Neil Blomkamp’s District 9 came out of nowhere. The low-budget, political, partially-improvised sci-fi epic was a critical and commercial success, winning hearts and minds with its pull-no-punches violence, Sharlto Copley’s comedic and ultimately moving performance, and the apartheid metaphor underpinning the overall tale. It also offered what I found to be one of the strongest-ever arguments against the idea that practical effects are ‘just better’ than CGI. And this was all on a budget of US$30,000,000. So now comes the director’s follow-up, Elysium. Whilst not a sequel, it continues District 9‘s sci-fi spectacle mixed with gritty natural scenery, gory violence at the hands of futuristic weapons technology, and the presence of Sharlto Copley. Yet a more-than-tripled budget, A-list stars like Matt Damon and Jodie Foster, and an even less-subtle and more current political message make Elysium its own beast. Does triple the budget mean triple the quality?
Well, no. Of course not. But ‘not as good as District 9‘ is not ‘bad’, and Elysium is only a short distance from its predecessor’s quality. The film is set in 2154, where the super-rich live on the glorious space station Elysium (complete with Med-Pods that can instantly cure anything from leukemia to a destroyed face) while the rest of humanity toils below on the ravaged Earth. Max Da Costa (Matt Damon) is one such human, and his impending death at the hands of uncaring factory management makes a desperate man out of him. He stops at nothing to reach Elysium and the Med-Pods, with the help of some criminal acquaintances and a deadly exoskeleton drilled into his flesh, muscle and bone, making him capable of fighting a billionaire CEO’s security droids with his bare hands.
The political message of the film should be very clear, and my enjoyment of Elysium comes from me, at the very least, not completely disagreeing with it. Make no mistake, however – if you describe yourself as politically conservative, ‘pro-business’, believe that every rich person became so purely through hard work and believe that poor people are lazy, you’ll likely consider the film an insufferable left-wing screed. I’ll address my thoughts on the political message in my following post, but for now, I’ll focus on the more immediate aspects of the film.
Firstly, it’s more of a traditional Hollywood film, and this is what made me a little more numb to it. District 9 had an odd, independent quality to it that really worked for me (likely helped by Copley’s improvised performance), whereas Elysium is considerably more straightforward, from the villains, to the plot and ending. The visuals are beautiful – both in the shiny greens and whites of Elysium, and in the dilapidated slum of 2154 Los Angeles. The violence is brutal – the effect of a man-portable railgun rifle on the human body, even through considerable cover, is a sight to behold. The performances are well-done – Matt Damon is admirable as a desperate, ex-criminal anti-hero with many selfish qualities, Jodie Foster plays Elysium’s violent, remorseless Defense Secretary Delacourt with appropriately cold sociopathy, and Sharlto Copley as the homicidal Elysium agent Kruger is the best part of the film. Copley is clearly having immense fun, constantly reminding us how much Kruger adores his job, as he deploys swords, grenades, energy shields, and a South African accent that will hit you like a truck.
Elysium is an intelligent, brutal sci-fi epic with an uncompromisingly left-wing political message, and it has already divided audiences, with many castigating it for having a cartoonishly evil portrayal of the rich. I greatly enjoyed it, and I recommend it to anyone who enjoys the above, and if you’re relatively right-wing, well… I just hope you REALLY love your sci-vi visuals and gory violence. See Elysium, but don’t go in expecting ‘the next District 9‘. Just expect a good film.
8/10
Silver Screens and Circus Mirrors 