Chappie isn't even out, and I'm already disappointed

[Jack Action]

or maybe that was, in fact, the actual point of the movie

You mean, the incredibly subtle subtext that highlighted the underlying metaphoric theme of ... nah, I think you were right the first time.

Hey, what's more likely: That this guy's the one glorious ************ who'll finally get rid of the "good underdogs snatch unlikely victory from the iron grip of tyrannical overlords" thing, or that the movie simply failed at making the designated good guys likeable?

Because tbh I'd love it if it was the first, but I don't have that much faith in anyone.

 

[Vault101]

well desperate people do desperate things, if you're dying you'll do what you can to survive and-

I'm not sure I want to have this debate. not over a fictional movie

Also, the robots didn't do all the work because then there would've been no movie.

heh well there you go, the "rich oppressing the poor" narrative works perfectly fine when there are actual *reasons* for that power structure ie: we've always enjoyed nice things at the expense/labour of someone else (hell we do NOW)

but if you take away that component ie: labour then its all arbitrary (like in Elysium)

that said though there is the real life concern of how in our increasingly automated world if it will create more disparity or solve it

 

[Michael Kerig]

Okay, I guess I'll be the voice of dissent to all this Neil hate. I think Chappie Looks great, I'm always thrilled to see science, in particular the ideas of aliens and artificial intelligence, portrayed in a positive light in fiction. Our stories shape how we view and interact with the world, and stories where aliens and AI turn always turn out to be unstoppable forces bent on the destruction of humanity will be harmful to any peaceful efforts in first contact with either. The garbage that is Transcendence is an example of what I mean. I mean, the movie glorifies domestic terrorism, and essentially promotes the idea of assassinating scientists.
So positive depictions of A.I.s in movies good in my book.

Also, I think it's worth pointing out, that Elysium was a thrilling ride right up to its ending, where it did commit a sin by oversimplify things tremendously. I myself was disappointed that Neil took the easy ending, especially after the much more complex ending of District 9, that leaves you unsure about the future, of not only Wikus, but all of the prawns, and even the Earth. But I mean, really, everything else was excellently shot, designed, and acted, it deserves some love for that. And to be honest, movies with more complex endings, that aren't Hollywood happy, get them chopped anyways. Look at I Am Legend, or Dodgeball, the films has originally had different darker endings, test audiences didn't like it, the endings were changed. Dodgeball, handled it better, making the ending a kind of farce, I Am Legend entirely betrayed the source material.

It also should be said that Neil himself has said that he didn't do the best job with Elysium. http://www.ew.com/article/2015/02/27/neill-blomkamp-says-he-didnt-make-good-enough-film-elysium
The fact that he can recognize and admit to his mistakes already makes him a better director then J.J. Abrams, the overrated hack that effed up Star Trek and is going to eff up Star Wars. Neil Blomkamp would've been a thousand times better for either.

 

[Darks63]

Don't discount it yet. The movie Short Circuit has a similar premise and its a great fun movie. Even the military fighting parts are funny and witty especially when he fights his fellow robots.

 

[Callate]

I didn't mind the thematic stuff in Elysium. The "fatal encryption" drove me nuts, though. ("Let me get this straight, this encryption doesn't prevent someone from copying the data, using the data, or even recognizing what the data is supposed to do remotely... So what, exactly, is the point of doing this from a practical standpoint, other than MacGuffining the plot...?")

From what I've seen, Blomkamp's strength isn't plot. It's the ability to make fantastic science fiction technology seem plausible, and even mundane, in the hands of the occupants of his world. When you think of how many sci-fi movies have to have their moments of, "Whoa, flying spacecar! Take a moment to admire the flying spacecar! Look at the alien vista, and all the flying spacecars whizzing back and forth in front of the lens flare!" It's rather refreshing to have a filmmaker whose characters say, "Yeah, yeah, flying spacecar. Look, do you spend this much time in the real world ogling a Honda Civic?"

In that regard, Chappie may well be worth seeing- the application of a functional AI-controlled android to a plausible setting. As far as plot goes, yeah, it's sounding increasingly like the gritty reboot of Short Circuit. Still, I think it may well be worth seeing for the former.

 

[happyninja42]

So Chappie was a movie that caught my attention with its initial trailers. They seemed to be of a robot with a childish mind that was in a world not too dissimilar to our own, with the story revolving around an A.I. learning what it means to be alive and the antagonists being people who feared what he was, and what he represented. It seemed like an interesting science fiction movie that actually gave logical, understandable and even relatable motivations with the fear of the unknown.

Then the more recent trailers have started to show up where the villains are working for the government, and that Chappie was created to fight the big evil government, and I just feel as though they took a more interesting movie and turned it into a generic one right before my eyes. I know have no interest in the movie and have no intent in watching it.

Am I the only one who feels this way? I really wanted to see the movie of the first few trailers I saw, not the boring looking generic movie that's being advertised now.

Never ever ever trust trailers. Either good or bad. Trailers are put together by other people, to try and hype the movie, they will splice things together way out of sync, because in a 3 minute format, that's got the most impact and punch. Just go see the movie and judge it based on how it was actually put together.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

From what I've seen, Blomkamp's strength isn't plot. It's the ability to make fantastic science fiction technology seem plausible, and even mundane, in the hands of the occupants of his world.

This I will definitely give Blonkamp credit for. His movies are some of the few Sci-fi films I've seen in which futuristic weaponry actually feels visceral and brutal, like they've taken the already brutal power of firearms and amped them up to an almost sadistic degree, which is what you'd expect of futuristic weapons.

If they EVER manage to get the greenlight for the "Altered Carbon" movie, he'd be an awesome director for it.

 

[beastro]

My guess is that the whole "AI turning against its government masters" thing is going to be some sort of anti-militarism message being thrown into the mix.

It left me wondering what kind of movie this will actually be.

Its being made by the guy who also did District 9, so if you've seen that, you can probably guess - tons of various political messages alongside a movie with sudden but competent genre shifts.

Isn't that guy the commie lunatic who also made Elysium, aka "everything rich people have should be public property because fuck rich people who aren't me"?

Hence why I'm quite worried how he's going to handle the next Alien movie.

 

[kris40k]

This I will definitely give Blonkamp credit for. His movies are some of the few Sci-fi films I've seen in which futuristic weaponry actually feels visceral and brutal, like they've taken the already brutal power of firearms and amped them up to an almost sadistic degree, which is what you'd expect of futuristic weapons.

If they EVER manage to get the greenlight for the "Altered Carbon" movie, he'd be an awesome director for it.

I'll agree with that. While I found District 9 a "meh, worth Netflixing" movie, I will say that he made the alien weaponry holy-shit-snacky powerful. My girlfriend actually disliked the movie because of how brutal the violence was. I said "that's the point; violence is brutal and ugly and I think the director wants that to be seen."

 

[Scarim Coral]

Honestly at this point I am fed up with the troupe "fear the unknown/ AI/ machine" (The Second Renaissance from the Animatrix, X-men and etc). I mean yes it is a reaction to fear the unkown but with those films in mind, can we at least try to show some friendliness/ kind approach to the unknown as I'm pretty sure that should worked in the long run of things.

Regardless I probably will end up watching Chappie due to it being a Neill Blomkamp film.