17 March 2015

BOT OF WAR

To its credit, Chappie very quickly announces itself - not just how bad it is going to be, but also the ways in which it is going to be bad. The beginning is some talking heads describing an artificial intelligence with hushed, earnest tones. Then the film cuts back to "18 months earlier". And 18 months earlier finds us in the middle of a montage of news programs - Anderson Cooper, why do you gotta be such a fucking whore, anyway? - that covers a span of at least several months, maybe a year or two, as South Africa replaces its human police force with autonomous humanoid police robots manufactured by the Johannesburg-based weapons contractor Tetravaal. And, I mean, you can't do that. You can't "18 months earlier" us into a montage. What was 18 months earlier? The beginning of the montage? The end? The night of the Cooper broadcast?

And in this single ass-brained cut, we get all we're ever going to get from Chappie: which is that writer-director Neill Blomkamp (his co-writer being Terri Tatchell, who served the same role on District 9, the director's six-year-old debut feature, made when he was still promising) has so, so many ideas, and no idea whatsoever how to put them together. The current conventional wisdom around Blomkamp is that he's a great stylist who just doesn't have a good grasp on how to tell a story, but I frankly think that's much too generous. A great stylist wouldn't have perpetrated that opening.

He does, however, have a distinctly poor grasp on storytelling, that's definitely true. Chappie is an astonishing, overstuffed mess, with at least two wholly different plotlines for two completely different movies about a sentient robot mo-capped by Blomkamp's lucky charm Sharlto Copley, and voiced by him in an endlessly irritating breathy pidgin, which coalesce into the third act of yet another movie entirely. The ad campaign seemed badly confused as to whether Chappie was a jolly sci-fi adventure for families baldly copying Short Circuit, or a visceral satiric action movie knocking off RoboCop, and this proves to be a sign that the marketing department had closely watched the film before they started to cut trailers.

The plot, such as it is, finds Tetravaal golden boy Deon Wilson (Dev Patel), the inventor of the computer program that makes the "scouts" (the name for the robot police) possible, angry that Tetravaal CEO Michelle Bradley (Sigourney Weaver, demonstrating the platonic ideal of what "Sigourney Weaver idling in neutral" can look like) won't let him experiment with his newly perfected A.I. program. So one day, in full view of everybody, he steals a scout that's set to be scrapped, and for this he doesn't even get questioned by security for over 24 hours. The bad news is, before Deon can install his software, he's kidnapped by a gang of thieves, Yolandi Visser (Yolandi Visser) and Ninja (Ninja) and Amerika (Jose Pablo Cantillo). Ninja wants to force Deon to deactivate the scouts; barring that, he wants this scrap scout as his own private thug. But when Deon turns on the robot that has not yet been named Chappie in accordance with Yolandi's flutey, elf-like slang, he picks up an accidental God complex, while Yolandi finds herself ecstatically playing mommy.

Meanwhile, in a subplot that keeps banging on the door, wanting to be let in the movie, Deon's in-office rival, Vincent Moore (Hugh Jackman) is trying to sabotage the highly successful scout program in order to force the Joburg PD to adopt his gigantic warfare-bot Moose, rather than try to maybe sell the machine to, like, the Americans, or China, or Israel. For reasons that beggar the understanding of mere mortals, the terribly gifted Jackman elects to play this computer programmer as a big game hunter.

For the third time running, Blomkamp has made a film that's saturated with Ideas about Political Situations; but in a reverse of the problem with his last picture, Elysium, the issue here is not one of too much satiric subtext getting blasted in the audience's face like a fire house, it's satire that doesn't seem to remain consistent for more than the length of a single scene. The tone is all over the place, character's aren't stable - Ninja goes from being an outright villain to an outright hero without a scene explaining why - the logic behind story developments is so inscrutable (particularly the deeper into its techno-wizard enthusiasm about uploading human consciousness the film gets), that it can't even function as a clear, steady narrative, let alone draw a message up through that narrative.

The most embelematic single element of the film that I can think of is this: within Chappie, a pair of novelty rappers (Ninja and Yolandi are the members of Die Antwoord in their other career) are playing variants of their stage personae while wearing clothes advertising themselves, without the film seeing fit to put even a ghost of meta-narrative spin on this fact. That total failure of premeditation or even basic coherence is found in every nook and cranny of Chappie: its relentless inability to follow-through on any of its many storylines, its indifferent character continuity. The only time the film really clicks is in the handful of moments that it fully commits to be an action film, where Blomkamp and editors Julian Clarke and Mark Goldblatt get to indulge in some clever cross-cutting, particularly in one of the film's three climaxes, where offscreen space is used in some particularly exciting ways to intensify the scope of the fighting. And the design is generally solid; there aren't too many locations, but Die Antwoord's lair, at least, is a fairly remarkable space, with graffiti that looks like childish scrawling adding a sweetness that ends up feeling menacing the more violence we see take place their, and the more deranged that Ninja's acting goes.

But little bits and pieces of pleasure are nothing compared to how bafflingly mis-conceived the whole fabric is. Bloated with ideas that aren't developed in any meaningful way, and tied inexplicably to its immensely grating title character, Chappie is a thoroughly draining, joyless experience; it's the kind of free-for-all disaster when a lot of talent meets a void of discipline and a complete lack of hard choice-making.

3/10

11 comments:

  1. I actually kind of liked it, but I can't really contest anything you're saying here. The plot is such an incoherent mash of underdeveloped story threads, character motivations and dissonant tones that it's basically indefensible. What I will say is that I found the title character endearing rather than grating, which I imagine counts for a lot in one direction or the other.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I still haven't seen Chappie, and still want to, but it gets bleaker and bleaker with every review I read. I was one of the few who disliked District 9 because I thought it was too hamfisted and lacked nuance, but loved Elysium and thought it had a gripping world and a well-told story. I am the last of my kind.

    Tim, in the highly likely eventuality that this film lands with a thud for me, could you offer some recommendations of recent sci-fi to a fan in need?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jess-

    Snowpiercer
    Coherence
    Predestination

    And if you haven't seen the British television series Black Mirror, definitely check it out.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I co-sign all of Rick's thoughts, except that I still haven't caught up with Coherence. But Black Mirror, for all I don't ever talk about TV on this blog, is definitely the most consistently interesting SF of the 2010s so far, and there's less than seven total hours, so it's pretty easy to digest.

    And Under the Skin of course, but I can't imagine any online SF fan needing to have that recommended to them at this point.

    Also, it's a couple of years old at this point, but not a lot of people saw Antiviral, which I thought had quite a lot going on in between the dumber parts.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As somebody who thought District 9 was just "ok" (and never understood why sci-fi fans felt the need to latch onto that the same year as Moon), the only thing about this that particularly interests me is how fucking bizarre Die Antwoord seem in it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. " The current conventional wisdom around Blomkamp is that he's a great stylist who just doesn't have a good grasp on how to tell a story"

    Yeah, he's not really a stylist. He's a guy who has some really cool production design that helps flesh out his sci-fi worlds in a way most other sci-fi movies don't do. That's about it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Agreed Stephen, he's not at all a stylist (which implies something more formal and ambitious) so much as somebody who's building this wonderfully coherent science-fiction world that happens to be host to hugely dysfunctional stories.

    Also Tim please don't remind me how much I wish I could hear your thoughts on television beyond the established fact that you rightfully love Deadwood.

    ReplyDelete
  8. So would you say he's the Shyamalan of sci-fi, then?

    For the record, I actually liked District 9 (the only Blomkamp film I've seen to date), but I'll admit it broke down a bit at the end.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Isn't Shyamalan the Shyamalan of sci fi? Or did Will Smith get sole custody of After Earth?

      (I'm too polite to talk about The Happening.)

      This is a weird place to delurk, but hi, Tim! I came in via your tour de force Disney retrospective and have happily wandered the archives for a while. You do great work, even or especially on not-great movies.

      Delete
  9. If you only watched District 9 I think that the rather crafty use of found footage and pseudo-realism in all the right places might trick you into thinking that he had a keen eye for combining different filmmaking styles on the fly - for my money, found footage hasn't been as much fun to watch before or since. After Chappie and the talking-heads clusterfuck that opens it, however, it's evident that Blomkamp actually has no idea why different styles are used for different purposes and actually just throws the same three or four darts at the wall every time.

    Anyway, Chappie. I thought the titular character's physical acting and effects were pretty superb, and made up for the misfire in the personality department (nothing about "robot that speaks like a child and acts like a gangsta" works on paper OR in practice), but the film's real overriding flaw were Ninja and Yolandi - the characters and the non-actors playing them. "Protagonist who is a barely tolerable human being to offset the Truly Good character(s) and Genuinely Evil bad guys" is something else that worked gangbusters in District 9 and not at all since. Especially since writing his heroes that way gives him nowhere to go in shaping his villains, and Blomkamp has thus now gone three-for-three on movies with film-and-allegory-destroying cartoon villains.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks for a terrific review. I haven't seen Chappie, but you confirmed all the things that got my hackles up watching the trailer. It's very satisfying to see a critic talk about story structure, and not just to snark on superficials. - And to add my two cents worth on the Blomkamp issue, I did see District 9. I thought it was consistently good, and that last shot had a powerful dramatic resonance that still stays with me. Elysium was a disappointment. And I am sorry to hear that Chappie is such a mess.

    ReplyDelete

Just a few rules so that everybody can have fun: ad hominem attacks on the blogger are fair; ad hominem attacks on other commenters will be deleted. And I will absolutely not stand for anything that is, in my judgment, demeaning, insulting or hateful to any gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion. And though I won't insist on keeping politics out, let's think long and hard before we say anything particularly inflammatory.

Also, sorry about the whole "must be a registered user" thing, but I do deeply hate to get spam, and I refuse to take on the totalitarian mantle of moderating comments, and I am much too lazy to try to migrate over to a better comments system than the one that comes pre-loaded with Blogger.