Can someone with any inside knowledge of the movie industry explain

>>84075808

Because Neil Blomkamp is a talented dude, and comes from a special effects background. He knows how to shoot scenes and work with the effects production team to great results.

He really needs a fucking writer though.

>>84075910
And stop making his movies revolve around South Africa. I know he's from there, but it's an uninteresting shithole. I'd rather watch a movie about Abbos than wiggers

>>84075910
>>84075961
I feel like everyone expected Blomkamp to be like a Ridley Scott guy who did Alien and then a whole bunch of other movies with a different feel, whereas actually Blomkamp is just a dude who wants to keep making his particular kind of South African-influenced genre fiction and that's OK.

I agree about the writer thing although his wife was the screenwriter for District 9 and that's easily his best written film.

>>84075808
Proper application of funding. Hollywood blockbusters can be all over the place with their budgets, hence why they can look like shit.
Plus, Hollywood doesn't always hire the cream of the crop for effects work. Lotta positions in filmmaking are filled out by nepotism or friends-of-friends. You put effort into finding and paying the right amount for a quality effects team, and you can make something look amazing for a surprisingly low budget.

>>84075808
Because in most "big blockbuster" cases the director just hires an army of CGI rendering slaves from a visual effects company and tells them only general guidelines of how he wants something to look, leaving the company to be the actual creative part which is an impossible task because it's a whole army of people trying to form a singular piece.

People like Blomkamp or David Fincher worked specifically in visual effects in the past so they know exactly what they want, how to prepare it and actually execute it, which most directors of today don't have a single clue about.
They all have the same tools, it's just a matter of how you use them.