A lot of people talk about the fake records in the film and compare it to cloverfield and blair witch. In my opinion this film is a fake documentary. First, the source of the documentary section of the film is not stated. Second, many videos were recorded without reason. Third, they were not shot by the same photographer. The provenance and rationality of documentaries are self-evident, and they are mostly filmed or organized by one or a group of authors. Pseudo-documentaries generally state the source in advance (justified incidentally), and are usually made by perceptible photographers. These conditions create two characteristics, one is authenticity, usually established by provenance and plausibility (the texture of the fragment itself also plays a role). The second is limited, which is based on the limited ability of the photographer. Looking back at "The Ninth District", you will find that the sources of the recorded passages are extremely complicated, and the author does not want to have traceability. All paragraphs are meant to bring out some kind of information to complement the narrative. This in fact constitutes an infinite narrator, a fiction that strengthens rather than weakens. But this omniscient organization is not entirely undesirable. At the beginning of the film, before the action started, the male protagonist's colleagues mentioned that he betrayed them and so on. Let me smell the common prophecy of mythological narratives. In fact, the arrangement of the information in the first half of the film is enough to carry out omniscient narratives and use prophecies to enhance its epic sense. But obviously, in the second half of the film, in order to take care of the suspense, it returned to the classic linear narrative. The last few interviews were more of an afterthought. It makes me worried.
View more about District 9 reviews
