Turn Advertising Off
 
    NEW>Full Movies!        Movie News        Top Stories      Theatrical Release Dates      Movie Pictures      Trailers & Clips      Listen to Movie Soundtracks

9 (2009)

"Concepts---great. Execution---Extremely lacking. "

The following might contain spoilers for those easily surprised... Then again, there really isn't anything you can spoil about this movie...

What the hell just happened? Did I just see a movie or did sixty minutes just shimmy its way out of my life without so much as an adieu? Seriously, does anyone know? The last thing I remember was going into a theater, buying over-priced concessions (Cherry Coke and Bunch-a-Crunch thank you very much), sitting in my chair and looking up just in time to see a bunch of flashy images frenetically prance across the screen... Then, just as I was prepared for the film to actually kick in---I was right back outside... No food or drink clutched tightly in either of my hands; no memory of what just transpired. Was that it? Did I just seriously pay nearly ten bucks for a brain-wash?

Well, I honestly might as well have. Plain and simple, "9" is a disappointment to say the least. I mean, you know there's a problem when the two-minute trailer exceeds everything its full-length brother has to offer. Pretty much, I look at 9 the same way I look at Hellboy 2: they're both films that I truly wanted to enjoy, but all they boil down to is a collection of cool parts that can't come close to creating a rollicking whole. Within the first ten minutes of 9, I knew there were going to be problems when absolutely NO effort was made to developing anything. Character development? Pshaw. Conflict? Nah. An actual story? Who needs it? We've got sleek visuals!!! Well, sorry Acker... I mean, that's great an' all, but actually having a narrative---even a base one at that---which is properly paced, is more important than all of the visual bravado combined. Without it, even a largely hyped flick can fall full force on its CG face *cough*cough*cough*. I mean, all of the attention by Acker and co. has been solely placed upon the eye candy, so much in fact that the movie simply has no room for anything more---well, unless you consider many unanswered questions and numerous plot holes. As I briefly hinted at above, things begin going downhill during the film's introduction when "9"---the lead doll---meets numero "2" (for seriously about two minutes), right before he's captured by the "Cat Beast". Following this, he meets the rest of the rag-tag group. Suddenly, "9" has a relentless yearning to go rescue "2" despite the fact that he just been born unto the wasted world, has no idea who "2" is, had no idea who anyone or anything is, and is suddenly---with absolutely no build up---willing to not only so rashly sacrifice himself, but the lives of others whom he guilt's into his reckless endeavor for a character that might as well have just been an extra. What could have easily fixed this however would have been an actual series of events that developed to this choice of action. Since "9's" birth directly precedes this, what would have been infinitely better would have been to show "2" finding him, and through something as simple as a montage, presented a passage of time in which "2" acts as a mentor to "9"; teaching him for weeks or months, telling him of other possible survivors---of the machines; this would have allowed us as an audience to understand why "9" would feel the need to stage such a suicidal rescue mission---he's lost someone close to him---the only person he's ever known. But since there's none of that whatsoever, there is absolutely no reasoning for "9's" immediate decision to risk all for a two-minute stranger. This might seem small---but this serves as foundation for the rest of the film's continued pointlessness. Upon the rescue, the dolls "awaken" a robotic architect which looks like a Mad Max version of 2001's hilariously monotone red-eyed villain. As the film races to its finish (it's barely an hour long), it becomes crystal clear that 9 is nothing more than a collection of ideas without anything to truly unite them. There is no real story here. Just a bunch of moments which try to trick you into thinking there's more at work than there really is. There's nothing to protect because the world is a dusty wasteland and every human is dead. The dolls have zero objectives other than to scavenge, draw, and get high off of magnetic force; the mammoth big bot antagonist is disabled and only the Cat Beast roams about and is very easily dispatched of when one doll fights it. So what's going on here? What should we care about? Who should we care about? Where's the conflict? Well, some might say it's when the biggie bot becomes sentient once more. Well, all it does is begin rebuilding its ruined robotic empire... Oh, and it wants the doll's souls for some idiotic, unexplained reason. This doesn't create urgency to me; it creates more questions. Why would the professor explain to "9" how to use the Talisman in the first place? Did he get a hit of the ol' Nostradamus and foresee "9" actually having to battle a soul-powered behemoth? And on that point, the entire soul extraction idea came about after he realized the world was going to hell because of the borg war, so why was there even a plug-in for the Talisman on the massive pile of "evil" rust, if it preceded it entirely? Why didn't he just place his entire soul into the machine in order to properly control it---he cared for it and it cared for him (as shown in the flashback where the prototype version tries to fight for his master as he's being pulled away by soldiers)? Why does the villainous orb-eyed engineer even need souls---it creates in its image just fine as it is. Why is one of the dolls a girl? It's an old man's soul... Guess he had an alternate spirit lifestyle? Do you see what I mean? There is no meaning behind any of the onscreen action. Outside of knowing that there was some bout between man and machine, we have no understanding as to why any of this is occurring or what motivations are. The film's excellent trailer (which I highly recommend you watch over the actual film) even goes as far to say, "After our world ended, their mission began." What mission?! They have no idea why they even exist! There's nothing left to save! They can't even reproduce---they're dolls! What mission?!

And then there's the voice actors... No one here does a stand-out job whatsoever. Once again, since the film is so short, I don't believe that any of the big name actors were allotted the time to truly give these characters personality. They all feel quite plain and uninspired... Jennifer Connelly, Elijah Wood, Bob Reilly, Crispin Glover (who I was really looking forward to), etc... They all say their lines, but all of them just felt so lackluster and unenthusiastic that I was bored just listening to them. On the plus side to the audio department, the sound design itself is excellent. The screeching of metal and blades as they collide with one another; the simple dangle of the doll's zippers as they bounce about with every step they take, the thunderous explosions and ricochet of projectiles... This is one facet of the film that I was quite happy they delivered on. Much like the graphics, the overall sound---not the blasé soundtrack, mind you---are one of the key aspects that attention and appreciation were definitely applied to.

And yes, the computer generated imagery does look simply wonderful. The decrepit state of the world is perfectly established via blown-out homes and the tiny detailed trinkets of yore that the dolls use as weapons, attire and furniture. This really is the bright spot on an otherwise missed opportunity. While the narrative was completely forgotten, at the very least, Shane Acker went to great lengths to make sure the film looked absolutely stunning. Sadly, the sheer lack of a compelling... Well, anything, far outweighed the style and ingenuity so well transcribed into the dilapidated landscape. Concepts---great. Execution---Extremely lacking.

At the end of the day, I, as well as the group of people that I witnessed this film with all felt ripped off. Actually, talking about it afterward only served to disappoint us more as we continued to find errors, despite its "cool" look. We had all been looking forward to this as soon as Coheed and Cambria's "Welcome Home" first played alongside the preview, and afterwards... Well, just wanted a refund for hardly an hour's worth of a movie that couldn't wait to book it to the finish line. There are some cool ideas here, but they're just ideas that don't form a full thought and only serve to make what was once just a short-film, a little bit longer.

18 Comments


October 8th, 2009 7:29pm
Thanks, Crypt--yeah, this flick might have had the visuals... But yeah... That's pretty much all it had... And as for the people and their comments... Well, they're funny...
  (Delete)
October 4th, 2009 7:54am
theres some funny comments below here. bashing you for no reason. you didnt like the movie. get over it. i love AllAboutSteevefan- "U suck". then you reply- "I try." classic...

but anyhow, i havent seen this. i was all excited for it, then the day it hit theaters, and it wasnt doing too well, and it was getting high reviews... all of a sudden, i just didnt care much. ill probably see this at the discount theater.

great review. it just sounds stupid. they meet for 2 minutes, then this 9 guy wants to save 2? hmmm... very questionable. but i guess he just cant let 2 die, huh? lol. nice job.
  (Delete)
September 13th, 2009 8:13pm
But isn't the machine already bringing life to the planet through its own creation? I mean, it's making creatures that are apparently sentient (even the cobra-like denizen bowed before its master when it presented its master its catch). So it's still bringing life to the planet--it's just in its own image.

But yeah, I COMPLETELY agree with you otherwise--it was severely disappointing.
  (Delete)
September 13th, 2009 9:58am
I got all the elements of the reason why the machine wanted to kill the sack boys is because they can bring life to the planet. When you look it the story it was poorly executed. Things didn't seem to have a natural progression. NO emotional attachment was made with me and the characters. They were all boring characters with no defining qualities to the them.
  (Delete)
September 12th, 2009 11:38pm
Thanks for the backup Messanger.

Screenwriter, thanks for the checking out the review. Like I told NewDrug, I'm glad that you could enjoy it; it just wasn't all there for me. Animation and visuals were superb, but its other cinematic aspects need much work.

And Imborednow, please explain why this film required intellect--in detail. The fact that you're even stating that shows that you really had no idea what was going on here. Explain what facets of the film required such brain power that the masses wouldn't be able to follow... And you speak of the populace obsessing with fart jokes--this film catered to those that enjoy drug referenced jokes--i.e.: the magnet scene even filled with the sound of a bong being used. You need to understand a film before you blast someone for stating an opinion. Even people that disagree with me have the decency to know that. So if you're going to become angry, state your points; your arguments, and then I'll once again type out my rebuttal.
  (Delete)
September 12th, 2009 11:06pm
seriously?
it was a good movie it just took a little bit of intellect.
though i will say it was a bad movie for the theatres.
because half of america just loves fart jokes.
so before you bash a movie...make sure you have good taste.
  (Delete)
September 12th, 2009 10:42pm
Story? What story? This was a weak movie.
  (Delete)
September 12th, 2009 7:24pm
Great review. I can see why you didn't like it but I absolutley loved this one. Not because it was Burton or because of the action just because of the story inside of it. It was a great little peice of animation in my opinon. Check out my review.
  (Delete)
September 11th, 2009 10:12am
Thanks NewDrug, I'm glad you could enjoy it; for me, it just wasn't all there (as you most likely already know). Thanks for the comment and thanks for treating both our opinions with maturity. Unlike some people on here...
  (Delete)
September 11th, 2009 6:49am
I personally loved this movie. I thought it lived up to everything i thought it could. Great review, but i strongly disagree. but to each his own right? lol.
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 11:18pm
Thank you very much, Soylent.
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 10:22pm
very good review.
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 5:19pm
I try.
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 4:11pm
U suck
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 12:04pm
Bonesaw, I understand that aspect of the film, but the fact is that Acker wanted to actually make these characters--not just single traits. That's why 9 is presented as a naive newborn at the outset of the film--he's curious and doesn't even know what a bullet is--but then, this becomes butchered when no other effort is made and suddenly he knows everything, even how to immediately make a flashlight-like object. Furthering this, 9 displays other emotions/"parts" of the professor that the other dolls are supposed to encompass. 1 is cowardly, fearful and leads with stubbornness. 9 does all of this as well. He's afraid and hides when the Cat Beast attacks and he rashly makes a call to arms questioning other's motives without knowing his own. He even acts like the girl doll and heroically fights. 5 even shows cowardice and fear and finally the determination to fight. If all of these dolls are just single parts, then why are they enveloping traits that make up an entire person? Because they were supposed to be characters unto themselves--not JUST a trait. Acker wanted them to be likable so he tried to present them as specializing in a single aspect, while retaining varying personalities unto themselves. Again though, he TRIED. While the potential for all of that is clearly there, nothing is done with it. That's my issue--the potential--it's obvious they were trying to do something ambitious with their world and characters but the determination was lacking. I hope I'm being clear, and thanks for the comment.

And Righthand, thanks for the comment. Yeah, Cherry Coke is definitely my drink of choice when it comes to the cinema. And I think that you'll find some entertaining bits here as well as some great CGI, but just don't expect an actual overarching narrative to really drive everything forward. Again, thanks for the comment, man.

And Serial Killer, Tim Burton didn't actually do this one--he just served as a producer (as well as Wanted's Timur Bekmambetov). Shane Acker is actually the director and original story developer--he had some aid on the actual . Like I told Righthand, there's a lot of creative content here that looks nice, there's just not a lot of meaning behind it whatsoever. Go for the visuals, nothing else. And again, thanks a lot for the comment.
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 10:24am
I'm not a Tim Burton fan, but I'm still thinking about this one. Good review, by the way.
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 8:07am
You are correct on some of these issues but the whole character development should be left out. Each number is already a trait and characteristic of its owner, so no background is needed. You just have to figure out what number represents a part of the creators soul. I thought the film was ok. Lets just say i was entertained for 75 minutes
  (Delete)
September 10th, 2009 1:30am
Great review man. Cherry coke is awesome. I was going to see this today but had other things to do. It sounds like a big let down. I was hoping it wss going to be good. The trailers werew good. It sounds like the actors didn't care enough to do a good job. And that theres no story. I might still check it out just to go see something. Great job as always man. Your reviews are good.
  (Delete)

1
  Star
Story:
Acting:
Directing:
Visuals:
Reviewed: September 10th, 2009
More of My Reviews:
Was this review helpful?

0 Users

1 Users
Average Score:
3 Stars
Viewing
8 of 12