Thu
Sep 10 2009 12:00pm
Review: Shane Acker’s 9

Shane Acker’s new feature-length expansion of his Academy Award-nominated short film, 9, features a beleaguered group of sentient ragdolls (officially labeled “stitchpunks”) struggling to survive in the wake of a cataclysmic conflict between human beings and a race of killer war machines, resulting in the apparent extinction of all organic life. Collectively, the stitchpunks represent the last hope and vestige of humanity, laying low, cautiously carving out a life amidst the wreckage and rubble of the dead world around them, cobbling together ingenious tools and contraptions out of the remaining fragments. When the eponymous 9 awakens into this strange and forbidding existence, however, his actions lead to a direct confrontation with an unholy host of diabolical machine-creatures, culminating in a climactic showdown between the forces of Good and Evil, Past and Future, Creation and Destruction, all set against a backdrop resembling some kind of post-industrial, steampunk-y Mordor, belching sinister smoke and flame and robot spiders at every opportunity.

If this sounds a little hackneyed, that’s because it is.

To be fair, 9 is an absolutely stunning film. Visually, it is undeniably breathtaking even in its darkest moments. Acker, production designers Robert St. Pierre and Fred Warter, and art director Christophe Vacher deserve the highest possible praise for bringing this world and its inhabitants to life, creating an atmosphere both somber and luminous: a wasteland still haunted by a few fleeting rays of hope. Unfortunately, the plot and characters seem like an afterthought within the film, functioning mainly to provide an excuse for a cavalcade of ever more intricate and disturbing mechanical monsters to scuttle in and out of frame, engaging our hapless clan of intrepid ragdolls in energetic and highly repetitive battle, again and again and again. And again.

As beautifully animated as the action is, the fight scenes grow increasingly tiresome as the film progresses because there is hardly any meaningful subtext connecting one skirmish to the next—the characters are little more than clusters of loosely-defined personality traits pinned unconvincingly to the arbitrary numbers assigned to them. We know, for example, that 9 is the Hero, 7 is the Courageous Warrior, 6 is the Crazy Artist, and 5 is The Nice One; whether we care about them is a different story.

Furthermore, while the various machine-beasts are certainly impressive (and genuinely unsettling), there is no real villain for an audience to root against, despise, or dread. B.R.A.I.N., the artificial intelligence responsible for the revolt of the machines and the destruction of humanity, barely factors into the action and has no personality. If you’re going to have a rogue A.I. wreaking havoc all over your post-Apocalypse, why not create one with a little flair? A little pizzazz? Engage in some sinister robotic laughter. Twirl an animatronic mustache, whatever. Just give me something. HAL and GLaDOS would eat B.R.A.I.N. for breakfast (though whether that would actually make them zombie A.I.s is another question entirely).

Personally, the only character I was remotely intrigued by at all was arguably the least likeable: the pompous, irascible 1 (voiced by the great Christopher Plummer). At the start of the film, 1’s position as the self-proclaimed leader of the group is reflected in his style of dress, which includes a decorative cape and a tall, mitre-like hat. Combined with the fact that he has taken sanctuary in the ruins of a Gothic cathedral, his finery has the effect of giving him a creepy, ecclesiastical look, like some kind of demented, angry puppet-Pope. (I’m just saying: if the Brothers Quay ever feel like making a short called “Francis Bacon’s Muppet Babies,” I know exactly who they should call...). In any case, 1 is a multi-dimensional character who actually grows and develops over the course of the movie, revealing himself as flawed, fearful, and weak, but not inherently evil or beyond redemption. Sadly, this instance proves the exception rather than the rule in a film which ultimately devolves into a series of stunning visuals stitched haphazardly together with vague plot points and rusty bits and pieces of backstory. Its design is every bit as stunning and ingenious as its protagonists, but for a movie so concerned with the evils of soullessness, there’s very little going on beneath its impressive surface.


Bridget McGovern is a lit nerd, a film geek, and a complete pop culture junkie. She enjoys vampires, David Bowie, roller coasters, and Zardoz more than anyone probably should.

8 comments
Jason Henninger
1. jasonhenninger
The phrase "Francis Bacon's Muppet Babies" has made my day worth living.
Eugene Myers
2. ecmyers
You've assessed the film perfectly! I'm still trying to figure out the plot, because it feels like it should work but it really doesn't. But what a beautiful mess it is.
Alec Coquin
3. bloggeratf
"Return to the source". Favorite quote of the whole movie.... I thought they had already done an animated version of The Matrix, but I guess I was wrong.

More importantly, I think people need to realize that since the stitchpunk beings are intended to represent limited aspects of the human soul. At least that is what I understood them to be. Assuming this is true, Acker painted himself into a corner as far as compelling characters go.

Thanks again for the tickets.
Richard Fife
4. R.Fife
I kind of was thinking what @3 said about the characterization, but I still think there is a lot you can do with a "soul shard", as was seen with 1.

To the plot, I think it really was just the jerkiness of it that put me off. They are zipping around so much that it felt like I was playing a video game and skipping the cutscenes between the levels. There just wasn't enough of the actual motion to make anything feel worth it.

Perhaps the video-game version of the game will fill in the holes in the pacing of the plot ;)
Bridget McGovern
5. BMcGovern
@4: Yep, Irene said almost the same thing about the video game aspect of the film; she also called it "ragdoll parkour with the coolest looking bad guys ever," which isn't a bad summary of the movie. I just wish there had been a little less parkour-style action and a little more story...
Other Alias
6. Other Alias
I watched the short film, and I thought the story was very well suited to that medium. Everything that needed to be said to tell the story was done in 10 minutes.

I haven't watched the full length feature, but as much as I enjoyed the short, I did wonder if there was really enough substance to it to fill 90-100 minutes.

I think some stories are better left short, allowing the reader / watcher to imagine the rest of it.
Elizabeth Coleman
7. elizabethcoleman
My problem with the movie was the fact that they raised a lot of interesting questions they never answered, and I suspect it's because they nevr thought up an answer in the first place, and didn't think through the consequences of what they were saying. Why do the machines act as they do? Other than to be a threat to the stitchpunks, of course. How are the stitchpunks our hope for the future, rather than just one guy's hope for the future?
There's some serious nature-of-the-soul discussions to be had there, and with the ending, they blithely toss away what I thought was the proper answer--at least regarding them, little golems that they are. I liked the idea that even as soul fragments, possessed by little archetypal complexes, they could still develop into whole individuals--miniatures of an entire soul. They didn't really go there, though, I suspect because the movie-makers didn't realize that they were implying that. To say more would be spoilery in the extreme, so I'll leave it at that. Suffice to say, I question their ability to reproduce and repopulate the world based on their actions. My roommate, however, liked that it could be seen as existential and meaningless. It is very realistic in that sense.

And I totally thought the movie felt like an old text based game, especially at the start.
You awake in a dusty room. What do you want to do?
LOOK
There is a strange metal object on the floor.
GET OBJECT
Torie Atkinson
8. Torie
@7 elizabethcoleman

Snerk. You're so right, except more realistically it would've been this:

There is a strange metal object on the floor.
PICK UP TALISMAN
Your inventory is full.

I really like the questions you raise, though. I liked all those things, too, and yet the film didn't even broach answers to those ideas.

What bothered me most wasn't that the plot was an incomprehensible mess (and it was), but rather that I didn't feel it would have required that much work to sit down and work it all out. If they had just had a discussion to hammer out what they were trying to do and how it was going to work, I think the film could have been salvaged.

Subscribe to this thread

Receive notification by email when a new comment is added. You must be a registered user to subscribe to threads.
Post a comment