'Chappie' Review (1 Viewer)

In short:


Like his previous films, writer/director Neill Blomkamp's third feature, Chappie, takes us to a down-and-dirty, near-future world. This time, however, the story's central character isn't a man, but a sentient robot named Chappie. Think of it as District 9 meets RoboCop — a blend of white-knuckle action, offbeat humor and thought-provoking ideas. But the real highlight is Chappie himself, a character brought to life through motion capture and CG technology, but who feels as real as any other actor on-screen. Chappie may not be the only film this year set to tackle the topic of a self-aware machine, but it may very well end up being the most compelling. It's a true blockbuster with brains.


Highlights from my full review:

The film serves up some fantastically white-knuckle human-on-robot and robot-on-robot battles, but it also counterbalances them with scenes that win us over with their offbeat humor and tickle our cerebrums with their thought-provoking ideas. From the notion of a soul to its transference from one corporeal vessel to another — it's all fair game here. And though Blomkamp and co-writer Terri Tatchell don't delve into too much detail in their exploration of these philosophical discussions, they weave enough of it into the fabric of the film to ensure that Chappie won't be mistaken for just another vapid blockbuster.

The real highlight of the movie, though, is the character of Chappie himself. Voiced by Copley and made real through the magic of motion capture technology and state-of-the-art computer animation, Chappie is a sight to behold — a rabbit-eared automaton who walks and talks with the awkward unevenness of a hyperactive seven-year-old riding the crest of a sugar high, who's also capable of inducing just as many "awws" as a two-month-old puppy.

But he's more than just a convincing special effect. Brought into being as a blank slate, Chappie is a product of his environment. Watching Chappie reconcile these different, oftentimes competing, influences and grow into his own person is to watch a performance as real as any other in the film. And isn't that, in essence, the whole point of the movie in the first place?

Click to expand...

Film rating: 4.5 out of 5

Sitting at 30% on Rotten Tomatoes.

I figure I must be one of the few people who really, really enjoyed Chappie. But I thought it was a blast -- engaging from start to finish, filled with action, humor and interesting ideas. Sure it feels familiar, but it also feels fresh and unique. Either way, it makes for an incredible movie-going experience.

Interview with Ninja, some spoilers:

http://boingboing.net/2015/03/06/ninjaxchappie.html

I thought the movie was alright but the look of the thug characters was distracting and horrible. Their haircuts and clothing made them look and come off as believably threatening as Bozo The Clown. "Watch out, I have a mullet, kneepads, a $100 dollar bill on my shorts and my gun is painted neon yellow! I'M A BADASS!"


Also, I was insulted that the filmmakers (or, more likely, the studio) thought the audience was so stupid that they needed to have subtitles for the bad guy.

TravisR said:

Also, I was insulted that the filmmakers (or, more likely, the studio) thought the audience was so stupid that they needed to have subtitles for the bad guy.

Click to expand...

I completely forgot about this. You're absolutely right. The funny thing is, some of Ninja's dialogue was even less intelligible.

"We Need Good Sci-Fi Movies, and Chappie Isn’t One of Them"..."Neill Blomkamp disappoints again — and who's out there to deliver?"

Click to expand...

From Time magazine. Ouch.


I didn't realize the guy who made this supposed turd is the same guy who is supposed to bring us a new Alien movie?? Uh oh.

The reviewer on Rogerebert.com gave it 1 star.

I don't think I'm going to see "Chappie", but I appreciated reading the different reviews and comments posted here sometimes. In theory, I should love Neill Blomkamp's movies, but in practice, I've hated his first two. I find it really difficult to explain what it is about them that I don't like. His movies are promoted as being science fiction (a genre I love), but neither "District 9" or "Elysium" actually felt like sci-fi movies to me. They seem more like morality plays or political commentary dressed up as science fiction. (And yet, when "Star Trek" did that same thing in the original series, I enjoyed it there.) I really wish I could put my finger on what it is about his films that makes me not like them. I've never walked out of a movie in theaters, but "District 9" was among the closest I've gotten. "Elysium" had some pretty visuals but I didn't really buy any other part of it. Neither film had characters I enjoyed or wanted to spend time with (not that that in and of itself is a requirement, I like plenty of movies where I wouldn't want to actually know any of the people in them), or a plot that I found interesting. And yet, they all have elements of things I've liked or loved before. Every criticism I can think of for those two movies, you could probably turn around and say to me, "But you liked that other movie that had those same things!". I'm really at a loss for why his films have so completely failed with me. And that's why I'll probably miss "Chappie". Despite it being presented in IMAX (a format I love) and being marketed as sci-fi (a genre I love), I'm worried I'll absolutely hate it.


I apologize if this post comes across as too negative, I don't mean to troll or to be disrespectful towards something people are enjoying. I don't really get why I don't like Neill Blomkamp and I wish I understood why that was.

Josh Steinberg said:

I don't really get why I don't like Neill Blomkamp and I wish I understood why that was.

Click to expand...

We certainly expected a lot more from District 9 than we got--

There were those saying "Peter Jackson's producing!", and then there was "We got this instead of the Halo movie!", and "Oo, it's South Africa, so it's all socially allegorical-like!"

That's nice, but it's a bad sign when the audience imagines better and more complex movies than the real thing delivers. (Instead, we got an alien-virus story trying to see how many times the main character can say "Fook!" onscreen.)


I haven't seen Chappie or Occupy Elysium, but I have a feeling Blomkamp didn't quite go as far as I, the fan, thought someone should, if they really tried.

I think I don't enjoy Sharlto Copely voice or weird manic movements as Chappie, the pitch of the voice just got more and more annoying for me. The same goes for the "Mommy" character. Plus, the characters are so 2-dimensional, "Chappie" was a live-action cartoon with a bad script and uneven performances from its cast. It's another miss after a promising debut from Blomkamp, who is probably a better VFX director, but not as good on the people directing front.


I give it 1.75 stars, or a grade of C-.

.

Patrick Sun said:

It's another miss after a promising debut from Blomkamp, who is probably a better VFX director, but not as good on the people directing front.

Click to expand...

I think I'd put Blomkamp in the category with guys like M. Night Shyamalan and Tim Burton, where I'm more than willing to give their next movie a chance because they're talented and have made some good movies but they've also had some definite misses.

And this guy wants to make a better Alien movie than David Fincher's?!

Personally, I love Blomkamp. His films are visually stunning and he always has a powerful story. How it is pulled off varies and I'll leave it at that.


Chappie was thought provoking and interesting. It was not at all what I expected. I bought the offbeat nuclear family in the film hook, line and sinker. As the film progressed, I found Chappie's life and struggles very moving. I loved the mommy character.


It was entertaining and well worth seeing in the theater. My 15 year old son loved it. He was moved in certain scenes, as well.


2 criticisms:


1. The film could have been PG-13. Most of the foul language was not needed. There is one very gruesome scene. Otherwise, it never approached the level of gore seen in District 9. The R rating will hurt its box office returns more than bad word of mouth. (That's just my opinion.)


2. The subtitles were not needed. But, I can see why they were added, no doubt due to the comments of test audiences. Either way, the subtitles helped, not hindered, my viewing experience.

Ejanss said:

That's nice, but it's a bad sign when the audience imagines better and more complex movies than the real thing delivers.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the way I felt about Elysium. There was a lot of potential for interesting science fiction concepts, but none of them were explored. Instead, we got scene after scene of Matt Damon battling Blomkamp's pet actor, Sharlto Copley.

First half was pretty good but the movie went downhill as it progressed. The more I watched, the more absurd the whole thing seemed, and I lost interest in it.


In the end, "Chappie" feels like "Robocop" + "Pinocchio" - or maybe "AI". I like the first half enough to give it a "C+" but man, does the second half go into the toilet!