I hated Chappie, that’s no lie, and apparently lots of people felt the same way. For Blomkaamp, making robots and making movies are the same thing, an identical passion, the same kind of assembly-line automation. He can do one well, but not the other. He tries to smear into the mix a little social commentary to hide the flaws in his narrative, which worked well in District 9, but not in Elysium and Chappie, for reasons that should be obvious to those who have seen the films.
Now in a major interview with Den of Geek , Blombkaamp expresses himself on Chappie, on why it failed, and how much it hurt for the film to make a mere $31M
“Chappie was unbelievably painful for me. That was difficult on several levels. But the thing with Chappie was, it felt like it was extremely close to the film I had in my head. Up until the film came out, I felt like I had given my all, and that I’d tried my hardest to make the film I had in my head, and I felt like I achieved that.
It put me in an interesting place, where I was needing to decide how I felt, when I create a piece of artwork that I feel positive about, and then the audience really rejects it – what does that mean? That puts you in an incredibly interesting space. I’m not judging the film based on box office merits or pure Rotten Tomatoes scores. I’m doing it because I love it, and I’m basing how I feel about it on what it makes me feel.
Read more, here.
My take: as before, my take is simple: Chappie was a movie about a robot. People have seen robots just as they have seen dinosaurs. What failed to work is the same thing that would ave failed to work if Jurassic Park had been about the dinos doing nothing much. He simply forgot to give the film the right kind of narrative, plain and simple. He thought he was making interesting robots, when he was supposed to be making FILMS, and that bit him on the ass hard and, perhaps, in the long run, cost him his Hollywood career.