the apartheid done in the movie, but there's plenty of meaning to be found in "don't be a bigot and don't let people starve out of neglect and spite."
Actually I thought the aliens wouldn't come back to conquer earth, that would be boring and a tired trope. I thought it would be about rescuing thier people, and everyone on earth just assumes they are here to invade.
I'm no screenwriter, and I'm not sure what social commentary would be appropriate, but it just sounds like a fun movie. And Wikus deserves some closure.
Not just experimental, but an afterthought made with leftovers of a partially made movie that production failed on.
The location, props, cgi, and even parts of the story were the scraps of the Halo movie that Peter Jackson started to make before abandoning it.
The result was an excellent movie, but the circumstances of slapping a new coat of paint onto a half produced film make for a very unique and hard to replicate product.
Privately owned studios should all be run at a loss as a point of pride among the wealthy. "Oh, you're funding a popular film? For profit? How embarrassing for you."
[edit] I misinterpreted the intent of this comment to mean the complete opposite - the person I am replying to is NOT saying that there's no sequel because Hollywood is risk averse so my first paragraph is arguing a point they're not making, my bad
I agree with the statement but I feel like you have it backwards. Introducing a new cast and story is a risk, remaking or filming a sequel of a beloved movie is the safe bet they keep falling back on.
Maybe I'm in the minority here but I'm content that there's no sequel to District 9. The story was told well and had a proper ending. I loved the characters and world building but I don't need another story set there unless it was planned that way from the start.
Maybe it'd be good. I'd love to be wrong. I've just been burned way too many times by hamfisted sequels to get excited anymore - especially when the original came out as long as this one
I interpreted your comment in the context of this post to mean you thought there wasn't a sequel to District 9 because Hollywood didn't want to take the risk
Nah, I'm coming down hard on sequels for their own sake. I only really want to see a sequel to anything if the writer has something to say. With some sequels the point of the thing is the spectacle itself (looking at you, John Wick), so that's alright I guess. There's room for sequels, but it has to have some reason to exist beyond bankability.
Yesterday was a good Lemmy day for me. I had another great series of conversations on another post with people I didn't agree with and everyone was respectful of each other's opinions.
Ooh my bad, then we are absolutely on the same page. There's plenty of good sequels but the majority are worse than the original (in my opinion at least)
You nailed it with the last sentence. Some sequels are made for the love of it and that doesn't necessarily mean they're good films BUT the cashgrab films almost never are.
It's a shame the spotlight is being monopolized by big studios doing reboots and sequels in an age of democratized creative tools and access. Indie and low budget should be having a renaissance. There's some good stuff coming out of Bollywood too now.
One of my favorite movies I watched recently was Anyone Else But Me by Joel Haver and it only had a $4000 budget. A good script and good actors go such a long way
I raise you the complete Marvel trash heap and several individual "sequels" made in the last 5 or so years. Neill Blomkamp has so many ideas, literally dozens of teasers are on YouTube. Most of them are seriously awesome. Do we really have to wait until all the geriatric Hollywood dinosaurs are dead? And with then their talentless and greedy "protégés"?
Yeah and I feel its problem was on the writing and directing. The concept was there but you just didn’t care about characters. They should’ve made the first half a romance, and then the second half about vengeance/redemption.
I feel like the "rich live in the sky, poor live on the wasted earth" was over the top. As opposed to S1 of Altered Carbon which was way better at addressing this trope. The meths were depraved, but you could kinda understand it --- they've been alive for so long, but want to continue to "feel alive" through ever more extreme experiences.
2&3 are good. they expanded the lore to be much more interesting, made agent smith a much more compelling character, threw away the stupid "chosen one" and "freedom fighter" cliches in favor of making the movies more about humanity's ability to choose rather than compliance and accepting inevitability, and had amazing scenes. i honestly don't know what people were expecting to see from those movies, but i bet every idea they would come up with instead would be stupid or redundant.
So I saw a blurb about this recently and it seems unfounded. Only 1 place was reporting anything and nowhere else online would corroborate it.
The last known news before that was the project is currently on hold for an unknown length of time. It may or may not get made. It's far from certain yet.
Let's not dream about that. Lately, all the remakes and reenvisions have been nothing but a quick cash grab and extreme disappointment to all those who loved original works.
A sequel called District 10 has been written. About a year ago Neill Blomkamp said he’s unsure about making it now but believes it might be made in the future.
Idk why everyone like this movie the main character was a pos until the very last sec and did a good thing in the end which costs him nothing much, i mean that is not a bad thing as sometimes lead's being bad good be cool but the movie really want everyone to feel for him and like him fuck him, fuck that and fuck the movie .
What was the allegory of the original Stargate movie, actually? Something about the working class overcoming monarchy, maybe? TBH it kind of played off as US Military intervention in the Middle East propaganda... Yeah that's probably it.
Good God there are so many assumptions about my character based on this post. Thought I was escaping the Reddit hive mind mentality coming here, but seems like it’s the same shit in another place.
The message is fine. A refugee story. The plight of the impoverished. Fine. It might have landed better for me if there were more sci-fi aspects involved.
I ... actually kinda agree with you.
I get that 'if alien then sci-fi' is the norm for designating sci-fi (like, if it contains science fiction then it's sci-fi, regardless of the plots focus, the entire thing is classified by the setting).
But my head-canon also focuses on what the story is about.
If I could take out the sci-fi elements & the story wouldn't change (ie could be set in today's Earth), then I only see it as -fi. But also the story could be set on today's Earth but with one single smol sci-fi element (a piece of tech of sorts), and if the entire plot focuses on it, then I understand it as sci-fi.
The most controversial example of this (just in my head) wound be Star Wars. Much later in the extended universe things changed, but the movies started out as pure westerns, like, the same story could have been told as a western and especially the screenplay parts wouldn't have to change, just the backdrop (Im not being literal, but not far from it).
Space sci-fi in general has the tendency to use the dimensions in space like if everything was happening on Earth.
I'd trade the fast and furious series for a pack of cigarettes and a sixer.
And I don't even smoke or drink
We can just throw the series away. No trade necessary.
I’d trade them for a swift slap on the ass
This person is the kind of person that would keep wishing on a monkey paw. The rest of Niell Blomkamp's movies have been not great, and a sequel would probably be so bad to make the original worse.
What the FUCK did you just say about Chappie???
Chappie was bad, and I say that as a Die Antwoord enjoyer.
I was Die Antwoord enjoyer until recently when I learned all the recent controversies they’ve been stirring up since at least 2013. It’s worth researching if you’re still riding off that old 2008 MySpace/OG Website high like I was.
damn. well, they weren't the classiest bunch, so im not surprised, but i am disappointed
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Antwoord#Controversies
Aw man. Looks like I won't be able to enjoy them anymore.
I figured it'd be Ninja getting accused sexual assault so even though it pisses me off, I'm not shocked
I was, however, surprised to read the accusations against Yolandi....from DANNY BROWN no less.
I hate Die Antwoord, but Chappie is a good boy and shouldn't be lumped in with them!
In comparison to District 9, Chappie was pretty awful. I was VERY excited for it but left disappointed. It was so campy and...unrealistic? That sounds stupid to say in the same breath as praise for District 9 but I don't mean the settings, I mean the stories. The character writing and plot were just not great.
Unfortunately, Bloomkamp is one of those good directors that mistakenly think they are also good writers (See also: Zack Snyder, M. Knight Shyamalan).
Jesus you are so right about those last two.
yeah, a dude "figuring out" complete AI in a single night of hardcore coding was super weird
That was more a scene of his final night of work. It was still kinda weird, but they set it up so that it was supposed to show that he was working all night, every night on the project, and finally hit the right "code" to make it work.
It was nothing original, just Short Circuit with guns
There's nothing wrong with that. Johnny 5 ALIVE
Not great doesn't mean bad. I had fun with Gran Turismo
He just needs a good writer by his side to keep him in check and reign him in.
Why? The first one was very experimental. They release a second one they are given two bad choices. They continue the original cinematic vision but being a sequel the plot suffers and it fails or they try something new and it falls flat.
Why ruin a perfectly, self contained, what I would consider masterpiece by trying to expand the universe.
I would be ok with exploring the world some more but maybe in more traditional heros tale type outline. Even then half the audience will think your getting, excuse the bad joke, "district 10."
Most sequels are sub-par, agreed. But this story does seem half-finished at the end of the film, a sequel would practically write itself.
Tbh, the sequel is the aliens come back and conquer humanity, but since the whole thing is a metaphor for apartheid politics, the sequel plays into a bit of a different narrative than anti-racism.
Though it'd honestly be pretty great if the sequel was the aliens don't come back, but Earth tears itself apart worrying about what will happen if they do.
I'd say more refugees than immigration per se, but yeah, it's about that too. The great thing about a metaphor about "othering" people is it can apply to a lot of things. Racism, immigration, jingoism, homophobia, etc.
It's taken mostly as a metaphor for apartheid because of the, you know, country and the apartheid they did in recent history and the apartheid done in the movie, but there's plenty of meaning to be found in "don't be a bigot and don't let people starve out of neglect and spite."
Actually I thought the aliens wouldn't come back to conquer earth, that would be boring and a tired trope. I thought it would be about rescuing thier people, and everyone on earth just assumes they are here to invade.
I'm no screenwriter, and I'm not sure what social commentary would be appropriate, but it just sounds like a fun movie. And Wikus deserves some closure.
They said before making mortal combat annihilation
Touché
Not just experimental, but an afterthought made with leftovers of a partially made movie that production failed on.
The location, props, cgi, and even parts of the story were the scraps of the Halo movie that Peter Jackson started to make before abandoning it.
The result was an excellent movie, but the circumstances of slapping a new coat of paint onto a half produced film make for a very unique and hard to replicate product.
I would trade six monkey paws for Hollywood to stop being so risk averse
But that’s where all the rich people pour their money dude
WON’T SOMEONE THINK ABOUT THE RICH PEOPLE 😂
Privately owned studios should all be run at a loss as a point of pride among the wealthy. "Oh, you're funding a popular film? For profit? How embarrassing for you."
Folly Studios
[edit] I misinterpreted the intent of this comment to mean the complete opposite - the person I am replying to is NOT saying that there's no sequel because Hollywood is risk averse so my first paragraph is arguing a point they're not making, my bad
I agree with the statement but I feel like you have it backwards. Introducing a new cast and story is a risk, remaking or filming a sequel of a beloved movie is the safe bet they keep falling back on.Maybe I'm in the minority here but I'm content that there's no sequel to District 9. The story was told well and had a proper ending. I loved the characters and world building but I don't need another story set there unless it was planned that way from the start.
Maybe it'd be good. I'd love to be wrong. I've just been burned way too many times by hamfisted sequels to get excited anymore - especially when the original came out as long as this one
I agree with everything you said, so I'm not sure what I've got backwards ?
I interpreted your comment in the context of this post to mean you thought there wasn't a sequel to District 9 because Hollywood didn't want to take the risk
Nah, I'm coming down hard on sequels for their own sake. I only really want to see a sequel to anything if the writer has something to say. With some sequels the point of the thing is the spectacle itself (looking at you, John Wick), so that's alright I guess. There's room for sequels, but it has to have some reason to exist beyond bankability.
Yesterday was a good Lemmy day for me. I had another great series of conversations on another post with people I didn't agree with and everyone was respectful of each other's opinions.
Yeah I think that's how people normally act, the toxic online dynamic is hardly inevitable, like we're evolving into crabs or something
Ooh my bad, then we are absolutely on the same page. There's plenty of good sequels but the majority are worse than the original (in my opinion at least)
You nailed it with the last sentence. Some sequels are made for the love of it and that doesn't necessarily mean they're good films BUT the cashgrab films almost never are.
It's a shame the spotlight is being monopolized by big studios doing reboots and sequels in an age of democratized creative tools and access. Indie and low budget should be having a renaissance. There's some good stuff coming out of Bollywood too now.
One of my favorite movies I watched recently was Anyone Else But Me by Joel Haver and it only had a $4000 budget. A good script and good actors go such a long way
I raise you the complete Marvel trash heap and several individual "sequels" made in the last 5 or so years. Neill Blomkamp has so many ideas, literally dozens of teasers are on YouTube. Most of them are seriously awesome. Do we really have to wait until all the geriatric Hollywood dinosaurs are dead? And with then their talentless and greedy "protégés"?
You're not thinking this through. Bring the Krill into the F&F movies.
And they can all be a big happy FAMILY !!!
I was so excited for Elysium because I thought it would be the spiritual sequel.
Yeah and I feel its problem was on the writing and directing. The concept was there but you just didn’t care about characters. They should’ve made the first half a romance, and then the second half about vengeance/redemption.
And it was...pretty one-dimensional.
I feel like the "rich live in the sky, poor live on the wasted earth" was over the top. As opposed to S1 of Altered Carbon which was way better at addressing this trope. The meths were depraved, but you could kinda understand it --- they've been alive for so long, but want to continue to "feel alive" through ever more extreme experiences.
Altered carbon had excellent source material to work from. As much as I liked the series, the book soars in comparison.
I’d really like them to make a sequel to “The Matrix”
Me too buddy, me too.
2&3 are good. they expanded the lore to be much more interesting, made agent smith a much more compelling character, threw away the stupid "chosen one" and "freedom fighter" cliches in favor of making the movies more about humanity's ability to choose rather than compliance and accepting inevitability, and had amazing scenes. i honestly don't know what people were expecting to see from those movies, but i bet every idea they would come up with instead would be stupid or redundant.
They are making a district 10.
There's been vague rumours for 15 years now. I'll believe it when I see it.
So I saw a blurb about this recently and it seems unfounded. Only 1 place was reporting anything and nowhere else online would corroborate it.
The last known news before that was the project is currently on hold for an unknown length of time. It may or may not get made. It's far from certain yet.
Like irl or a movie?
guess you're not family.
Let's not dream about that. Lately, all the remakes and reenvisions have been nothing but a quick cash grab and extreme disappointment to all those who loved original works.
A sequel called District 10 has been written. About a year ago Neill Blomkamp said he’s unsure about making it now but believes it might be made in the future.
Christopher Nolan disagrees.
Yes, google it, I was amazed too.
Huh?
google search
No thanks. I've seen the rest of his movies.
... wait... you guys wouldn't trade Fury & Fastest movies for free?
Turn back from family (and their 58 gear manual car transmissions) and return to space monke!
@01010101011 https://www.imdb.com/video/vi3896050201/?playlistId=tt1136608&ref_=tt_pr_ov_vi
Oh fuck yes! Any time!
I really really want a super 8 sequel or triology in general (so 2 more movies)
Think it could be pretty good but maybe they didn’t think it out that far.
Anyone got a list of sci fi movies based off a book series that just never made another movie after the first before I ask GPT? lol
Does he have different eyeballs.
In this scene, yes
Just don't make it as awful as Chappie was. Damn, what a infuriatingly bad flick.
I liked Chappie, it was good
It was one of my most favourite movie of all time
Boring ass movie
Idk why everyone like this movie the main character was a pos until the very last sec and did a good thing in the end which costs him nothing much, i mean that is not a bad thing as sometimes lead's being bad good be cool but the movie really want everyone to feel for him and like him fuck him, fuck that and fuck the movie .
This movie was okay, but I don’t really consider it to be sci-fi. It’s more a political drama.
Yeah, it's not a-political like real sci fi like Star Trek
What was the allegory of the original Stargate movie, actually? Something about the working class overcoming monarchy, maybe? TBH it kind of played off as US Military intervention in the Middle East propaganda... Yeah that's probably it.
Also: Starship Troopers is not just about killing bugs
It's abut mating with them and creating a new race (ie space diplomacy).
Imagine a human capable of butt-to-orbit warfare.
How dare sci-fi explore political issues, like the tendency of humanity to resort to othering people that make them uncomfortable.
I’m fine with it, it’s just that the sci-fi is a thin veneer for the political message.
Gonna be real champ, there's a ton of sci-fi in the movie, it sure sounds like you just don't like hearing the message.
Good God there are so many assumptions about my character based on this post. Thought I was escaping the Reddit hive mind mentality coming here, but seems like it’s the same shit in another place.
The message is fine. A refugee story. The plight of the impoverished. Fine. It might have landed better for me if there were more sci-fi aspects involved.
I actually said you didn't like hearing the message, not what the message was.
It can be both.
counter point: cool robots
I ... actually kinda agree with you.
I get that 'if alien then sci-fi' is the norm for designating sci-fi (like, if it contains science fiction then it's sci-fi, regardless of the plots focus, the entire thing is classified by the setting).
But my head-canon also focuses on what the story is about.
If I could take out the sci-fi elements & the story wouldn't change (ie could be set in today's Earth), then I only see it as -fi. But also the story could be set on today's Earth but with one single smol sci-fi element (a piece of tech of sorts), and if the entire plot focuses on it, then I understand it as sci-fi.
The most controversial example of this (just in my head) wound be Star Wars. Much later in the extended universe things changed, but the movies started out as pure westerns, like, the same story could have been told as a western and especially the screenplay parts wouldn't have to change, just the backdrop (Im not being literal, but not far from it).
Space sci-fi in general has the tendency to use the dimensions in space like if everything was happening on Earth.