Comments on: Review: Neill Blomkamp’s ‘Elysium’ Starring Matt Damon & Jodie Foster

By: Marco Albanese

Marco Albanese — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:40 +0000

Elysium it's not openly socialist, but it's terribly phony, full of clichÃ©s, one dimensional characters awfully acted, with no sense of humor at all! The screenplay is so weak you could imagine all the narrative arc after 5 minutes. A complete mess that ends with the usual boring "wrestling match" between the good guy and the bad guy. Obviously these are my two cents…

By: Mass

Mass — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:40 +0000

lol please playlist, you're the last reviewing website I'll take seriously when you try to convince me that this film doesn't have openly left overtones. Your twitter feed is like a MSNBC twitter feed, so spare me that on your reviews please.

With that said, film is a different avenue to express the filmmakers personal opinions about society, and the science fiction genre especially. So I don't mind it, even though I would categorize my beliefs as more right when it comes to economy, and social programs. That said, I'm extremely excited about this film. I can't wait to see it.

By: Chet

Chet — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:40 +0000

thanks for the in-depth review!

By: Shmeckle

Shmeckle — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

B+? Really?! The movie has no internal logic, though it's not ashamed to beat us over the head mercilessly with it's message. I'm old school, if you want to send a message, use Western Union. Instead, try telling a good story – and by that, I mean, please don't repeat the prologue (in which the nun tells kid Matt Damon that he's here for a purpose and he's going to do something great). Why is no one ever home on Elysium? And if there's a machine to cure all ills and let you live forever, what about the food supply? Heavy-handed politics + missed opportunities + Jodie Foster's wavering accent (Afrikaner? Aussie? British? Or just bad dialect coach?) = a C at best. Let Blomkamp direct, but hire a real writer.

By: Lynn

Lynn — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

Elysidum. Too much dramatic loud unnecessary background music. Plus it was derivative – I Robot meets The Hunger Games.

By: Thomas M. Calderon

Thomas M. Calderon — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

This is my review, what in the hell did they have to use Mexican gang with gang tag WTF.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

I am very glad I found your review. I saw this film and then read reviews about "slick Hollywood violence" and (not unexpected) being "openly socialist." To be honest, I thought it was "openly Christian" ("Do unto others…") in terms of any message being offered. As for the violence, as many have pointed to, it does seems much more "believable" in comparison to other CGI offerings this summer. And, in my opinion, also unlike many Hollywood offerings, where the violence is there for it's own sake, Elysium carries an important message with the mayhem. Does anyone really think you can deny "them" a cure for their child's cancer and not expect a violent pushback? As John Harrison remarked in Star Trek: Into Darkness: "Is there anything you wouldn't do for your family?" Does this film go over the top on the spectacle and fighting? Of course-but that is the way great storytelling has always operated, going back to Homer's Illiad (the Goddess Athena spearing the God of War Ares on the battlefield of the Trojan War is over the top-but it was put there for a reason). For sure, the focus remains throughout on LA vs Elysium and the connection that Max makes between them (the best loved tales tend to be about the Hero striving). However, I find it easy to imagine a future where the lines of nationality, race, gender, and religion have been obliterated by the fierce demarcation placed by the powerful between those have and those who have-not. Is this film perfect in every aspect? Perhaps not, but if perfection is one's expectation of anything made in this world, you will live with a lot of disappoint. Does it tell a good story? Yes, I think it does, in an epic, very traditional way.

By: JOHN

JOHN — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

Had high hopes for this one and was a little disappointed. Effects and the look are top-notch. Foster's high-speak was weird and distracting. And as for the action scenes being shot so well "you can actually see what's happening" – NO WAY IN HELL. This was shaky cam at it's worst. I get that the director wanted to go for as much realism as he could all around but it didn't translate when putting the camera IN the action. Even when weapons are fired it's often hard to tell where they are hitting. So much to love about this movie and these shortcomings should have been easy fixes.

By: RC

RC — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

One of the most enjoyable movies of the summer? Really? Is that because we're standing it next to LONE RANGER? While ELYSIUM was visually pleasing and well acted, the screenplay was a disaster, filled with one convenience after another and absolute juvenile politics. One dimensional characters fulfilling archetypes and an ending you could see from the first five minutes of the film. DISTRICT 9 was a great, smart film that didn't hit you in the head with hammer trying to deliver its message. Whoever is trying to pass ELYSIUM off as an intelligent movie is as dumb as the studio thinks the audience is.

By: Me

Me — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

By: Jack

Jack — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

I was extremely disappointed with this movie. I had high hopes, I really did, but I hate to report that Elysium is not nearly as smart or as interesting as its premise. This review–much like the movie itself– has its heart in the right place, but misses the mark by a long shot.

By: Jack

Jack — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

By: victor enyutin

victor enyutin — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

âElysiumâ by Neill Blomkamp (2013) is called by the âRolling Stoneâ reporter Peter Travers (PT) âHell-raiser with social conscienceâ. For those who still remember popular revolutions and their consequences âhell-raisingâ is not associated with oneâs conscience, but rather with despair and frustration which are not good advisers as what to do. Hell-raising is more related to blind destructiveness and usually result of the impossibility of finding ways out of unbearable social situations.
The film is simultaneously a drum-beat revolutionary and cowardly not in a dystopian but in the very present day sense. It calls for attacking the establishment ruled by the one-percenters, and it represents this establishment as a remote future (we see those who serve the âone-percentersâ in a satellite station over earth. Theyâre called droids: robots who rule earth in the name of the financial elite and spy on people to prevent mutiny. The main character, Max (Matt Damon), is one of the constructors/engineers of the droids/robots, who at the same time âcannot resist pissing them offâ (PT). Maxâs noble acts of dissidence, in other words, are âto piss off the managers of life, the representatives of those in power.â It is not just youth slang; it is how young people today, the target audience of the film, understand what political resistance consists of â âto piss the bosses offâ. âElysiumâ, in other words, represents the fight for human rights and democratic principles on the level of adolescent sensibility. Instead of helping the young people by providing them real analysis of todayâs political and financial situation in our country and the world and use this information to explain them realistic ways of resisting the financial elite, the film stimulates the young to behave like fifth grader towards a hated teacher or the school principal. Simultaneously it glorifies high-tech weapons by parading Matt Damon through tough situations as super-heroic marine.
The leader of droids is played by Jodie Foster who started her career in films which were much closer to the truth of life as it is, instead of projecting this truth into simplified future in a masked (embellished by clichÃ©s) â mythologized/infantilized form. Delivering the truth in a style of animation cartoon is distorting the truth and seducing the young minds to non-realistic ways of perceiving whatâs going on in their country. The basic trick of the film is to represent us living today, as those who already have survived the rule of the one-percenters, who are invulnerable to whatever the decision-makers do and intellectually grow on Hollywood-like images until revolution will breakout in future by the effort of a bunch of super-heroic individuals armed with super-machineguns. âElysiumâ makes its audiences even more childish. It magically liberates us from all our problems in the very moment it depicts them to us.
The director of the film is a South African film-maker. It is very sad that making a career in Hollywood kind of commercial film-making is more important for some people than to be occupied with analysis of real events and their meanings in the life of real people that today attracts many young Americans and foreign talents.
Victor Enyutin

By: Francesca

Francesca — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

I don't think it's phony. It's a futuristic nightmare with good action and powerful visuals, even if the screenplay has some flaws (the world is only LA? Scary). Damon's comparison to John McLane with no desire to be a hero sounds spot on to me, and I loved Foster's character, a rough baddie, similar to many real politicians, even if I would have liked to see more of her private side. The humour is there, but it's mostly dark, and displayed in Kruger's lines. Loved to see also Wagner Moura in this, great choice.

By: Summit reacher

Summit reacher — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

More John McClane than John McClane? It's official. After Behind the Csndelabra and this, Matt Damon can do anything.

By: Thesaurusrs

Thesaurusrs — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:21:39 +0000

"… one of the most satisfying films of the summer". Even though I love Matt Damon, I was kinda on the fence about this one. But, OK, you convinced me.