Wednesday 4 November 2009

Crap-o-Nine Tale: The Nine Most Disappointing Things About ‘9’



In an undefined mid-twentieth century post-war milieu nine puppets invested with a curious life force must defend themselves from a rampaging mechanical force. A late-teen oriented CGI film produced by Tim Burton which apparently allows its metaphorical imperative to override all other customary fallbacks, what could possibly go wrong? Plenty, it turns out. Of the many frustrations, here’s my top 9:

1. Given the almost limitless possibilities of an entirely digital environment, the film offers an almost dazzlingly dull array of shot reverse-shots.

2. There’s a fat henchman used for comedic effect.

3. The highly impressive mise-en-apocalypse (a mixture of World War Two landscape, H.G. Wells threat and J.R.R. Tolkein geography) is left increasingly unexplored.

4. Martin Landau got about three lines. Unless he played one of the dead bodies, which he might have done for all I know.

5. Ten years since ‘The Matrix’, twenty-five since ‘The Terminator’, a whole eighty since ‘Metropolis’, and still the level of discourse in this sort of thing is “them machines be evil”.

6. And, given the above, there is no sense of irony in the fact that the whole film is structured around mechanical characters, has as its deux ex machina an electronic MacGuffin, and was created entirely on a computer.

7. The dialogue consists entirely of context-free heroicisms: ‘I have to do this’, ‘I can’t do it alone’, ‘There’s still a chance’, ‘We have to go back’, ‘Run!’. It’s like watching a Michael Bay film with all intervening dialogue concerning something other than a basic physical task removed.

8. Director Shane Acker doesn’t seem to know what an allegory is, let alone how to put one on film.

9. As a concept, it’s incredibly interesting. As a film, it’s unremitting dross.

No comments: