Elysium

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Elysium

    It's interesting to see how different people's reactions are.

    The movie was okay. I can't put my finger on it, but something was off or missing about the movie. Maybe it's the fact that we get so little time relishing this futuristic world. Everything felt so rushed. Yes I know Max has five days to live, but it seemed like Blomkamp didn't allow his characters more than a second to think/talk about their predicaments. I mean Delacourt and Spider and Diego Luna did get a couple of random close-ups but mostly fell flat.

    FinalAct, you're right that on paper the stakes are all there, but watching the movie, it feels like that's not enough.

    Fwiw, the things I enjoyed the most, were Jodie Foster and William Fichtner and Krueger--but only until the moment before he gets to Elysium. They were fun and I wish Blomkamp had developed their characters more. In fact, I wish we had spent more time on Elysium and had none of the very on the nose flashback scenes. Those just seemed to drag everything down.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Elysium

      Originally posted by malfernan View Post
      I can't put my finger on it, but something was off or missing about the movie.
      Crap script?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Elysium

        Originally posted by SNAFU View Post
        Crap script?
        That just goes to show you can't conjure up a great story or write a killer script simply when asked too. There's a lot of luck, time, patience and endless rerwrites involved.

        It usually goes like this:

        a) Director has a killer (and very rare) idea/script.
        b) It's picked up and filmed.
        c) Big BO haul.
        d) They're asked by studios to write/direct something else (maybe a sequel).
        e) Low on time, they slap a story/script together.
        f) It's filmed.
        g) Film is OK, but nowhere near as good as the original.

        Same thing happened with Shayamalan and the Wachowskis.
        I'm never wrong. Reality is just stubborn.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Elysium

          Originally posted by malfernan View Post
          It's interesting to see how different people's reactions are.

          Everything felt so rushed.
          This I suspect is the ultimate weakness of the film. This is one of those films that I wouldn't have minded if it were longer. Time to allow the audience to enjoy the characters, because I really liked the characters, but you do get a lot of information crammed into a very small sliver of time.

          I thought the characters were unique and specific. I'd love to read the script because the scenes get to the point (its function) quickly-- I respect that, it's not an easy thing to do. And considering how little we see of each relationship, I give the film makers huge props for that.

          Like I said, it's a great story, but it also had to satisfy a lot of expectations.

          I would have liked to see more about this relationship that Max has with the young thief. As well as the relationship with Julio who is really not a bad guy, so much as a rebel struggling to level the playing field. I actually really liked his character and what he stood for-- he's a rebel for the enslaved, not unlike Morpheus when he tries to free humanity from the Matrix.

          I think it would have had better impact had there been a couple of more scenes with each of the relationships to really draw you in. For example; when the young thief dies, it's almost right, where we can feel this great sense of loss when he dies. It's emotional, but not quite as emotional as it could have been. A few more moments with the character might have helped. An extra scene, maybe two.

          It's the same with the John Carlyle character-- Fichtner does a great job conveying who this character is and I think he has like three maybe four scenes.

          If you really look at the story, there's a lot going on. There's a lot of story that had to be laid down and thinking back on it, they did a really great job. I mean, I don't know, I'll watch it again, but it really felt that every scene came in at the latest possible moment, and got out as early as possible. It doesn't feel like there was any fat at all.

          I think about the time they devoted to the opening sequence of Max as an orphan, and we get it. And then when they reunite they rip through it so fast that by the time we see the 'forever' tatoo, it's emotional, but not nearly as much as it could have been had we had a few moments to see them 'fall in love' again. We need to see them fall in love again to maximize the impact of the ending when he make the ultimate, selfless act-- sacrificing his life.

          That and the moment with the nun telling him how beautiful earth is when seen from Elysium, should've really come from the young girl, not the nun-- that would've made that moment when he says, "you'll never believe what I'm looking at," much more poignant. The ending was good, but it could have been so much more powerful.

          I think Armageddon and Gladiator achieved this.

          World War Z was the same, the first act felt like a freight train on napalm-- just blasting through the story. If I remember correctly the last Bourne was that way, too. All the scenes had exactly the information necessary to move the story forward and not a single word more. No fat.

          Now, if it were me, I think I might've had a co-conspirator who was actually on Elysium and feeding the information to Julio off world. It would have allowed the audience to relish the concept, because let's face it, everyone wants to see the Elysium space station and how it works-- it's cool. That's initially why they're going to see this movie. Not because of the story. It's the cool concept.

          And typically when the hero embarks on his journey a key moment is that he physically goes to the new world. Luke into space, Neo into the Matrix, Katnis into Capitol City, Rose onto the Titanic, and I think there's an audience expectation that the second act of the film would take place on Elysium, and that doesn't actually happen until the third act.

          I would've liked to have seen the second act on Elysium, and then the third act somewhere in the underbelly of Elysium. You know, descending into darkness kind of thing. I think that could've been cool.

          Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed this film. I'm not bashing it. I'm so happy for the film makers and hope it's a huge success. It's one of my favorites of the year. Maybe it has something to do with how much I like the idea of the story as much as how I loved the characters.

          The sci-fi genre has always been the genre that expresses, exposes, and examines our moral social condition. I don't mind the political references, because, to me, this is the world we reside in.

          A final point, I could absolutely see this as the next sci-fi TV/cable series.

          So I've blathered on...
          Ciao,
          FA4
          Last edited by finalact4; 08-12-2013, 07:52 PM.
          "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Elysium

            Originally posted by SNAFU View Post
            Sat through it this Friday. Just another ho-hum Hollywood action movie, loaded with action-movie cliches. Boring and predicable. What made it even more excruciating was the heavy-handed political stuff.

            And the overacting.

            Other than all that, movie was awesome.
            From the trailers, it looks like a clumsy metaphor for the US health care system and the whole 1% vs. 99% thing. The same way District 9 was a clumsy, obvious metaphor for the evils of apartheid. Or Avatar was a clumsy metaphor for US military aggression.
            Guess Blomkamp is hanging out with Cameron on Boring Theme Island.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Elysium

              Originally posted by winter dreams View Post
              ...it looks like a clumsy metaphor...
              The thing that gets me is these rich Hollywood types *are* the 1%.

              So it feels like a cynical marketing ploy (and hypocrisy) when they preach about how unfair the socio-economic system is.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Elysium

                Originally posted by SNAFU View Post
                The thing that gets me is these rich Hollywood types *are* the 1%.

                So it feels like a cynical marketing ploy (and hypocrisy) when they preach about how unfair the socio-economic system is.
                I think your idea of the 1% is a little different to mine.

                By 'Hollywood types' I'm assuming you mean the makers of Elysium? If so, how exactly is Blomkamp part of the 1%? How is Damon, Copley and Foster part of the 1%? Not every millionaire in Hollywood is part of the 1%. Not every employee who works at Sony is part of the 1%. Not every studio exec who is responsible for green-lighting movies into production is part of the 1%. I would consider people like Spielberg, Rupert Murdoch, The Koch Brothers, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, The Bush family, The British, Swedish, and Danish Royals, Hank Paulson, The Rothchilds, and the Rockefella family part of the 1%, just to name a few (I don't think it's a very big club).

                Blomkamp grew up in one of the poorest countries in the world. It's the 21st century and there's parts of South Africa that still don't have electricity or running water - and they are located next to British and U.S. owned platinum and diamond mines. Blomkamp is merely telling a story about the ever widening gap between the super-rich and the poor, which we are seeing the world over - particularly in countries like South Africa and the U.S. I don't see that as being hypocritical. In some ways I see it as being responsible. Sure, it's mainstream entertainment, first and foremost, but to insinuate that the film makers behind Elysium are all part of the 1% is not accurate in my opinion.
                Last edited by Terrance Mulloy; 08-13-2013, 05:39 PM.
                @TerranceMulloy

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Elysium

                  Originally posted by Terrance Mulloy View Post
                  I think your idea of the 1% is a little different to mine.

                  By 'Hollywood types' I'm assuming you mean the makers of Elysium? If so, how exactly is Blomkamp part of the 1%? How is Damon, Copley and Foster part of the 1%? Not every millionaire in Hollywood is part of the 1%. Not every employee who works at Sony is part of the 1%. Not every studio exec who is responsible for green-lighting movies into production is part of the 1%. I would consider people like Spielberg, Rupert Murdoch, The Koch Brothers, Bill Gates, The Bush family, The British, Swedish, and Danish Royals, Hank Paulson, The Rothchilds, and the Rockefella family part of the 1%, just to name a few (I don't think it's a very big club).
                  You may want to brush up on how percentages work. The top 1% is like $370,000 annual and above. So yeah, a lot of the people you listed are.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Elysium

                    Originally posted by dmizzo View Post
                    You may want to brush up on how percentages work. The top 1% is like $370,000 annual and above. So yeah, a lot of the people you listed are.
                    Yeah, the IRS obviously classify it a bit differently to how I have. Fair enough. But I was primarily talking about overall Net worth and assets, not necessarily annual income.

                    Sure, the film makers of Elysium are probably all wealthy, but I still fail to see how that makes someone like Blomkamp a hypocrite.
                    @TerranceMulloy

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Elysium

                      Yeah, I don't think he's a hypocrite either. No theme should be off limits because of how much you make. It only matters what you make of the theme.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Elysium

                        Originally posted by dmizzo View Post
                        I don't think he's a hypocrite either. No theme should be off limits because of how much you make. It only matters what you make of the theme.
                        Then at least make a good movie out of it. This thing *sucked*. It reminded me of another heavy-handed stinker with Brad Pitt, KILLING THEM SOFTLY. Utter waste of time. At least Pitt's latest, WORLD WAR Z, was moderately entertaining, even though it still had some cheesy "message" stuff stuck in there.

                        The thing is, when these mega-millionaires make preachy movies, finding fault with the exact socio-economic class they represent (and embrace, getting richer all the time) the irony is MASSIVE, and invites flak.

                        You say the filmmakers aren't hypocrites. Really? They are the *exact* class who would be living on Elysium and paying big bucks to hitmen to kill anyone who threatened their way of life. So they make a movie about how awful and unfair that is! You don't see the hypocrisy in that? The cynicism?

                        But the main problem is: yet another terrible movie from Hollywood. Yet another terrible movie from Matt Damon. Suggest these people direct their energies to making movies that work (badly needed escapism), instead of blabbing obvious stuff that we already know.
                        Last edited by SNAFU; 08-14-2013, 06:21 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Elysium

                          I've liked several of Damon's recent movies, including THE GREEN ZONE, THE INFORMANT, and PROMISED LAND, and am looking forward to seeing ELYSIUM. I really liked DISTRICT 9.

                          I also liked KILLING THEM SOFTLY. It's a crime-drama with a movie star as the lead, and some people (like most audiences) had their expectations dashed when it turned out it was a small, offbeat film with a point of view. Doesn't mean it was bad, by any stretch. Mainly just different. Same thing could be said of THE INFORMANT.

                          Generally speaking, I find it exciting and interesting when filmmakers actually engage with weighty issues of the day. And I agree with Terrance that it makes ELYSIUM potentially MORE compelling that it's about one of the defining issues of our time (while still kicking ass), not LESS.

                          Every movie is an argument about life, society, the world, whether we're conscious of it or not. RAIDERS, DIE HARD, and TAKEN are all movies which in my view hammer you on the head with their political/thematic agendas, but because those political/thematic agendas rest so comfortably within genre/mythic/ideological norms, most people don't even notice them. Doesn't mean they're not there, or that the movie is any more subtle or sophisticated than one where the themes are thought to be worn more clearly on the movie's sleeve, like ELYSIUM.

                          FWIW, I love RAIDERS and DIE HARD, didn't like TAKEN...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Elysium

                            Just saw it. Thought it was OK to Good.

                            SPOILERS

                            It WAS too fast, and it had way too many perspectives. So many characters with so many different agendas: Max, Frey, Delacourt, Kreuger, Julio.

                            Even though the story/script was just OK, Blomkamp really brought it to life visually. He and Abrams are the best at this in my book.
                            I'm never wrong. Reality is just stubborn.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Elysium

                              Elysium was alright. I kept my mood up by repeatedly thinking "well at least it's nowhere near as bad as Pacific Rim".

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Elysium

                                It could have been that Robocop type movie with action/comedy/social commentary. My favorite scene was when Matt Damon talks to a Parole Officer (was that it?) who is a robot. It felt so real. I can see that in the future.

                                I didn't love it. I wanted to se more of Elysium. I wanted to know why they wouldn't give health care to poor people since if they already had the machines and they cured everything (can they cure being fat and depressed?) why not cure Matt Damon (and everyone else) and throw him back to work? In fact, he gets sick, they cure him and he has to work off his medical bills, so he's a slave to the company. That makes sense to me.

                                Here's my question. They are in space. Why doesn't Elysium require a roof so the residents can breathe and don't float into space? More importantly: IF THEY GOT A ROOF, THEN NO ONE COULD JUST LAND WITHOUT PERMISSION AND THEN EVERYTHING WOULD BE GREAT.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X