Film Review: District 9
District 9, USA 2009, Dir: Neill Blomkamp
District 9 is certainly an original sci-fi thriller. Sure, the giant ship hovering above the city is from Independence Day, the hand-held style from Cloverfield, and the aliens straight out of H.R. Giger’s sketch book, but it is set in Johannesburg, not in New York or Washington. Any South African film making it to number one at the US box-office is a turn up for the books, but one that takes the Americans on at their own overblown, CGI-laden game? This is a first.
The film follows Wikus Van De Merwe (Sharlto Copley) who works in the alien control department of MNU, a private contractor working for the South African government. Twenty years ago, a massive alien vessel arrived in Johannesburg, filled with starving aliens. These refugees were housed in District 9, a slum on the edge of the city, and it is now Wikus’s job to move them to a new camp where they can be better controlled. While evicting aliens from their homes, he accidentally sprays himself with a mysterious liquid that starts transforming him into an alien. Now Wikus must fight to survive as he is hunted by MNU.
Much of the film is made up of news clips and interviews with experts and witnesses, and the rest is in a faux-documentary style making it feel very real. Throughout the plot, just as in the real South Africa, the shadow of apartheid is never far away. The shacks the aliens live in were not built by an art department with a vivid imagination; they were recently abandoned homes of black families moved into government housing.
The analogy between the forced segregation of aliens (or “prawns” as they are referred to) and that of the black population is hardly subtle, but it is still eerie to see South Africans, both white and black, being so suspicious and discriminatory towards another group. Even Wikus, a seemingly harmless and keen guy in the mould of Murray from Flight of the Conchords, happily aborts dozens of incubating alien foetuses without a second thought in one troubling scene. It must be noted that xenophobia is not a thing of South Africa’s past, as repeated attacks on Zimbabweans attest, making the imagery here even more potent.
Even the most politically correct members of an audience will start to consider whether they could be welcoming to a race of seven-foot tall insectoid creatures. Such Alien Nation-style philosophical questions are quickly sidelined when the film moves on from its interesting set-up to become a reasonable action movie, as Wikus is chased by the MNU and a Nigerian gang. This is somewhat of a disappointment after showing such promise – even with the cool alien weaponry involved.
District 9 is the feature directorial debut of Neill Blomkamp, previously best known for the Citroen ad with the body-popping, transformer car. His training as a 3D animator shows in the terrific special effects. The technological march of CGI means that a medium-budget independent film like this can now compete with the top US studios on effects, which just wouldn’t have been possible ten years ago. Having Hollywood heavyweight Peter Jackson onboard as producer must have helped; his power to get geeks to do his bidding is matched only by George Lucas.
While it is does descend into a typical shootout finale, District 9 is essential viewing for sci-fi nuts and anyone looking for a fresh take on the genre. A creepy vision of the future making a point about the present, like all the best sci-fi.
I saw this film and I found it to be sloppy and in reality a third person shooter game with brilliant special fx and not much more but alot of unanswered questions, which is shame because it started out with more potential.
The criminals were an over the top, played out, african warlord trope. Why it even needed to be pointed out that they were Nigerians was beyond me, naming the criminal warlord after the former Nigerian president was distasteful and unecessary.
All the pundits were white, as were most of the people in the MNU offices whilst the black troopers refer to Wikus as ‘boss’ and other black people are street extras…why?! There is no summary of what happened in SA’s most pivotal political years. The aliens land in 1982 – how did apartheid die? Did Mandela stay in prision? Why is Moesha’s dad the only Black person who looks like he has power yet does nothing but strut around on the news? Sexual acts are refered to and people in the cinema laughed but we never find out if the prawns even have genders let alone the necessary equipment? In fact apart from the one prawn and his son the rest are hardly ‘humanised’. Frankly, I prefer the ideas in my sci-fi well done and not half-baked! On the upside though blacks and whites were blown up and shot down in equal measure so at least it’s not racist there.
Hmm, Alice. You seem not to be reviewing the movie, or even commenting on the review on the site, but responding to my opinion.
No opinion is irrelevant-it’s how the movie struck me. If I found the movie shallow, I found the movie shallow. Big mushroom-shaped spaceships, arthropod-like aliens, transformer finales and slow transmogrification…it’s all been done before and better.
Also, you do not appear to have understood what I wrote.
Those were NOT Nigerians in District 9. Not in their language, not in their culture. The only thing that they had in common with Nigerians was race. A caricature or over-the-top representation is one thing, but not using an entire different race to represent another. It means they cannot distinguish between different people of colour or that they think we are interchangeable. I’m glad you don’t find it racist, but maybe if you were Nigerian you’d feel at least a little discomfort.
It is one thing to represent Italians as Mafiosi, but it would be another thing to stick say Spanish or German people in a movie, have them speak Spanish or German, and then say they were Italian Mafiosi. It would be like saying Europeans are interchangeable. I’m surprised that you can’t see this. It isn’t just an issue of one-dimensional portrayal. It’s non-portrayal.
If anyone wants to say that Nigerians are criminals in a movie, that’s fine. We can have that debate. But that’s not what’s happening here.
But, given the box office reaction most people loved it. Which is, for me, a scary thought.
I watched District 9 this weekend and enjoyed it immensely. Having experienced apartheid at first hand I can see clear parallels between the prawns and the way blacks were treated during that period. It made uncomfortable viewing at times because I have heard the very same language being used and the same treatment being meted out to friends and family.
I agree the portrayal of the “Nigerians” was definitely one dimensional and focused solely on very negative aspects of human behaviour. However, all the humans were cast as villans. The whites for profiteering and propaganda and the blacks for being unsympathetic to the group that has assumed their position at the foot of the ladder.
Ultimately it was an allegory for a lesson we all need to learn and act on: It could be you. There are those who abuse power, those who stand by and do nothing and those who are victimised. Those positions may be reversed at any given moment and who will stand against it.
Far from shallow.
I saw the first half of the film and the most pertinent aspect that struck me was the environmental and political context of white and black africans joining together in condemnation of another species… thus possibly reinforcing the idea that we needs a common enemy to bring people together (probably true).. In the sequel (our reality) lets make the next enemy the environment, or other foreigners (people who are not like us)… then we can share our fear, fight a non existent common enemy, and then come back together (hopefully without scapegoats) in the knowledge that our shared fear brings about reactive action… fact is stranger than fiction and in this case possibly alot more insightful and entertaining…
I had read reviews of District 9 before watching the movie and had heard of the controversy. But I watched the movie and my opinion is that District 9 is not racist. The film is a mock docu-drama, with footage of reporters commenting on what’s happening in District 9. The commentators are for the most part white and part of the politic/scientific elite. Most of what they say is pure propaganda: the way they explicitly name the Nigerians as gang leaders and how they suggest that Nigerians may be having sexual intercourse with the aliens. The proof of that: when they start chasing Wikus (hero of the movie, and white), they say that’s he’s also been having sex with aliens! That is also a total fabrication.
I’d agree that the Nigerian characters are over the top but gangsters are baddies and in the movies baddies engage in outrageous behaviour. I mean: do you think that all Italians are all Mafiosi for example? White people in the movie are not portrayed in a better light than blacks: they are a bunch of liars who only think of profit and conduct inhumane experiments. The movie plays on the stereotypes associated with each group. It doesn’t shy away from racism but is not racist.
I also disagree with the comment that the prawns were proxies for blacks. I think says more about the people who have that thought than anything else. District 9 is set in a post-apartheid world and is a metaphor for the existence of refugee camps in general. It conveys the idea that any being placed in such circumstances (forced to live in a ghetto and vilified) would end up acting like the aliens do (scavenging, etc…)
And finally, despite its pretence, District 9 is a (very good) summer blockbuster, made and marketed as such. After the first 45 minutes or so, it’s pure action movie. So to accuse it of being shallow is irrelevant.
Actually, District 9 is one of the most racist films I’ve ever seen. It’s shallow, it uses stereotypes and worn out cliches of science fiction.
I was looking forward to this film and I saw it on opening night.
To start with I was horrified by the portrayal of “Nigerians”-they were not speaking any Nigerian language and they were reduced to the level of mindless superstitious thugs.
It was so obvious that the “prawns” were proxies for blacks (especially since their language was similar to Xhosa with the clicks) and they went to town making them look destructive, dirty and other.
Out of all of them only one was “intelligent”, the token not-like-the-others uncle Tom.
The treatment of women was non-existent in the narrative. The only major female character was only worthy of looking pretty and shedding a few tears.
I could go on, but the long and short is that this film was a big disappointment.