• Arsecroft
    link
    fedilink
    741 year ago

    This person is the kind of person that would keep wishing on a monkey paw. The rest of Niell Blomkamp’s movies have been not great, and a sequel would probably be so bad to make the original worse.

  • @Daft_ish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    46
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Why? The first one was very experimental. They release a second one they are given two bad choices. They continue the original cinematic vision but being a sequel the plot suffers and it fails or they try something new and it falls flat.

    Why ruin a perfectly, self contained, what I would consider masterpiece by trying to expand the universe.

    I would be ok with exploring the world some more but maybe in more traditional heros tale type outline. Even then half the audience will think your getting, excuse the bad joke, “district 10.”

    • @UNY0N@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      251 year ago

      Most sequels are sub-par, agreed. But this story does seem half-finished at the end of the film, a sequel would practically write itself.

    • @w2tpmf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      Not just experimental, but an afterthought made with leftovers of a partially made movie that production failed on.

      The location, props, cgi, and even parts of the story were the scraps of the Halo movie that Peter Jackson started to make before abandoning it.

      The result was an excellent movie, but the circumstances of slapping a new coat of paint onto a half produced film make for a very unique and hard to replicate product.

  • Sagrotan
    link
    fedilink
    321 year ago

    I raise you the complete Marvel trash heap and several individual “sequels” made in the last 5 or so years. Neill Blomkamp has so many ideas, literally dozens of teasers are on YouTube. Most of them are seriously awesome. Do we really have to wait until all the geriatric Hollywood dinosaurs are dead? And with then their talentless and greedy “protégés”?

    • @pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      2&3 are good. they expanded the lore to be much more interesting, made agent smith a much more compelling character, threw away the stupid “chosen one” and “freedom fighter” cliches in favor of making the movies more about humanity’s ability to choose rather than compliance and accepting inevitability, and had amazing scenes. i honestly don’t know what people were expecting to see from those movies, but i bet every idea they would come up with instead would be stupid or redundant.

    • Yeah and I feel its problem was on the writing and directing. The concept was there but you just didn’t care about characters. They should’ve made the first half a romance, and then the second half about vengeance/redemption.

      • @qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        And it was…pretty one-dimensional.

        I feel like the “rich live in the sky, poor live on the wasted earth” was over the top. As opposed to S1 of Altered Carbon which was way better at addressing this trope. The meths were depraved, but you could kinda understand it — they’ve been alive for so long, but want to continue to “feel alive” through ever more extreme experiences.

        • @BluesF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          Altered carbon had excellent source material to work from. As much as I liked the series, the book soars in comparison.

    • apotheotic (she/her)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 year ago

      If your sci fi isn’t making some sort of social or political statement, its not sci fi - its just sparkling futurism.

      • @Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        … wow, “sparkling futurism” is the phrase I didn’t know t needed, thx.
        It classifies so much stuff perfectly!

            • apotheotic (she/her)
              link
              fedilink
              English
              41 year ago

              Inception is kinda all about closure, which I’ll give you isn’t quite “social commentary” but its treading dangerously close to mental health commentary.

              Interstellar is all about climate change, and the duty of humanity to fix their own mess, which are certainly social commentary points

              Star Trek has social commentary and political commentary baked into its DNA, everything is an allegory for some real life issue they want to trick people into thinking about with an open mind, or from a new point of view

              Star Wars, well, looking at when it came out the parallels to the Vietnam War are palpable but its dripping with anti-authoritarian messaging

              Its funny, I was almost surprised to see Inception in your list. Not because I think its bad media, I think its pretty rad, but because it sort of feels more like a standard heist film with a science-y/fantasy-y gimmick. Certainly by my criteria it wouldn’t count as SciFi for the aforementioned lack of social/political commentary, but its an interesting edge case.

              • @blarth@thelemmy.club
                link
                fedilink
                11 year ago

                It’s not that I don’t understand there are political themes in sci-fi. It’s that it felt like I was being beat over the head with it in D9. Also, just not a big fan of being told something wild exists in a movie but it’s never exposed because the budget doesn’t allow for it.

      • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        What was the allegory of the original Stargate movie, actually? Something about the working class overcoming monarchy, maybe? TBH it kind of played off as US Military intervention in the Middle East propaganda… Yeah that’s probably it.

    • @Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I … actually kinda agree with you.
      I get that ‘if alien then sci-fi’ is the norm for designating sci-fi (like, if it contains science fiction then it’s sci-fi, regardless of the plots focus, the entire thing is classified by the setting).

      But my head-canon also focuses on what the story is about.
      If I could take out the sci-fi elements & the story wouldn’t change (ie could be set in today’s Earth), then I only see it as -fi. But also the story could be set on today’s Earth but with one single smol sci-fi element (a piece of tech of sorts), and if the entire plot focuses on it, then I understand it as sci-fi.

      The most controversial example of this (just in my head) wound be Star Wars. Much later in the extended universe things changed, but the movies started out as pure westerns, like, the same story could have been told as a western and especially the screenplay parts wouldn’t have to change, just the backdrop (Im not being literal, but not far from it).

      Space sci-fi in general has the tendency to use the dimensions in space like if everything was happening on Earth.

    • @DogWater@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      So I saw a blurb about this recently and it seems unfounded. Only 1 place was reporting anything and nowhere else online would corroborate it.

      The last known news before that was the project is currently on hold for an unknown length of time. It may or may not get made. It’s far from certain yet.

  • @MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    101 year ago

    Let’s not dream about that. Lately, all the remakes and reenvisions have been nothing but a quick cash grab and extreme disappointment to all those who loved original works.

  • Des [she/her, they/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 year ago

    i did always want a sequel where the aliens came back and wrecked shit with their actual military so i can cheer them on

  • @Rambomst@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    71 year ago

    A sequel called District 10 has been written. About a year ago Neill Blomkamp said he’s unsure about making it now but believes it might be made in the future.