We asked around here at the “office” if someone wanted to review it, but everyone said “Thanks, but no thanks.” Anyone out there see it? And if so, is it any good? And, more importantly, how does it stack up to the classic original film?
We asked around here at the “office” if someone wanted to review it, but everyone said “Thanks, but no thanks.” Anyone out there see it? And if so, is it any good? And, more importantly, how does it stack up to the classic original film?
nahhhh…..
I’ve decided to avoid this on principles alone.
I watched it
I watched it largely out of morbid curiosity. It was clear from the trailers that they changed a fair bit. Indeed, at least one iconic line from the original is completely missing.
To be fair, the movie is decent if taken on its own. If the original did not exist for comparison, I doubt there would be any particular outcry other than the usual "it sucks because…" or what have you. Still, the original does exist and many of the changes are going to really irk hard core fans.
Basically, if you are really attached to the original and are incapable of treating this version as a completely separate movie that happens to share a title and a few plot points, don’t watch it. Otherwise, enjoy it for what it is.
Remember, if you’re going to make a movie that is identical to the original, there’s no point making it in the first place. (I’m not saying they should have made this version; only that it would have made little sense to keep the plot identical.)
I’ll refrain from a detailed analysis of the changes.
The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
I think a detailed analysis of the changes, with spoilers, would be fascinating. I agree– if you’re going to remake a movie, you need to have a reason to remake it, so it’s not going to be the same. I’m just having trouble with the concept of remaking this particular film, instead of just making a new, original SF piece or adapting a more recent SF novel or story.
But when I eventually see it, I’ll try to view it on its own terms.
Of course, I don’t plan to see it soon.
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
They did try and justify it by saying that the original was warning against nuclear armament where as this version is talking about man’s negative effect on the planet.
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
That’s the main reason I’m not seeing it. I just get the sense that it’ll just be a commercial to convince you to "go green" and I’m not interested seeing two hours of that.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for conservation and not polluting, but the current green movement involves saying you’re green and then asking the government to take more direct and indirect control of our lives.
The other thing that irks me on this is that if the aliens have all kinds of wonderful clean technology, why not just give it to us to use to clean up the planet, why threaten to wipe us out?
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
Sorry, please ignore the dupes. I hitting a bug in firefox when posting.
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
I just thought you were adamant in your belief. :)
-Joe
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
That’s the main reason I’m not seeing it. I just get the sense that it’ll just be a commercial to convince you to "go green" and I’m not interested seeing two hours of that.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for conservation and not polluting, but the current green movement involves saying you’re green and then asking the government to take more direct and indirect control of our lives.
The other thing that irks me on this is that if the aliens have all kinds of wonderful clean technology, why not just give it to us to use to clean up the planet, why threaten to wipe us out?
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
That’s the main reason I’m not seeing it. I just get the sense that it’ll just be a commercial to convince you to "go green" and I’m not interested seeing two hours of that.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for conservation and not polluting, but the current green movement involves saying you’re green and then asking the government to take more direct and indirect control of our lives.
The other thing that irks me on this is that if the aliens have all kinds of wonderful clean technology, why not just give it to us to use to clean up the planet, why threaten to wipe us out?
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
That’s the main reason I’m not seeing it. I just get the sense that it’ll just be a commercial to convince you to "go green" and I’m not interested seeing two hours of that.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for conservation and not polluting, but the current green movement involves saying you’re green and then asking the government to take more direct and indirect control of our lives.
The other thing that irks me on this is that if the aliens have all kinds of wonderful clean technology, why not just give it to us to use to clean up the planet, why threaten to wipe us out?
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
I haven’t seen the movie so I’m not sure what angle they went at it. I do remember an interview with the director where he clearly stated they were trying not to be heavy handed with the message, unlike the original. Take that as you will, but I have a feeling this is more a popcorn flick than a deep thinker.
That being said, it’s not a bad thing to lecture people through a medium they are willing to pay attention to. It’s an important subject and one that can’t keep being ignored because feelings are going to be hurt.
Re: The Day Keanu’s Face Stood Still
But that’s where I have a problem with the remake. The original may have been heavy-handed, but it integrated the contemporary problem in a way that made sense. A warlike species on the cusp of a space age: that represents a threat to the aliens. That’s why they come and talk to us in the original.
But a non-green species, far less advanced than the aliens? Why would they bother lecturing us? Does this make sense in the film?
Each One is Different
I was ok with this movie. There were some good moments, and I’d like to see if there were cut scenes that flesh-out the story.
I reminded myself, that the original movie, wasn’t really the short story it is based on. So really, this is just another version, not a remake.
Re: Each One is Different
BTW, did any of you actually read "Farewell to the Master", by Harry Bates? http://entry.anime.xxxallaccesspass.com/entry.html I’d love to actually see that story told.
On its own
I never saw the original, so I went in with a blank slate. It was fun, but it wasn’t something I would regret having not seen. If you want to go to a movie, it’s not a bad choice. Some bits felt campy (mostly the military parts), but in a rather forced way. But overall, I enjoyed it.
Saw it.
Liked it. Was a fun saturday morning at the movies. Never saw the original. I am not a purist. The first one doesn’t have nearly good enough FX to be worth my time. Plus, it was the 50s or something equally ancient. No one could act. Unless you count over-acting.
Thus, in my opinion (and the only one that matters to me), based upon the little bits I have seen of the original, this one is better. Keanu Reeves was actually decent in this movie. Sometimes he really seemed like he was an alien evaluating humanity. Of course, maybe he actually is.
Anyway, I know my opinions are bound to make some of the nerds out there bounce off the walls, but so be it. :)
It was a good movie, but it didn’t change my life.
Re: Saw it.
Odd, very odd. You’re certainly entitled to your opinions, but…
Judging a film based on the bad special effects – not even Plan 9 gets panned *solely* because of its special effects, and the original Day the Earth Stood Still had very little in the way of effects in the first place. If I’m worried about pretty pictures, I generally go hunting around SigGraph, or http://www.artrenewal.org, or National Geographic IMAX movies. I don’t think special effects really should be the point of a movie.
As well, your dismissal of it as "it was the 50s, or something equally ancient" strikes me funny. I enjoy reading *old* tales, such as ancient mythology, or golden age SciFi, as much as I enjoy some of the new stories. Few can equal E. E. "Doc" Smith for galaxy-shattering kabooms! And I can’t figure out for the life of me why you say "No one could act. Unless you count over-acting." I tend to find the ratio of actors to over-actors has stayed pretty constant over the years. I always felt Michael Rennie and Patricia Neal did beautifully in the original – hardly over-acting. And I really can’t see how anyone can say Lock Martin overacted. *grins*.
I’m more than happy to agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinions – but I tend to weight those opinions based on the reasoning behind them. Your reasons don’t convince me to share your opinion.
While I agree with earlier posters that a new version of a film shouldn’t be a frame-for-frame type recreation of the original, the differences should be relatively minor improvements, such as technology updates, dated slang (though not when appropriate to the setting), and/or minor changes in goals – such as a remake of The Thomas Crown Affair changing the painting that is the goal of the theft. There should be enough in common with the original that comparisons are actually possible – which they really aren’t with this new Day The Earth Stood Still. The original had a clear and simple message – in which mankind would have to solve its problems, or face a clean and quick death. The new one leaves the human race to face a long and lingering death, with nothing but surviving pockets to eventually possibly rebuild – pockets that likely will not remember the message Klaatu came to Earth to bring.