1) The plot is threadbare.
By no means does a movie need a complex plot to succeed. Just last week I saw and enjoyed immensely the Japanese film Still Walking, the plot of which involved a family hanging out on the anniversary of a loved one’s death. 9’s plot is at once completely arbitrary and urgent, a lame combination in most circumstances, but especially here, given the high-concept setting.
2) The characters are brilliantly designed.
Shane Acker and team do an amazing job giving the numbered sack people designs that are both diverse and rich in character. There are wonderful details, such as first model 1’s lower-tech shutter eyes making him squinty, or 6’s dirty fingertips, or the little vestigial wings on 3 and 4. It’s a shame these visuals aren’t enough to make up for the fact that…
3) In all other ways characters are poorly-stitched.
Of the nine characters in 9, 4 have quirks, 4 are one-note and flat, and only one (1, appropriately enough), has any meaningful growth over the course of 80 minutes. There are a few great little moments, such as with 8 playing with his magnet, or the cute report of 3 and 4, but overall, these characters are woefully underdeveloped, which is a shame because the movie ultimately hinges on us caring about a world in which this is all that’s left of life.
4) The machines are wonderfully macabre.
The machine monsters, that combine mechanical parts with bits of bone and cloth and plaster, are super spooky as stills, and even scarier in motion. I especially liked the cobra-stitch creature.
5) The action scenes shine!
The action in 9 is as exciting as anything put forward in the summer blockbusters. The scenes are incredibly well choreographed, which is critical considering how bizarre the mechanical foes involved are.
6) The voices are unremarkable.
Christopher Plumber, who voices 1, is always a joy to listen to; he alone elevates his character through performance. The other voices are very perfunctory. Not that it’s the actors’ faults – they just don’t have any great material to work with. Elijah Wood’s 9 is the most problematic for me, as the performance is very generic and kiddy and doesn’t quite gel with the overall look and feel of the film.
7) The more serious sci-fi bits are confusing/frustrating.
Okay, this is spoiler territory, so skip this is you want to see the movie before discussing its themes. The nine sack-people of 9 are brought to life by bits of their creator’s soul. Early in the film, 2 comments on how sophisticated 9’s design is, suggesting that the sack people are getting more sophisticated with each iteration. The actual designs and personalities, however, don’t suggest any progression, but are rather manifestations of different parts of the personality (reason, ingenuity, curiousity x2, caution, intuition, bravery, brawn, compassion?). Perhaps 9 is supposed to be the culmination of a line in that he is a fully “human” soul, whereas the first eight are just fragments, which is why creating 9 kills the scientist. I’m sure there was some serious thought put into what these little guys represent, but how it’s conveyed is messy at best. Also, if the machine is evil because it is intellect without a soul, than why doesn’t it start to develop a conscience as it steals 5 pieces of soul? If I was writing this scenario, that’s something I’d want to explore. Finally, much of the film’s finale hinges on 9 discovering how to use the device that sucks out souls. He uses it to undo the damage he did by giving soul-sucking power to the machine, but it’s emphasized that the scientist wanted to impart the knowledge of how to remove souls to 9. What’s the implication here? Is it just really lazy writing so that 9 can undo the arbitrary disaster he sets in motion, or was he intended to release the souls of his comrades to unleash “green soul energy” back into the world to make it rain and bring back life? (Yeah, this makes no more sense in the movie…)
8 ) When will mankind learn that you should never make artificially-intelligent weapons of mass destruction?!
Seriously!
9) There are no talking animals!
With every animation studio out there churning out largely generic talking animal cartoons , it’s a nice change of pace to have studio support for an independent animated genre flick. 9’s not going to break any records, but the 16 million that it earned so far is pretty impressive for a movie that is ultimately very niche and nerdy. Even though I didn’t really like 9, I do admire it, and I’m glad I saw it.
Stumble Upon
Del.icio.us
Buzz
10) Tim Burton mostly kept his gothy little one-note visual fingers out of it.
Snap! Hey, Burton’s got a whole bunch of notes! Actually, they’re all chords for a fuller feeling. Burton stopped doing mere notes years ago.
I dream of doing a mashup of clips of different Burton movies all cut together to make a different movie. I bet you could show it to the non-fangirl/guys and sell them on it being an wholly separate, original movie.
I think that would only work with his stop motion animation and only if you re-dub the voices. I, myself, happen to love stop motion animation though. You’re being unfair. You can say similar things of Jim Henson’s muppet films.
I happen to feel that Burton’s very creative vision has become very one note as he continues to churn out things he knows will bring in the Hot Topic crowd that’s become his bread and butter. He’s done some great work, but I know I’m not alone in thinking that his past five or so movies are extremely similar in visual style and lacking in a certain soul or creative spark. No amount of your own enjoyment of his films is going to change that personal POV, and I doubt my “unfairness” matters much to Burton.
In other words, whatever floats your boat doesn’t have to float mine
But you’re right. To each their own.
I think there is soul to Tim Burton’s work. It’s just a lot of people mistake simplicity for lack of depth. There’s a child-like whimsy to many of Burton’s protagonists. It makes them endearing and adds to their innocence. But I certainly wouldn’t call his work soulless. …Except maybe Planet of the Apes remake.
Tim was making films of the Gothic quirky quality long before Hot Topic existed. Let’s be reasonable. Burton earns money from the film distribution itself. It’s the company (not him) that gets the money from merchendising. From what I read he hates merchendising. It was because of a toy line that he was ordered to make changes to Batman Returns that he did not want to do.
Let’s be more sympathetic to the circumstance. If Tim Burton had made Edward Scissorhands today instead of 1990 you would probably accuse him of doing that to pander to the Hot Topic Crowd when in reality it was his style long before that store ever existed. It just happened to become trendy in recent years.
Okay, that came out strangely out of order. Sorry about that.
I certainly don’t think of Burton as a one note director. Is Big fish anything like Edward? Is Corpse Bride anything like Batman? Gothic yes, but other than the colour schemes and surreal qualities all his films are pretty unique. You have musicals, dramedies, stop motion animation, two cell animated series, super hero films, docu-dramas, and book adaptations.
I was thinking of going to see this for my birthday, but now I’m not too sure… Maybe I’ll just go see Harry Potter 6 (if it’s still out by then…) and rent this one. :/ Thanks for the warning on it, though! Last year I went to see Igor, and I ended up hating it. =_=; I don’t want to repeat that experience!
9 is a very artistic film, filled with symbolism and some depressing concepts though it is beautiful. If you want a whimsical, up beat film on your Birthday, this is not the film for you. It’s not a bad film but not one you want to see if you just want a simple, pleasant animated feature. Sure, the plot is simplistic but there is some depressing subject matter.
Hmm, well, I don’t want to be sad on my birthday, but I want the movie to leave an impression all the same. :/ I don’t want to walk out of the theater thinking, “Meh,” like I did with Igor.
9 is a very artistic and admirable film. Like many films of its ilk, it aims high,but I honestly think it falls short of being good storytelling. I used to be more forgiving of movies like 9 that are brilliant in design and loaded with symbolism, but as I’ve gotten older, I’ve started to hold imaginative films to a higher standard. I’ll still see a mediocre imaginative film over a mediocre “mundane” comedy, but I will no longer allow a movie to coast by, skimping on basics of story and character. Coraline, Up, Ponyo, District 9, and even Inglorious Basterds are fantasies that manage to simultaneously create unique worlds, but also have the “heart” and clarity that I think 9 is lacking. I’d equate 9 with a movie like Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow or Final Fantasy: The Spirits Withing. Ambitious, interesting, but just not engaging.
Okay, comparing it to Final Fantasy: Spirits Within sealed the deal. It’s a no-go for me. I’ll rent it when it comes out on DVD, and save my money.
Thanks for the heads up, Jake! I really appreciate it.
I think part of the problem with 9 is that the characters’ aren’t well explored. You’re not emotionally invested. Sure this can be explained away that they’re all aspects of a greater whole but it’s obvious that they were intended to have individual personalities. Part of this problem can be blamed on the short running length of the film.
I saw this just a few hours ago. I was a little surprised because it didn’t have the typical Burton feel, which made me cautious because the last film to not really feel like Burton but was made by Burton (as director or producer) was the Planet of the Apes remake and that was just awful.
I am a Burton fan. I have been since I was nine years old watching the animated Beetlejuice TV series in 1991.
I feel Burton’s greatest creation will always be Nightmare before Christmas (which I was obsessed with between 1993 and 1994). I know he didn’t direct it but it was his poem, he produced it, designed all the characters, chose the colour schemes, wrote some of the lyrics (uncredited as according to Danny Elfman) and did a lot of the work usually reserved for the director.
I felt the big reveal about the scientist piecing out his soul was the big reveal for me, the moment where I could see Tim Burton’s hand print on the project. Tim Burton has had a quietly spiritual quality to his films as of late. You can see it in Corpse Bride though not so much in Beetlejuice though that was the first of his films to deal with concepts of the after-life.
I had seen 9 back when it was still a short film. You can find it on youtube if you’re interested. The new plot isn’t that different.
I don’t really like the new word stitchpunk but this is definitely steampunk.
It’s not my favourite film. I probably won’t go out of my way to watch it again but it was interesting.
By the way, here’s the original short film if anyone’s interested.
In retrospect I am gonna see 9 after I may see “Jennifer’s Body”
I may need to watch something to in other words
“eat away the horror”so that I won’t nightmares when I go to sleep
(Jennifer’s Body)
but I have wanted to see 9 since I saw movie trailer in “Coraline”
& even though I know how its gonna end. through the net
I still what to see it
9’s ending is a lot like the ending of the short film only they add ‘It’s our world now. It’s what we make it.’
I meant the movie
“or was he intended to release the souls of his comrades to unleash “green soul energy” back into the world to make it rain and bring back life? (Yeah, this makes no more sense in the movie…)”
Sounds like it makes perfect sense to me, and I haven’t even seen the movie yet. Very similar to the restoration of the crystal in The Dark Crystal or Paradise in Wolf’s Rain.
Not having seen the movie, sounds like the scientists piecing out of his soul business is kind of similar to your Labby characters being splits of the original’s personality? Or did that influence your interpretation maybe?
Jake’s right. The scientist says he pieced out his soul because his first creation lacked humanity. It was pure intellect. He gave each of his nine beings a piece of his soul so that when humans died away at least one human soul would live on. The scientist died creating 9, whom apparently was his finest creation. According to an article I read each one of the beings was supposed to be a little more advanced than the last. I think most of his humanity went into 9. Each one was an aspect of his own nature.
I guess because they developed indivduality and indivdual personalities they ascend at the end as fully formed individual human-like souls (the ones that died). But it’s sad because the scientist destroyed himself in the most ultimate way possible just so that humanity, the nature of humanity would live on.
Anyone else think this soul-splitting idea sounds a bit like the horcruxes in Harry Potter? Even though the Scientist was not an evil Dark Lord and still died after his soul pieces lived on.
Yeah, the idea does sound a lot like the horcruxes.
I never noticed that until you mentioned it, but I do see the parallel, even though I have yet to see 9.
It reminded me a little bit of Jake’s Ablations but also of the definition of soul as provided in The Dresden files novels (that souls and broken souls can heal). Each one of those stitchpunk dolls developed his own personality, individuality, memories and nature. When you see their souls at the end they didn’t re-connect to recreate an incomplete version of the old man. They were still individuals… well, until they crossed over and reconnected with all life to make the rain.
I still wonder though why the soul stealing device was compatible with the monster. Why was the monster equip for it? Is that how the war machine worked? It killed by taking human souls? So the planet wasn’t just lifeless, it was also soulless. That’s pretty sadistic to not just take the lives of your enemies but also their immortal souls.
Maybe those were the human souls inside the talisman, so when it opened they were released and rained down at the end. I know it sounds weird, but it’s a possibility. I wonder if anyone will ever ask Shane Acker about that, because I’m sure we’d all like to know for sure.
Only two questions remain:
1) just how much of an influence was little big planet? for reals.
2) was there any sort of danny elfman soundtrack with high pitched voices going “la la la la la la la la” in a minor key, at any point? that is how you really know whether the burton was restrained.
Haha. I’d argue the point but usually Danny Elfman does have a distinctive gothic horror movie style to his music. I do love him though. It’s hard to believe he started out as the lead singer for Oingo Boingo (their only mainstream hit was probably Weird Science). How did Tim Burton see that and go ‘That would make a brilliant composer for my films!’
And now he’s the second highest paid composer in Hollywood. Danny’s done things you probably don’t even realize were his such as the Desperate House wives, Simpsons and more obviously the Tales from the crypt theme songs. There’s also the Spider-man soundtrack, Nightbreed, Darkman, besides all of Burton’s films (except Sweeney Todd and Ed Wood).
I was such a big fan of Tim Burton’s and Danny Elfman’s growing up that when my little brother (he was eleven at the time) went to see Sleepy Hollow in 1999 he shouted ‘DANNY!’ in a cheering tone when he saw his name in the opening credits. Apparently in certain things I trained him well.
My favourite Oingo Boingo song is Flesh ‘n Blood which is on the Ghostbusters 2 soundtrack even though all you hear in the movie are the opening chords of it just before the toaster scene.
My favourite Danny Elfman compositions are the Edward Scissorhands soundtrack and the piano pieces for Corpse Bride. They’re of such a classical style that people keep mistaking them for such things as Moonlight Sonata but they’re not. They’re original pieces for the movie.
And of course there’s a special place in my heart for all of the Nightmare before Christmas soundtrack of which I have most of Danny’s original demos (I LOVE the demo for This is Halloween).
My favorite Elfman scored movie was Notorious. Who knew that dude could write 16s?
I got the impression this was a “Presented by” producer’s credit for Burton, not something he heavily shaped. There were no la las that I could detect. The LBP-esqueness only came through in the very excellent graphical representation of crafts. But LBP is just silly as all hell, whereas this was Very Important Business!
This was more or less just paid for by Tim Burton much like James and the Giant Peach and Batman and Robin.
There are instances where he has producing credit but does more than just produce like with Beetlejuice the animated series and later Nightmare before Christmas to a far greater extent.
p.s. that was supposed to be a number eight) , not a cool dude in shades.
I still kind of want to see this movie, even though I’ve seen a lot of reviews of it basically proclaiming “Meh, it’s OK”. It looks pretty interesting.
I just saw this today with my husband. We saw the previews and thought it was going to be awesome. I enjoyed mostly the whole movie. We where however dissapointed when at the end…there really wasnt any point to any of it. Everything that 9 did was just to fix (and poorly) the stupid mistake he made. 9 was the most pointless character there. 7 killed the cat creature….and if 9 wasnt there to screw things up, the machine would have never woken up and they all would have lived in peace.
This is true. Another issue I had was why did the machine that woke up have the ability to steal souls at all. It wasn’t the same device the scientist used to make his doll people. Did this thing steal components of this because of jealousy of the stitchpunks soul?
Wat. It couldn’t ahve. It was asleep. I really don’t understand why the monster was equip to do that.
9 put the talisman into the machine that made it start stealing the souls. I doubt it could’ve stolen them without the talisman
Yes, but why was the machine equip to be compatible with the soul-stealing device and why did it proceed to function as if that was it’s main purpose of being?
Hearing all this talk about the story and characters not being up to snuff made me nervous, but I can honestly say I loved this film. Enough to go see it twice over the course of two days. It’s a movie that lets you do the thinking and come up with your own conclusions and observations, and I really admire that. It’s a rare theme to present on screen, and usually avoided by filmmakers since people always want to see and know everything up front. I didn’t see much wrong with the story, apart from the numerous plotholes, but as previously stated it’s kind of refreshing to use your imagination and fill those in yourself. Yes, the characters were a little flat, but isn’t that because they are each (except for 9) only one aspect of the scientist’s personality? I found them all to be quite loveable, except for 1 and 8. Grouchy old men and mean giants are never much fun. They didn’t go over the top with humor as most movies do, there was just the right amount to maintain a balance.
Was anyone else particularly effected by the end of the Over The Rainbow scene? The juxtaposition of the song and something horrifying happening got to me, and I think will go down as one of my favorite movie moments. The “burial” scene was very touching too, kind of gives the viewer hope that humanity is not yet lost.
The ending did confuse me though, with the little green things in the rain. My guess is they planned it as sort of a rebirth scene, just like in the end of Princess Mononoke when the Forest Spirit’s soul is blown over the barren hills and makes the trees grow again. Once more, you kind of have to form your own conclusion about this.
Overall it was very enjoyable. It may never outshine Nightmare Before Christmas or Coraline, but it’s definitely paving the way for new, fantastic animation and a new director. Good luck to you, Shane Acker!
Quick question just throwing it out there
but is there an AMV of the short mainly with
Coheed and Cambria playing in the background?
&mainly when he fights the monster of course?
this is probably a dead horse by now m(_ _)m but
what would happen if an American director worked on a movie with a Japanese director, or an Indian or
Chinese director?
my guess is that they would make a movie
Directors of mutliple racial backgrounds have done wonderful things together. Kingdom hearts for example.
To be honest I never thought of it as a cultural issue. A film would be made, that’s all.
at least you get it
I however still wonder what fans would have to say
about if Burton worked on a movie with director Miyazaki,or Masashi Ikeda
Miyazaki and Burton both have a fondness for Steampunk, whether it’s Howl’s castle or Ichabod Crane’s specks. They’d probably work well together. Burton is tempermental. So is Miyazaki and when you have two people who are a lot a like one of two things happen. They either hate each other, seeing the things they hate about themselves reflected back at them. Or they end up loving each other. Like Tim Burton and his co-director for Corpse Bride or Henry Sellick with Nightmare before Christmas and later James and Giant Peach (few people know Burton produced that). So long as their egos don’t clash they could do something amazing together.
although it may never happen I agree with you on that,that it would be something amazing truthfully I feel that just the fact that if,it were made thats what makes it amazing in the first place
I just saw the movie, and I kind of agree with Mollie up there. I liked it. Quite a bit actually, and I agree with alomost everything she said (I thought the “Over the Rainbow” scene was a bit cheesy).
The only thing I had a problem with was the purpose behind it. We have these little sack people, and before they had to fight for their lives against unspeakable horrors, they were created to do…. what, exactly?
If 9 dolls were all that was going to be left of humanity, forever, what was the point?
The point was simply that, so the nature of humanity could endure. Perhaps so beings of other world might discover what humanity was like through them or so there might be some hope for the planet. Where there’s life there’s hope.
sequel?
in truth aside from honor being a point of plot
I thought there job was to save the last humanity
somehow starting with a child or a baby
9 dolls,9 months?
I’m not quite sure how they would do that, seeing as how the last of the human race died out and they just have fragments of the soul of one man who’s been long since dead. I’m not sure how they would make a baby if there aren’t any humans around to reproduce, or at least get some cells from so that they can grow the baby the same way they do with cloning animals. But that would have started a whole uproar on the ethics of genetics and cloning human beings that I doubt Tim Burton would have wanted to deal with. I think that’s too delicate of subject matter for a children’s fantasy movie. Parents would go nuts over it, and not in a good way.
I think think the only ethical issue of cloning comes from those few that think it’s a good idea to keep a version of themselves alive for spare parts. This notion and those who are okay with this notion disturb me…
yeah that I could have actually gotten that from my newborn niece
& 1.you need to watch more Outer Limits
ever hear of Cryonics?
I watch Outer Limits. I think if you are cloning a human for the simple act of creating a human, an individual new person who is physically identical to a deceased one or living is fine. However if you’re using that person for parts and or slavery that’s when the technology has exceeded human conscience.
Kids movie? I’m sorry, but I beg to differ. It may be CG but this stuff is pretty dark for kids. When I first saw it, a mother had brought her two sons to see it and after the attack by the Seamstress (the cobra thing) the younger boy was in tears and wanting to leave.
It’s definitely not for YOUNG kids (it is rated PG-13, for crying out loud!) but I would say that many of its elements play out in a “kiddy” fashion.
good news everybody I may get a chane to see this movie
hey guys got back from the city
honesty I enjoyed 9 of course I also enjoyed Gamer
but truthfully I feel that because all of you guys pointed it out its flaws that maybe all of you well tolerant it