| District 9 and Consumer Friendly Social Activism |
| Thursday, 27 August 2009 21:07 |
|
I went to District 9 without having seen any write-ups or previews, and was blown away. I wasn’t prepared for a movie that so deeply addressed social issues such as refugees, over-crowding, violence, and corporate evil. The main character is essentially a corporate public liaison charged with serving eviction notices to a containment camp full of malnourished and burdensome alien refugees from another planet. I was struck by the complexity of these alien creatures, which seemed to have great technology, but on another level were the scum and outcasts of their society, willing to barter away all they had due to their addiction to cat food. Though the aliens were physically repulsive, the movie actually generated strong emotions of pity and perhaps even empathy for these creatures. The movie was violent and littered with bad language but the story was engaging despite a few gaps in continuity. The special effects and filmography aided to suspend disbelief long enough to enter into the fictional world of District 9. Thankfully, the shaky camera effects weren’t quite as bad as in Cloverfield. Spiritually speaking, I think the largest question this movie asks is, “At what expense both personally and corporately are we willing to forgo our own pleasures, desires, and safety to ensure ethical treatment of others (especially those who are not as ‘cultured’ as ourselves)?” This is an incredibly relevant question, especially in this day where everyone wants to show his or her hipness through social activism. The reality is that to make a substantial difference we must be willing to seriously sacrifice our comfort, our reputation, and maybe even quite literally, our lives. I’m challenged with this film as a Christian because I feel that the heart of our message is the willingness to go to the cross on behalf of the disenfranchised. Yet, I wonder if we aren’t so driven by the almighty dollar that we make our decisions based on how much liability we might assume, or how we might avoid controversy, rather than on what would be the right thing to do. |
| Last Updated on Thursday, 27 August 2009 21:12 |
