Shrimpin’ Ain’t Easy: A Look At District 9

By Special Correspondent Arturo R. García
Also posted at
Arturo Vs. The World

district9 1

The much ballyhooed District 9 succeeds at one thing – it leaves you with questions. The problem is, not all of them are of the good kind.

The film’s conceit – sticking a million-plus misplaced extraterrestrials in the middle of Johannesburg – is promising. But from there, the story is built on a series of cheats, the biggest one being the rather loud absence of the word that, like it or not, comes to mind once you set the story in South Africa: Apartheid.

*SPOILERS AHEAD*

It’s implied that the District is a stand-in for the Soweto of our own reality. But, again, that’s a cheat: we’re robbed of a potentially more potent commentary because of that substitution. Getting viewers to say, “Wow, humans are capable of great inhumanity” isn’t as ground-breaking as writer and Director Neill Blomkamp might want to think. And to think that any government would be handling a First Contact situation (as opposed to the internment of its’ own citizens) without the U.S., United Nations or any other coalition tugging at its’ sleeve isn’t sci-fi – it’s flat-out ridiculous.

wilkus 1The story kicks off 28 years after the visitors’ arrival on Earth, but it’s not really about them – our protagonist, and literal tour guide is well-meaning office schmuck Wilkus Van Der Merwe (Sharlto Copley), a Christopher Guest character in way, way, way over his head. Wilkus is placed in charge of serving eviction notices to the District’s residents and selling them on the new FEMA government housing they’re getting shipped to.

While investigating a squatter’s shack, Wilkus is sprayed with some of “the fluid,” a crucial biological material. Not only does it power the aliens’ rather impressive weaponry, but it’s the key to the escape plan of one Christopher Johnson, as a singularly clever Prawn is dubbed. Christopher has been plotting for 20 years to get the hell off this planet, and needs the juice to power his getaway craft and revive his people’s mothership, still hovering over Johannesburg.

It’s worth noting that Copley co-produced the inspiration for District 9, Alive In Joburg, a short film where the aliens get a fairer shake from Blomkamp; one of them gets to talk directly to the unseen documentarians and express a motivation (they just want to get off this planet) and a problem (our atmosphere is toxic to their physiology). There was a similar scene in the trailer for District, but it’s not in the theatrical cut, which makes Christopher’s positioning as the Noble Other/Savage really troubling.

christopher 1
Why is Christopher so much smarter than his fellow refugees? How could he be the only one trying to find a way out, or to know/care enough to clothe himself in a “human” manner? And, if humans and Prawn are able to understand each other by the time the “footage” is released, why did the documentarians – because that’s how the first half of this film is framed – exclude interviews with any of the aliens in favor of black South Africans telling us how threatened they feel, and white South Africans denigrating the species as a whole?

We get no insight into any of this, because the movie retreats, very jarringly, into the realm of summer schlock after Wilkus’ infection. As he becomes a test subject, a fugitive, and a less-than-altruistic ally to Christopher, their characters run headlong into caricatures: a wheelchair-bound, voodoo-influenced Nigerian gangster exploiting the Prawns for cash and weapons while eating their body parts on the advice of a “priestess”; and a xenophobic mercenary charged with turning Wilkus in to his slimy CEO father-in-law.

Copley isn’t bad at all – his Wilkus is a terrific anti-hero. But could Christopher and his son, both CGI characters who summon up more “humanity” than the real-life Shia LaBouf, really have been less palatable figures for the audience and creative team to rally behind? Because the story we get, with awesome-looking alien tech and a white hero standing up for the Oppressed, doesn’t end up going anywhere Torchwood didn’t just saunter through with more brains and less blood; at least Russell T. Davies would’ve given Christopher’s race a name. By the time the film reaches its (open-ended) conclusion, you’re left hoping the visitors would return for vengeance – so that you could root for them.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. ‘District 9′ Alien Movie Drawing Criticism “A Racist Movie About Racism…” « Barbados Free Press on 19 Aug 2009 at 12:23 am

    [...] Racialicious: Shrimpin’ Ain’t Easy – A Look At District 9 [...]

  2. ‘District 9′ Alien Movie Drawing Criticism – “A Racist Movie About Racism…” « Barbados Free Press on 19 Aug 2009 at 12:52 am

    [...] Racialicious: Shrimpin’ Ain’t Easy – A Look At District 9 [...]

  3. A little background about my D9 post « funny blog pageslap on 19 Aug 2009 at 4:10 am

    [...] Finally, I’m not the only person who has critiqued the racism in this movie. I’ve since come across several other reviews that say some of the same things (and were written by people who had not read my post, nor had I encountered theirs until today). But if you want to read some other critiques of many of the same issues that I found problematic, check out A Thousand Grams and Beliefnet, and Arturo’s post on Racialicious. [...]

  4. Why People Should Cut District 9 a Little Slack - Sharda Sekaran on 25 Aug 2009 at 9:47 am

    [...] the Geico cavemen when I turn on the television or sit down to watch a movie.  But with all the racial critique being leveled on “District 9,” I have to say that I like this movie. I would actually see it [...]

Comments

  1. pageslap wrote:

    Solid review, Arturo. However, I think it’s problematic to look at this flick as too close an allegory to real-world apartheid. The aliens here actually are pretty awful. With the exception of Christopher and his family, the other aliens are violent and disgusting. Plus, they’re not actually human.

    So while the aliens are indeed treated cruelly and unfairly by the fictional government in the film, I think it’s rocky to equate this somewhat justifiable discrimination to any actual discrimination faced by actual, real-world, real-life humans. I don’t like the idea of any ethnic group actually being compared to the aliens; they’re loathsome.

    I wrote some more stuff about the racism that really caught my attention in this film- my name links to my post, which is here:

    http://pageslap.wordpress.com/2009/08/17/district-9-is-racist/

    Thanks again for sharing your views.

  2. Heather Leila wrote:

    The short film was from maybe three years ago, before the violence in the townships last year against African immigrants. What if this movie isn’t about Apartheid at all? What if it is about this more recent issue of xenophobia against immigrants from Mozambique and Zimbabwe and elsewhere?

    The aliens in this movie are not terribly likeable, but that’s an interesting point too. The movie could have given us more characters with names and personalities- but the audience doesn’t have to love them. It doesn’t matter if refugees are lovable or grateful or intelligent or even nice to look at. We have obligations to refugees, as humans and maybe that was the point of making the aliens so unpleasant. There are humans who are just as unpleasant, but they still have rights that should be respected.

  3. dejamorgana wrote:

    I don’t know how this plays out in the movie because I haven’t seen it yet, but isn’t the fictional District 9 more of a stand-in for the real District Six, not Soweto?

    District Six really was razed. And it was the home to thousands of people who really were denied their histories and cultures by being known officially by the simple name of Coloured.

  4. inkst wrote:

    I just saw District 9 on Saturday and was hoping to see a post today!

    I agree with some of your criticisms, and my guess is that most of the flaws in this movie (namely, everybody but Wikus being 1-dimensional and the absurd amount of gunfighting) come from its need to be released on the US big screen. I guarantee this movie made a lot of people expecting a simple alien action flick way more uncomfortable than they would have liked, and I bet the original vision of the story would have done that even more so.

    For me, the aliens’ perspective is missing because this movie isn’t about aliens, it’s about people. It almost doesn’t matter what they think, what their backstory is, what their planet is like, what Christopher’s deal is, or what their motivation is, because the movie is a lens on human behavior. It does what great science fiction is supposed to do; it gives us enough distance from reality (ie leaving out explicit discussion of apartheid or naming Soweto) in order to really take a look at ourselves. I agree that there are moments when the film relies a little too heavily on allegorical tropes, but the setting and situation reveals a lot about racism and oppression in a way that a realistic film simply cannot. That is not to say that sci-fi is better than realism. In my mind they serve different purposes. A film like District 9 works well when you’ve also seen something like Tsotsi.

    Here are some points in the movie that got me thinking: in spite of the aliens’ obviously superior technology, they are completely devalued by the humans and seen as lower life-forms that just root around in trash and randomly wreak havoc; humans take from the alien culture what they think is useful: weapons; the international MNU is said to be the biggest arms dealer in the world- it went from being a political organization to being a military-industrial powerhouse; marginalized black South Africans assert themselves above the easily manipulated aliens; the aliens were definitely not noble-savages (although Christopher does seem to be forced into that mold) as evidenced by their absurdly destructive weaponry; the gunfights during the climax end up between the mainly white MNU soldiers and the Nigerian gang- the aliens are just trying to get away; the movie’s protagonist is this simple dude who works in what looks like any other shitty office cubicle.

    The Nigerian gang was the most troubling entity for me as they seemed to be some of the most stereotyped, and there was a distinct absence of the black South African voice other than a couple interviews at the beginning (that were unnecessarily subtitled) and that one guy who ends up in jail defending Wikus. The absence of their voice though reflects how, based on my understanding of South African politics, this would have played out; white people would have been making the decisions and taking all the bulletproof vests.

    I definitely had a few problems with the film, but overall, I liked it a lot and thought it was one of the best mainstream science-fiction stories to come out in a while.

    I am very interested to hear other Racialicious readers’ reactions to it as well.

  5. Fiqah wrote:

    Well done, Arturo. This sounds like a hot, skippable mess. Seriously, “Prawns”? Like, coconut curry sauce prawns? Shades of bell hooks. How’s THAT for “eating the Other”?

    Also, er…this:

    While investigating a squatter’s shack, Wilkus is sprayed with some of “the fluid,” a crucial biological material.

    ::: raises eyebrows :::

    Euw.

  6. inkst wrote:

    @pageslap: I read your post on the racism in the film. I think that you nailed exactly what was bugging me about the Nigerians. The cannibalism and prostitution were definitely unnecessary. Also, I noted that the actresses who played the implied sex workers were billed in the credits as “Nigerian Hookers.” That kinda made me cringe too.

  7. atlasien wrote:

    I love the title of this post! Hilarious!

    The review leaves me interested enough that I think I’ll probably go see this movie. I’ve got a sort of medium-level tolerance for both summer schlock and White Saviors in movies. Although The Last Samurai and Blood Diamond are still too much for me to take without gagging (I did end up seeing bits of them on airplanes) and Transformers is totally out of the question.

  8. LusciousLibrarian wrote:

    I have to agree with everyone here. I saw the film this Saturday and was really in awe of the attention paid to the detail in which Wikkus’ character disintegrates physically and emotionally, but I was equally in awe at the complete lack of complexity and thought there was put into the non-white characters.

    Why do we hear hip-hop in the background whenever the Nigerian “gangsters” are on screen? As if hip-hop is universally the drumbeat of thuggery. Why does Wikkus speak fluent alien, but cannot communicate with the Nigerian thugs? And as someone mentioned earlier why is Christopher the only alien who is literate, verbal and clothed, despite the fact that the alien technology is so vastly superior to humans?

    When all of these are put together it seems as if the stereotypes about the aliens as base, vile, and animalistic are true and there are “some” who are exceptions. This is a long held belief of many well-meaning and guilt ridden members of majority culture who don’t consider themselves racist.

  9. Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist wrote:

    @Fiqah:

    they were called “prawns” because it’s supposed to be a degoratory name, referring to their prawn-like physique.

    seriously, District 9 is one of the best films I’ve ever seen. You really should do yourself a favor and go see it before you dismiss it.

  10. Heather Leila wrote:

    Ok, I just posted my thoughts on my Mozambique blog:
    http://heatherleilamoz.blogspot.com/2009/08/alive-in-joburg-district-9.html

  11. inkst wrote:

    “And as someone mentioned earlier why is Christopher the only alien who is literate, verbal and clothed, despite the fact that the alien technology is so vastly superior to humans?
    When all of these are put together it seems as if the stereotypes about the aliens as base, vile, and animalistic are true and there are “some” who are exceptions. This is a long held belief of many well-meaning and guilt ridden members of majority culture who don’t consider themselves racist.”

    He’s the only one we know of who is clothed. Remember that the film is told documentary style, so you are kept aware of the fact that you are seeing a subjective point of view. I also think that those characterizations of the the exceptions and everything are there to criticize the majority culture. Like I said in my earlier comment, when those viewpoints are applied to something like the Prawns in a sci-fi movie, their sheer ridiculousness becomes more evident and you can’t ignore it. You get enough distance to see xenophobia and racism for what it is: self-serving garbage.

  12. Bonasi wrote:

    @pageslap: I haven’t seen the movie, but I’ve seen the problem elsewhere where the writers make an allegory only for it to actually be a really, really bad allegory do to the minoriy-stand ins being depicted as violent or evil and the majority somehow always gets equated to ‘human’. (Supernatural is guilty of this, as is, from what I’ve heard, True Blood.)

  13. Bonasi wrote:

    Oh, and here’s a review by dcmoviegirl:

    http://dcmoviegirl.blogspot.com/2009/08/early-review-district-9.html

  14. DanL wrote:

    The review was pretty good. There was a review I read somewhere, probably slate, that talked about how Neil B decided to hold back on what was an exceptionally good first act in order to maintain some semblance of a popcorn flick, which I think is a main reason why it falls into such trouble with the review. The original short shows where it certainly could have gone.

    That being said, the movie is still pretty good and worth watching. The evil corporation trope is a little played out as noted elsewhere on the web but its definitely one of the better sci-fi movies this year and in a while.

    One thing that I don’t know if it was too noted was that it appears to some extent that due to the aliens coming, apartheid wasn’t entirely shut down. The obvious scene to demonstrate is the one concerning the bulletproof vests but there was another seen where Wilkus ran into the Gunter store and immediately went to a cashier while there was a line of black customers out the door. I think there were a couple of small details like this that were pretty good and caught my eye though how to properly explain them escapes me now

  15. Steve wrote:

    I am an African and I didn’t think it was racist at all.

    I was mostly interested in seeing a Sci-Fi action movie set in South Africa (since I lived there for a few years) and I was very happy with the results.

    I don’t the aliens are stand ins for black people or for apartheid it is more a question of “If aliens came to earth but did not have vast technology and resources how would we treat them?” Turns out we treat them pretty crappily.

    As far as the issues with the aliens, it is posited that the aliens are some kind of “insect hive mind species” and that the queen alien is dead or something so most of the surviving ones lack much independent thought. Christopher obviously belongs to some more higher ranking group (perhaps a technician group) .

    As for race, I thought it was pretty balanced, most of the biggest villains are white (Wikus’ father in law and the head mercenary) and Wikus himself is more clue less than heroic. It is clear that the Nigerian gangsters don’t represent all black people, since we see plenty of black people working at MNU and in the interviews and other footage.

    In short I thought it was really good and you should see it if you have an interest in Sci-Fi and/or Africa.

  16. Kwesi K. wrote:

    While it’s not stated out right, it was obvious to me while wile viewing the film that Christopher was an engineering class/or at least technician alien. At the beginning of the film, they state out right the the aliens were of a hive type society and all those that were found on the ship were essentially drones. Speculation was made that the queen or command level aliens had died off some how.

    Christoper and his interaction with the lower level yellow alien made it clear to me that while he may have been “smarter” than the others, his abilities to command his people were limited at best.

    As for labeling Wilkus as a hero standing up for the oppressed, I think you missed the point. From the act of infanticide he commits during the eviction to his rage at not getting things his way and attacking Christopher, he’s only willing to take up arm for his sake. His change of heart only comes when he realizes that he’s very close to dying and everything he’s done so far would be meaningless if he didn’t give Christopher a shot at succeeding.

  17. Didi wrote:

    “And to think that any government would be handling a First Contact situation (as opposed to the internment of its’ own citizens) without the U.S., United Nations or any other coalition tugging at its’ sleeve isn’t sci-fi – it’s flat-out ridiculous.”

    Is it really ridiculous – or are you simply just used to the US being the primary country to deal with first contacts because that is the only way your media is served to you?

  18. Katie wrote:

    There’s more discussion of the treatment of race in this movie in the following places:

    http://seeking-avalon.blogspot.com/2009/08/alien-cockroaches.html

    http://community.livejournal.com/deadbrowalking/385146.html?style=mine

    Some additional criticisms leveled there.

  19. Kate wrote:

    Oh, what a breath of fresh air, after all the four-star reviews!

    I’m almost inclined to see it again just to get a handle on what was going on with the subtitles, which seemed to have nothing to do with whether the speaker was intelligible or not.

    Re: the “hive workers who have lost their queen” – I definitely read that as a callback to the strategy of portraying marginalized groups as weak-minded and incapable of bettering themselves as an excuse for institutionalizing them.

  20. RainaWeather wrote:

    I have to see the film before making any judgments, but my sister saw this film and when she told me about it the first thing she said was, “apartheid.” So I figure even if the word wasn’t mentioned, that aspect must have been pretty obvious to anyone who knows about S. African history.

  21. Miles Ellison wrote:

    Nigerian gangster cannibals controlled by witchdoctors? Really? Are they kidding? Is this a joke?

  22. Winn wrote:

    @inkst,

    I really agree with your perspective here. I saw “District 9″ on Friday and have been thinking about it ever since. It is satisfying as a summer-action popcorn movie, but also operates on multiple levels, with nuances that continue occur to you after some time and distance. I also didn’t get that self-congratulatory air that sometimes occurs when you deal with sci-fi that tries to work as an allegory for man’s inhumanity to man; that sense of “look at me and deep, profound and liberal we are”. There are too many shades of gray in the film for that. And the characters in the film are not necessarily multi-dimensional, but they are complex, from the lines of demarcation in the alien’s society (discussed as hierarchal, with the majority of the aliens imagined as “drones”, which may explain why they are not as bright or capable of acclimating to the ways of humans as Christopher), to Wilkus’ clear character arc, and no pretense that he is altruistic or an advocate for alien rights. The glee with which he discusses killing the alien offspring in an early scene disabuses the viewer of any notion that this is a conventional hero. The treatment of the Nigerian gangsters was the most problematic for me; I have no problem with depiction of the criminal element and I know the supernatural elements of the leader’s belief system is not totally unrealistic, but because we do not have enough counterbalancing images of black Africans in film overall, let alone this film (nor are we given background into what is surely a complex existence for Nigerians living in South Africa and what that interplay is like), it comes off as too reminiscent of the same old wild-eyed, violent, money-grubbing, exploitive, superstitious Africans we’ve seen far too many times in film. Yet I can’t dismiss the film because of that, and I certainly don’t think the Nigerians come off worse that some of the cold-bloodedly mercenary white characters.

    This is not a film that should be dismissed without seeing it. Even while some aspects of it are definitely problematic, it is deeply thought-provoking, and much more multi-layered and challenging than your average summer flick.

  23. Arabi wrote:

    Don’t people find it troubling to assume that “aliens” are necessarily always a stand in for “oppressed minorities”.
    I haven’t seen the film but judging from reviews I think one can easily see this as more about how many white South Africans feel about the current racial climate. I mean first of all the aliens are foreign, from another “place”, having arrived in ships with superiors weapons. Who does that sound like(Europeans) though in this case they are being “oppressed” and the atmosphere is not to their liking( how a lot of whites feel in post-Apartheid South African) and thus some are trying to make an escape to their Queen( England, Australia, HELLO!) while the others have mindlessly accepted their lot. And of course we know those “pesky” Africans are always trying to get a hold of their superior technology to wreck havoc on each other.
    As ridiculous as it sounds LOTS of white South Africans, despite their continued economic dominance, feel this way.

  24. Pearl wrote:

    Someone put together an FAQ on IMDB, seen here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1136608/board/thread/145381864 Some of it seems to be his/her own opinion, but there are also parts quoted from the director. Reading it, it actually seems that there is a disconnect between how you (and I’m sure many people, including myself) view the aliens, and the way that the director understood them. Most importantly, the aliens’ society is apparently supposed to function like a hive, with workers and a queen, so a lot of what seems to be plot holes might be answered by this.

    Overall, I enjoyed the movie, though as pointed out earlier in the comments, there were some problems with the representation of Nigerians as lawless, violent, etc. This movie, like many good sci-fi films, tried to make a point about human behavior, though it’s not without it’s faults.

  25. Irene M. wrote:

    Let me preface this by saying that I mostly agree with Garcia. The fact that the film focuses on Wilkus, or even needs him to tell the story period, plus the treatment of the Nigerians are huge faults with the film. If I never see another white savior in a film, it will be none to soon.

    However, there are a couple of race-related issues that District 9 got right and I hope to see in other movies. *spoilers ahead*

    1: The movie is actually set in Johannesburg, not the US or Europe, AND has an entirely South African cast. One of the characters says, to paraphrase, “We were expecting the ship to stop over Manhattan or London, but not South Africa. Why choose Johannesburg?” Why not choose Johannesburg? It’s a large, important city on one of the largest continents on Earth, why wouldn’t aliens go there? For film makers and watchers to assume that aliens must stop in the US or Europe requires a Eurocentric mentality, because if its important and interesting it has to happen in a predominatly white nation right? Even the Entertainment Weekly review of the weekend box office is Eurocentric, saying that the director “shot the film in Johannesburg, South Africa of all places.” Furthermore, the human cast of D9 (aside from a few “documentary” interviewees) are entirely South African. There’s no American or British hero who magically appears in another nation while delegating the locals to props or sidekicks. Instead of South Africa being an exotic locale where our “real” hero or anti-hero visits, it’s shown as an actual place with events and people worthy of our study without an American/British medium.

    2: The film actually has lots of non-white people in it. Now, hear me out before you stone me for having too low standards. A lot of science fiction, such as Star Trek, Alien, or Babylon 5, takes place in a future where humanity is or should be working together in space. A future in which Earth is or should be united, thus the humans are supposed to represent humanity in general. However, despite the premise of human unity, you could never tell that white people are the minority on Earth by watching these shows. The hallways, crowds, and mess halls of these shows are filled with lots of white extras walking around in uniforms. Not that the racial make up of the main cast is unimportant, but using non-white extras is relatively easy to do and a logical extension of these shows’ philosophies yet it never happens. Apparently the people running these shows assume that humanity becomes magically white in the proceeding decades. What I love about D9 is that it doesn’t presume that white = human. Even though it’s not set on the future, most of the human beings that you see are black. The patrons at a restaurant, the crowds cheering the departure of the ship, and (the most interesting example I saw) the protesters trying to block the MNU evictions are mostly black. There is racism in the portrayal of some of the characters, but it was refreshing to see a movie that acknowledged the fact that humanity is not largely white. That in most places on Earth, a major city is not going to be filled with white bystanders. Now that’s something I would love to see more of in sci-fi.

    3: The movie is science fiction, but it’s not post-racial. Instead of making all of the humans white or humans racially mixed throughout, D9 portrays what would happen in our currently racist world. Think about, why are MNU agents mostly white while its protesters are black? Why isn’t Wilkin’s black successor invited to his promotion party. And, most damningly, how in a city with a mostly black population does Wilkin end up in a hospital with only white people in the waiting room? Just because D9 doesn’t live in a white universe, doesn’t mean that white privilege has disappeared. While the movie doesn’t dwell on intra-human racism, it doesn’t erase it either.

  26. Pearl wrote:

    …Uh, ignore the word “some” in “…some problems with the representations of Nigerians…” There were problems, period.

  27. Arabi wrote:

    The previous post was only half-joke but its just as plausible as an Apartheid interpretation.
    The fact is, any time we try to foist our representation of the real world upon a work a fiction, we run into contradictions. Allegories tend to be very simple and do not make for good cinema. The best medium for an allegory is the parable or fable. I don’t think this is an allegory but it may be a reflection upon xenophobia at large, as manifest in a myriad of ways.

  28. pageslap wrote:

    @Irene:
    Great comment- I hadn’t thought about the setting in that way. I’m not sure I entirely agree but it’s definitely food for thought; thanks for raising those points.

  29. The Hippo wrote:

    @inkst

    I also whole heartedly agree with your point. District 9 is not really a metaphor for apartheid as it is a deconstruction of how “first contact” is portrayed in films. Usually, when ever humans meet aliens, the aliens are always portrayed as superior and malevolent, and the humans inferior and benevolent. It is the aliens that come to Earth trying to conquer us,not the humans coming to alien planet X and being technologically superior and malevolent. So District 9 is a breath of fresh air, were the roles have been reversed, and the humans are the badguys.

    As a few of the posters point out, it would be jumping to conclusions to compare the prawns to any real-life human ethnic group,sure, there are some similarities to the war refugees from Nigeria that were attacked a few years back in South Africa. As pointed out, the aliens also have advanced technology far beyond that of humans, and are pretty violent, quite unlike the Nigerian war refugees.

    And on Wilkus van der Merwe, many people who seen the movie,including me, beg to differ on him being a “white savior”. Indeed, the character is a jerkass and unlikeable until the very end were he,in order to help Christopher and his son escape to there mother ship, stands and fight the MNU mercenaries, the only unselfish act the character does in the movie. Wilkus burns down a hatchery,gleefully killing there babies, as Winn points out. He is just as speciest as the rest of the human characters until he starts changing into one of the aliens.

    And on the Nigerian mercenaries, yeah that was pretty problematic, how they turned out to want to eat the prawns and were generally pretty sadistic. But how is that any different from the predominantly white MNU, who dissect prawns(symbolically eating them) and take great glee in killing them? To me, white characters are just as evil and amoral in their treatment of prawns as black characters, the whole of humanity is negatively portrayed.

    And lastly, the prawns are hardly noble savages, as others have pointed out. They have advanced and very powerful weapons, suggesting they may be just as violent as humans. And at the end of the movie doesn’t Christopher say that he is returning with reinforcements…

    All in all, District 9 has its problem with race, and much negativity, but it also has its positive parts, and and the good outweighs the bad, its a hundred times better than that schlock fest transformers:revenge of the fallen. Its the only other good popcorn flick I seen besides Star Trek

  30. oddrid wrote:

    @pageslap: I love your review. You exactly nailed why I was disquieted with the portrayal of the Nigerian characters in the film.

    I have to say I agree with everyone here saying that Christopher is a remnant of the technician class. I don’t think it’s a plot hole at all, in fact I appreciate a movie that doesn’t spell it out but leaves enough clues for us to figure that bit out ourselves.

    And for what it’s worth, I also want to caution against reading this as a perfect allegory. I think the director is wanting to leave echoes of apartheid in his narrative, but certainly isn’t aiming for a perfect comparison. Otherwise the portrayal of the aliens would be much more problematic, obviously.

  31. Jen wrote:

    @Didi

    “And to think that any government would be handling a First Contact situation (as opposed to the internment of its’ own citizens) without the U.S., United Nations or any other coalition tugging at its’ sleeve isn’t sci-fi – it’s flat-out ridiculous.”

    I initially rolled my eyes at this and thought it was strangely US-centric for Racialicious, until I re-read it. The key phrase is “tugging at its sleeve” – ie, it seems unlikely that the US/UN would let a country like South Africa do this on its own, not that a country like SA would do this on its own.

  32. dba_BAD wrote:

    District 9: Where black women are either interspecial prostitutes or or flesh-eating maniacs

    District 9: Where black folks rate only *slightly* below prawn-like aliens

    District 9: As long as 1 yt in prawnface identifies with your struggle…

    District 9: Remember, the true victim is the helpless, angelic white woman

    District 9: Where the black folks are not only violent criminals, they’re incompetent buffoons as well

    District 9: Once you go black* dot dot dot

    *full prawn

    District 9: Where black folks got beat out by a CGI alien for the role of the ‘magical negro’

  33. Urban Suburbinite wrote:

    “Indeed, the character is a jerkass and unlikeable until the very end were he,in order to help Christopher and his son escape to there mother ship, stands and fight the MNU mercenaries, the only unselfish act the character does in the movie. ”

    He had a selfish reason for doing that as well, Christopher being able to “fix” him. (I don’t want to spoil, so I’ll leave it at that.)

    Re: “Prawn” behavior

    I picked up on the the whole hive heirarchy, and Christopher’s rank. However I thought that it was also a wink at media portrayals of minorities. The footage of the Prawns behaving badly was shot documentary style. When we meet Christopher it is regular film. It just reminded me of how many times the news shows the least educated, more prone to violence, criminalized type POC. When a non-POC meets an educated POC (sometimes) they react with the same surprise Wickus did when he discovered how intelligent Christopher was.

    Also the thing that bothered me most about the Nigerian gangs, was that they were always referred to as “The Nigerians” or “The Nigerian Gangs”. It made it seem as though being Nigerian was more detrimental than the fact they were a gang. In the states most gangs have names Bloods, Crips, Los Solidos etc. I would think that the particular gang would have a name as well.

    One last thing. I could see the apartheid overtones, but scenes at the beginning with the different people saying how the aliens didn’t belong here, reminded me of how some Americans speak about Mexican immigrants.

  34. 7thangel wrote:

    here’s a review http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/08/17/what-secrets-lurk-within-district-9-white-anxiety/
    take note of a few comments specifically schwing and geoff

    schwing
    “Thank you so much for your review, Spencer. My friend and I watched the movie last night and were appalled by its racism and equally astounded that most people fail to see through its insidiousness.

    It was interesting to note that in the theater we visited, the part where the Nigerian gang leader was killed got louder applause than when the crazed MSU chap was ripped apart by the aliens.

    There are several things that just don’t sit right with me. Why would director Neill Blomkamp, a white South African filmmaker make a movie that perpetuates stereotypes and denigrates an entire nation of black people? The Nigerians had absolutely no redeeming qualities. Why not Russians, Hungarians, Italians, Israelis, Chinese, British…? Why did the aliens who most people found destructive and disgusting have to speak in clicks like the Xhosa tribe of South Africa? Why were the South Africans patrons of a restaurant named Gunthers? Gunther is the name of a king of Burgundy and means “warrior” or “soldier.” In effect, the South African blacks had a white warrior to thank for their sustenance.

    Like most of Peter Jackson’s movies, the evil doers are always menacing dark creatures. This reeks of nothing short of Orientalism.

    I’m not typically a conspiracy theorist, but I find it curious that Peter Jackson’s production studio is called, “Wingnut Interactive”–a clever subterfuge in my opinion.

    Anyhow, I commend your discerning mind and hope that more thinking people would take a closer look at the message of District 9 which to me, is racist fare cleverly packaged as an anti racist movie.

    Much like WholeFoods, something doesn’t smell right!

    geoff
    Shwing you are so right on. Not only was Gunther a white European warrior, but he was killed by henchmen of Attila the Hun. Another manifestation of the fear of the Other; the black South Africans may get their grub from the white soldier, but they are not to be trusted; they’ll throw him in the snakepit the first chance they get. This film was definitely shot through a colonialist lens.

    schwing
    Worse still, Günther could refer to racial anthropologist/race scientist Hans Günther. http://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/othersrv/isar/archives2/billig/chapter1.htm

  35. DCMovieGirl wrote:

    Great review. :)

    It’s was lonely for a while there.

  36. Amused0472 wrote:

    I tried to rationalize something good out of this film, but could not. If I were of Nigerian ancestry, I’d be pissed. As a black person, I’m offended. The only thing I liked in the film was when Christopher’s son hit Wikis in the head with the candy. Cosign with Arturo in hoping Christopher and son come back to kick some ass.