Jump to content


Photo

The Day The Earth Stood Still


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Benson Marks

Benson Marks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Student

Posted 03 December 2008 - 01:45 PM

The Day The Earth Stood Still should be coming out on the 12th this month, and, quite honestly, I don't know about this. I've seen the trailers for this movie and they don't look anything like the original. On the other hand, I think Keanu Reeves looks like the right guy for playing Klaatu, and I have to admit, I think those special effects look neat. But, in all honesty, I don't know. I want to say this'll be great, but I've got a bad feeling this might be a little too far from the original. What do you guys think?
  • 0

#2 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2420 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 03 December 2008 - 02:55 PM

They've taken on a classic and the only way to enjoy it will be to put Wise's version completely out of your mind.
TDTESS was a tight little thriller and a perfect Cold War allegory by a great director, beautifully executed on a small budget. The remake isn't.
I won't be investing in a ticket.
  • 0

#3 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 03 December 2008 - 06:28 PM

I've got the same feelings about this as I did for Cloverfield. It looks cool in the trailers. I'll take the risk that it might suck or blow my mind.
  • 0

#4 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1582 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 04 December 2008 - 03:24 PM

On the other hand, I think Keanu Reeves looks like the right guy for playing Klaatu, and I have to admit,



Uugh This guy wouldn't be good playing a donut shop manager, one of the dullest "actors' of our time IMO, Peter sellers is rolling in his grave.


-Rob-
  • 0

#5 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2420 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 04 December 2008 - 03:32 PM

No, it was Michael Rennie.
  • 0

#6 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 December 2008 - 04:40 PM

The original was a brilliant Christ allegory and all about peace & loving your fellow man. The trailer for the new film has lots of stuff blowin' up real good. 'nuff said.
  • 0

#7 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1582 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 04 December 2008 - 08:00 PM

The original was a brilliant Christ allegory and all about peace & loving your fellow man. The trailer for the new film has lots of stuff blowin' up real good. 'nuff said.



Yeah the new one looks real dull just what we need right now another the world blows up movie!

-Rob-
  • 0

#8 Eldon Stevens

Eldon Stevens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Student

Posted 09 December 2008 - 08:47 PM

The first one was an iconic, classic 50's science fiction film that was about the Cold War. A cautionary tale about the management of nuclear arms. It didn't really thump you in the face with its theme until the speech at the end.

This time around, looks like it's a cautionary tale about mismanagement of the planet. I hope they don't thump me in the face with the theme throughout the whole movie. I mean, I anticipate the required footage of polluted trash dumps, leaking radioactive barrels, and some nice coal stacks billowing toxicity into the atmosphere. As long as stuff blows up and the dialogue isn't terrible, that's cool.

And oddly enough, I think Keanu Reeves is the right actor for the part. He's sort of . . . out of tune . . . or something. I buy him as an alien in a human body. If you don't think so, I'm curious: Who'd be better for the part?

-Eldon Stevens
  • 0

#9 Ira Ratner

Ira Ratner
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 558 posts
  • Other
  • Coral Springs, Florida

Posted 10 December 2008 - 06:25 AM

I don't understand this Reeves thing--watching him act is like watching paint dry.

I see this movie as being exactly like War of the Worlds:

I liked the remake, but no way did it come close to the original. How the heck could it? It's a different time. But I enjoyed it--from my couch. But I'm glad I didn't pay to see it.

What remake is coming next? Gone With The Wind?

Some things just shouldn't be touched.
  • 0

#10 Eldon Stevens

Eldon Stevens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Student

Posted 14 December 2008 - 02:16 PM

Well, I went to go see it opening night, and was disappointed. But not in the production design, cinematography, or even the acting. The issues all centered on the story. And I don't know if the original script* was the culprit, or if the original script was great and was subsequently altered into mediocrity (as so often happens) on its way to the screen.

I have to agree with Ebert on this one. In his review, he says: "All this is presented in an expensive, good-looking film that is well-made by Scott Derrickson, but to no avail." The first 15 minutes of this film raised my expectations. Mostly it was footage that we've all seen in the previews and trailers. There was a nifty prologue that added a new element to the story. That's always a good sign; it leads one to (perhaps incorrectly) believe that the filmmaker's are being thoughtful about what they reveal before opening day.

So what about the rest of it?

Eh. It just wasn't that engaging. The melodrama didn't connect. The amount of dialogue was sparse, even for a science fiction movie. There just wasn't that much to the story that we hadn't predicted. There was only one or two 'money-shot' special effects that we hadn't seen in the trailers. I just didn't buy that an advanced alien civilization would make a planetary judgement call based on the behavior of one kid. Maybe it's just because the story tried to make the argument that large groups of people can willingly change their behavior, to benefit the greater good while enduring personal disadvantage, and I'm right there with the aliens, thinking, "No we won't. Not unless we're forced to at the business end of a gun." Individuals will make sacrifices, and we call them heroes, but asking most people to make sacrifices is futile. (Or I'd be driving an electric hover car right now, no?)

Anyway, there was just too much about the story that I couldn't engage with. Also, the pace was glacial. The visual effects for the sphere were very nice, but did we really need a 25 second pan across the thing, with surging music? Five different times during the film? Really? Five times!?

Also, on a mildly funny note, there were so many product placements in this film that they became a distraction. One scene: the LG phone plops out of her purse onto the bed with the logo positioned just so, immediately followed by a close-up of Citizen watch to get the time. Bang!Bang! Oi.

At one point in the film, after I had given up on it, Helen Bensen holds her son, they're both crying, and he says "I'm sorry..." and she says "I'm sorry....." I just couldn't help myself. I broke my normally iron-clad theater etiquette and said, "We're all sorry." I got a few laughs.

<sigh>

Yesterday I went out and bought the original version on DVD and watched it, along with the surprisingly good special feature on Robert Wise, which sort of made up for the experience.

From now on I'll just keep my expectations to myself.



*Not the original original script, the original script for the remake. Hmm. Maybe there should be a name for that, something that doesn't use the word "original". The 'remake greenlit script'? But I digress.
  • 0

#11 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 14 December 2008 - 07:47 PM

Saw it yesterday. Was hoping it would be better. It wasn't bad. It just wasn't good.

I would like to volunteer that this is a perfect, perfect example of transference failure. Who the f*** was this movie about? What I mean is: The movie must be about somebody. We must have someone's shoes to walk in. Unfortunately, we were obliged to follow along with three characters, none of which we could commit to because the writer and director made us care about two characters too many. Therefore, there was insufficient character dynamic or opportunity for character loyalty from us. Frankly, I couldn't have cared what happened to any of them. If you don't care about anyone in the movie, there's nothing grand enough to carry you through the movie.

This was such a fundamental, story teller's blunder. How much did they spend on it?
  • 0

#12 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 30 December 2008 - 05:14 PM

Watched this tonight..

Keannu reeves was well cast and Jennifer Connelly and Jaden Smith. All three acted their parts well.. John Cleese had a nice cameo.. The Robot looked good and that was about it.. The story could have been reworked so much better than this. I felt like the film finished to quickly and they had cut off the last twenty minutes.. There should have been a goodbye between the main characters and a resolution with the earth leaders with some indication of what we needed to do to change after all this was a film with a message that in the end didn't get delivered. Everything was just unfinished. If I was going to end this film then I would have had Klattu take jenny and the kid on board and maybe even talk to the higher alien authorities who maybe make their decision from talking to the boy who then helps in talks with the world leaders at least this would give some kind of direction to the whole thing. The original films message was simplistic and can't be copied only reworked for todays audience and this didnt do it.. My guess is to much of the budget went on Keanu and not enough to make the film..

All in all average effects with little spectacle Acting was good so was everything else just lacking in budget and compelling story.
  • 0

#13 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 December 2008 - 05:31 PM

I don't think it is necessary for a movie to pick a single central character for the audience to empathize with -- there can be a great variety in types of movies. The more subjective ones do tend to center on one character's emotional journey, but more objective films with broader intellectual or political themes can be more about group dynamics than a single character's feelings. I mean, look at an Altman movie like "Nashville" or Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove" -- they don't fall into a neat pattern of having a main character that you identify with.

Even "The Godfather" films are not focused completely on Michael Corleone's emotional state -- they are really tales where the family is the central character.

So I don't see a problem with having three main characters in a movie that you have to follow and care about, as opposed to one character with the other two playing subservient roles dramatically and emotionally. Audiences can care about more than one person at a time, just as they do in real life.

That said, this movie is rather unfocused about what it wants to be about and it all sort of falls apart in the last act. It was interesting up until then, sort of like that movie "Star Man" (which also had a somewhat unsatisfying ending, but it was better than this movie's climax.)

The trouble with a lot of these current blockbusters is that they often rely solely on spectacle to engage the viewer during the climax, which will tend to be emotionally unsatisfying. Or they try to have it both ways, like the last "Pirates of the Carribean" movie, with that endless action climax culminating in the emotional climax of the series -- but by the time that rolled around, you were numb from being beaten over the head with one long efx action climax after another after another...
  • 0

#14 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2420 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 31 December 2008 - 05:31 AM

Indeed. CGI will go out of fashion. Then we'll need stories again.
  • 0


CineLab

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Opal

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Opal

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

The Slider