9

Animated films are usually imagined as those movies that you go to with children because there are a lot of colors, some cute creatures that kids will love, well, and if it's not Pixar, usually a proper story is missing - although it's not a completely true rule. What is the domain of the movie "9" is animation and generally the visual aspect. This animated film is dark, dark in its atmosphere and environment in which it takes place. Let's face it, the story is not completely childish either. Shane Acker came up with a short film called "9" in 2005, which was successful, so Tim Burton, Timur Bekmambetov, and other producers decided to support a feature-length version. This is exactly the kind of movie that could be in the spirit of Tim Burton's style, but it's missing something. Primarily a proper screenplay. In the final form, it's nothing more than a film with a dark side that gradually eliminates a limited number of representatives of good. A little inspiration from kung fu movies, a little effort for cute moments. It's a shame, unfortunately, because this film had the potential for so much more. The presented world is truly dark and unpleasant. It could have almost been a horror film, but it fell short so that the film could be accessible to children. And yet, the film has a PG-13 rating, which means it's not suitable for children. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/05/9-umelec-diktator-nacho-libre-rise.html (19/02/2013)

Three and a half stars. In 9, form triumphs over content, and it does so with ease. The film is really nice to look at, the animation is almost flawless, all the technical toys are well thought out and the post-apocalyptic world is beautifully demolished and dead. But the script is also dead - it likely won't surprise anyone, and if it does, it's only because of how boring it is. That’s really unfortunate - the action scenes are nicely and imaginatively shot, the rag dolls are likeable and the robots appropriately "dark"... But the plot... (16/06/2010)

Once I had got comfortable in my seat (seat no. 8, and I ceremoniously sat my backpack on seat no. 9) I was swallowed up by the perfect atmosphere balancing between cyberpunk and the second world war. The war got to me already in that ten minute piece. A gang of numbered figures, each of who is something special (junky no. 8, bossy no. one, etc...), are fighting against machines of genius erm... Machines that have awakened after years of sleep. The atmosphere is (I know I’m repeating myself) perfect, the action full-on + there’s lots of it and the characters are nice. But there is something wrong too. Acker’s vision and theme require a more developed story. Pamela Pettler’s screenplay is literally shoddy and full of plot holes. Everything is explained somehow too briefly and the heroes keep on walking backward and forward staying in the same place. While there’s a whole empty world waiting to be explored. (11/09/2009)

Acker's visionary abilities battle with a sub-par script that flutters behind his exuberant imagination, and the result desperately cries out for a more uncompromising dramaturgist whose care would ensure more than just a fully rendered variation on the most recent Terminator. Stretching the original 11 minutes into an hour, not adding a drop of added value to the plot and hoping that "it will somehow carry itself" deserves a slap to the head. Giving these zipped-up bags a chance to show themselves properly on paper would be the most original cartoon far and wide. There is talent is evident here, though. (08/10/2009)

The beginning held my attention... for about ten minutes. Then came – apologies to anyone who might be bothered or offended, but I really can't call it anything else – blatant American kitsch. And it didn't hold my attention, or even seem to deserve it. Maybe Shane Acker should have stuck with his 11-minute short from 2005, because he didn't give the world anything new by multiplying the time of the short by seven. Yes, the grim depiction of a post-apocalyptic world was very successful, perhaps I could call it the animated face of Orwell's 1984, but that's just a maybe and a happy accident. Someone wrote here about the gripping action, which I certainly didn't find gripping, rather it made me worry about whether I needed to paint my nails, which I also managed to do, and that just doesn't happen with good fantasy... It would have been a good movie if it could have held my attention. And it doesn’t help that it had been one of my most anticipated films of 2009. (31/01/2010)