‘9′ movie doesn’t get a 10 … or a 9
Image from roberthood.net.
Sometimes timing just isn’t enough to make a movie into an event. The makers of “9″ the movie planned from the beginning to have the film released on 09-09-09, and I would bet my payday check that they came up with that idea before they came up with the movie idea.
I’m not saying “9″ movie reviews are terrible — they’re not. On a scale of 1 to 10, “9″ got a 6.2 from critics. I don’t think that a 62 percent is what the film’s many producers, including Tim Burton, director Shane Acker and Focus Features were aiming for. That’s the score the film received from the collection of critics on Rotten Tomatoes. It got the same score on Metacritic, another site that features a collection of “9″ movie reviews. That’s a D-minus in high school terms, which is not great news for a $33 million film.
Stay tuned for ‘9′ movie trailer
The CleverTV anchor who introduces the “9″ movie trailer at the end of this posts correctly states: “This might be one of the best-pedigreed animated films in a long time.” The movie’s cast includes Elijah Wood, Jennifer Connelly, John C. Reilly, Christopher Plummer, Marting Landau and Crispin Glover.
Is glass 62 percent full?
Of course, 62 percent also means that more than half the critics who wrote “9″ movie reviews liked it, so the majority of the reviews were good. To use Metacritic’s terminology, it got “generally favorable reviews.” I am sure the filmmakers would have liked better reviews for a movie released on 09-09-09 that is described as “a post-apocalyptic nightmare in which all of humanity is threatened.”
The good news is, a movie’s reception by critics often is not reflected in box office earnings, and sometimes not even in popular opinion. I am sure “9″ movie will make its $33 million back, and I predict it’ll make another $50 million or $60 million on top of that. If it weren’t for the fact that critics have made it clear this PG-13 film is too intense for young kids, it’d probably crack $100 million easily. Without further ado, here are a few highlights from “9″ movie reviews.
The good
Lou Lumenik from the New York Post compares the movie “9″ to another recent sci-fi release “District 9.” The major difference between these flicks is that “District 9″ is live-action, while “9″ the move is all CGI, with characters that resemble crocheted dolls.
Luminek says he prefers “9″ the movie to “District 9.” However, like most “9″ movie reviews, his is a little mixed. He writes:
Where the two films differ are Acker’s intoxicatingly rich visuals for the devastated world of “9,” which draw extensively on the steampunk style. “9″ may not be an instant classic like “Wall-E,” but it signals the arrival of Shane Acker as an audacious new talent to watch.
The rich visuals Luminek speaks of include the characters, which are 8-inch tall robots that look like dolls. The film’s main character is No. 9. The movies “9″ and “District 9″ are both feature-length films based on previously made shorts.
The bad
David Edelstein of New York Magazine says this about “9″: “The movie is dreary and monotonous, the vision junky in more ways than one.”
Edelstein says of the “9″ movie: “It’s hard to get worked up about yet another post apocalyptic fantasy in which it’s the machines that have exterminated mankind.” However, Edelstein, along with all the other “9″ movie reviews I have read, does admit that the visuals have a definite “wow” factor.
Watch the ‘9′ movie trailer
