Yesterday, I had a movie date with my good friend Donna. As much as I'd absolutely and indefinitely love to watch Pixar's UP, we ended up watching Peter Jackson's 'District 9'.
I've seen the trailer a month before and I thought it would be one of those crappy low budget films that oddly surface on theaters these days, but to my surprise it's a decently good film. It's not typically the type of movie I'd go-see in a heartbeat, but it was nicely done based on the over-all concept of the film.
Usually, sci-fi or "alien/non-human" concepts for that matter are usually shot with hi-end gadgets to give the audience a feel that it's surreal and out-of-this world. But with District 9, they made it look somewhat a cross between a reality-based documentary and Cloverfield minus the horrible screaming and wobbly camera shots so a lot of things actually ran through my head. Like what if the movie's storyline was real? What if the government acts the same way as MNU did? What if we have been living with non-humans all these time since the Roswell incident, and somehow, by some strange combination of cover-ups we ended up co-existing without us and them knowing? Or something like that.
I've always fancied watching science fiction-based genres from a very young age (and once dreamed of working for NASA), so it's nice to see something of that genre be bought to life through film in a manner quite unlike anything else that has been marketed for the last few decades or so. Also, it dealt with the subject of non-humans BUT with actions and principles just like humans is quite remarkable; especially at a particular scene where Christopher (non-human) convinces his son that if their plan of leaving Earth fails, the concept of living in an alien concentration camp it just as close to home (or something like that). Plus, it's a concept that transcends not only as something that questions our very existence or of other life-form's existence but as well as how we deal with others.
Human or non-human... I think it doesn't even matter. As long as there is life, both have the right to live... and to live means to have freedom, and to be free gives you the right to nurture your life conditions.
And oh yea, before I forget. Until now, I can't shake the thought of the 'prawns'. It's a mix of mild interest and confusion. I don't know why~!
When I got home, I've already had my phone set to a 9 o' clock showing of Nicole Kidman's movie 'Birth'. I was intrigued by the concept of the movie; reincarnation and eternal love. Especially because I've seen the trailer of Kidman kissing (gulps) a 10-year-old boy (Sean) played by Cameron Bright.
I really hate it when a film involves a lot of chit-chat, downplayed with hints of subtle mystery concept. But 'Birth' builds up the screenplay by doing so all throughout the film. It was beautifully made and the actors portrayed their characters really well, particularly Cameron Bright who had to be well-convinced that his character Sean is the re-incarnation of Anna's (Kidman) dead husband (or so he thinks).
But I think the tiny flaw of the movie came near the end, when it's quite vague whether or not Sean really was the re-incarnation of Anna's dead husband or he was just in a kind of trance. The ending can just throw off anyone at a certain point.
Or was it just a terrible fate? To be given a certain moment in time to get in touch with strong emotions that you thought you'd never feel, but just when you start believing in the possibility you realize that it will never be the same and it can never come back.