Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Day The Earth Stood Still, remake=TERRIBLE

Day The Earth Stood Still, remake=TERRIBLE
Thread Tools
lexapro
Baninated
Join Date: Mar 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 12:56 PM
 
I liked the original much better. I saw it last night and was SO unimpressed. THey should have eliminated the little kid from the script and had a LOT more on the plot of the aliens, their intergalactic group, more on the scientist and the alien. I could have done so much better.

Such a let down.
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 12:58 PM
 
That sucks. i've been wanting to see it. still will though. or should i just save my money and wait for blockbuster?
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 01:29 PM
 
Go to rotten Tomatoes and that should answer your question.
     
Ghoser777
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 01:40 PM
 
What I can't figure out is how Hollywood can keep making such terrible moves? I'd like to see some stats on the the quality of movies over the years... you know, percentage of moves in 50's that were rated 4 stars versus now, etc.
     
keekeeree
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Moved from Ohio's first capital to its current capital
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 01:42 PM
 
Save your money and rent this ONLY if you have one of those unlimited monthly plans. I would not spend money on this movie.
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 02:52 PM
 
If you've seen the original, and you saw the trailer for the new one, I can't fathom how you couldn't have figured this out beforehand.
     
keekeeree
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Moved from Ohio's first capital to its current capital
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 03:06 PM
 
The more trailers I saw, the more I knew they made some major changes to the original screenplay and movie, but I held out hope they they'd stayed true to the essence of the original.

By the time I saw this Saturday morning, I pretty much expected the worst. And I this movie served it up smorgasbord-style.
     
elrah
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: A Wonderful Place
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 04:41 PM
 
Only reason I want to see it is because Jennifer Connelly is in it <3
     
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 05:06 PM
 
This movie sucked. That kid was so friggon annoying and the second half of the movie was such a disappointment. The first half built up well but it was just too open ended and vague with mediocre special effects.

I hadn't seen the original but was intrigued by the premise.

The climax was just so utterly disappointing.
     
Lava Lamp Freak
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 06:13 PM
 
I was entertained by the movie. Jennifer Connelly is still hot. Kid was annoying. Keanu was part Neo part robot. I haven't seen the original to compare, but I thought there were a lot of Matrix moments and even some reminders of The Langoliers.
     
lexapro  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Mar 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 06:58 PM
 
I really hope they edit the movie and remove that annoying kid. I know I would.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 07:28 PM
 
Jennifer Connelly and Neo did the best they could, and I actually thought the special effects were all right (♥ Weta), but the little kid is annoying as hell and the script is bad. It's hard to beat '50s sci-fi movies for schlock, but these folks had determination.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 07:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by elrah View Post
Only reason I want to see it is because Jennifer Connelly is in it <3
You don't find it kinda sad that you would watch a terrible movie cuz there is someone hot in it?
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2008, 08:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
You don't find it kinda sad that you would watch a terrible movie cuz there is someone hot in it?
not when the hot girl is hot, no. that movie staring the hot girl, and co staring those weird robots comes to mind.
     
JoshuaZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 10:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Ghoser777 View Post
What I can't figure out is how Hollywood can keep making such terrible moves? I'd like to see some stats on the the quality of movies over the years... you know, percentage of moves in 50's that were rated 4 stars versus now, etc.
Except back in the 50s there were only a couple of new movies coming out every month. We produce more major films every two months than were probably produced back in the 50s.

I think the problem now is that a lot of our big budget films today are the B Movies of yester-year. Only with giant budgets and star power. I mean seriously. Look at a lot of the plots of the big summer movies? They're horrrrrrrible. Yet make lots of money because they're giant budget films with giant name stars. Not that theres anything wrong with that, its just that these are not '4 star' quality films.

Just a thought.
     
angelmb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 10:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by elrah View Post
Only reason I want to see it is because Jennifer Connelly is in it <3


You don't find it kinda sad that you would watch a terrible movie cuz there is someone hot in it?
Ah come on, not only is she beautiful, but a very talented actress, which turns to be a good reason to see a movie, if the movie is a epic fail then that's another history.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 10:55 AM
 
The original was an amazing, character driven story with a few effects thrown in to hook us into the story. It's hard to think of a way to beat Robert Wise's direction; Michael Rennie's, Patricial Neal's, even Sam Jaffe's acting, and of course the enormously entertaining and engaging story (by Harry Bates, with screen play credit to Edmund H. North). That film, hardly "schlock" when compared to contemporary SF, was a strong story about xenophobia, general hatred, and how our actions impact others. It is a truly great film.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 12:38 PM
 
I was waiting the whole movie for him to say, "Klaatu barada nikto!" Never did. What a sham. :/
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 12:53 PM
 
I Am Jack's Complete Lack of Surprise.
     
LegendaryPinkOx
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: petting the refrigerator.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 01:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
I was waiting the whole movie for him to say, "Klaatu barada nikto!" Never did. What a sham. :/
WHAT?! That line is classic, and for it to be omitted is just wrong.
are you lightfooted?
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 03:29 PM
 
"Klaatu barada nikto" is in there, it's just kind of quiet and garbled and not very important. I guess it was meant to be a shout-out to fans of the original, but it was more of a mumble-out.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 03:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
"Klaatu barada nikto" is in there, it's just kind of quiet and garbled and not very important. I guess it was meant to be a shout-out to fans of the original, but it was more of a mumble-out.
Ah, apparently I missed it. Bah.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
ctt1wbw
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2008, 11:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by brassplayersrock² View Post
not when the hot girl is hot, no. that movie staring the hot girl, and co staring those weird robots comes to mind.
Or you could just google image search her, and save the twenty bucks.
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 30, 2008, 11:40 PM
 
Saw it last night. It wasn't horrible for me but it wasn't good. Very predictable and low key.
     
PB2K
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 01:34 AM
 
I'm sure it's a lousy movie. to name a few : Alien vs predator 2, War of The worlds, Starwars 1 also had too many annoying kids in them. I am visiting in India now and I started to like the Bollywood movies, sure they are all musicals of some sort, but at least they arent so extremely expensive and disappointing as Hollywood movies. and the cast looks better too
{Animated sigs are not allowed.}
     
flabasha
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 05:27 AM
 
I love that the original's hook was how everything STOPPED, and how creepy and neutered the humans felt as a result. Hence, the name "The Day the Earth Stood Still".

Then I saw the trailer for the remake, and couldn't stop laughing. It should have been called "The Day the Earth Blew Up". The epitome of modern Hollywood, to completely miss the whole f'ng point.
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 10:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by flabasha View Post
IThe epitome of modern Hollywood
That's the problem, isn't it? Hollywood is a parody of itself anymore. Everything will either have explosions, extensive CG, or Nic Cage attached to the project at some point.
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 10:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by Dakar V View Post
That's the problem, isn't it? Hollywood is a parody of itself anymore. Everything will either have explosions, extensive CG, or Nic Cage attached to the project at some point.
No kidding. Remake after remake, dumbed down plots, Nicholas Cage...
Hollywood is afraid to take the financial risks necessary to make something special. Yeah, I'm bitter today.

OTOH I heard that DTESS was OK from film friends. Now I have to see this thing to make up my own mind.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
KeyLimePi
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Baltimore
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 03:14 PM
 
However bad DTESS is, I'm sure it's better than The Spirit. Hands down the worst of the year. My girlfriend and I have been together for more than ten years, and in all that time we've been in bad movies and I've suggested we leave, she never would. She always likes to give movies a chance. Last night we saw The Spirit and about 30 minutes into it I said 'this is horrible, can we leave?' and she said 'I'm right behind you!'
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 06:44 PM
 
Trust me the Spirit is 10x worse than this movie and most others.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 08:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
Trust me the Spirit is 10x worse than this movie and most others.
I'm waiting to hear from a real Eisner fan on The Spirit. However, I have made NO moves to see Keanu's stone face.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 10:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by JoshuaZ View Post

I think the problem now is that a lot of our big budget films today are the B Movies of yester-year. Only with giant budgets and star power. I mean seriously. Look at a lot of the plots of the big summer movies? They're horrrrrrrible. Yet make lots of money because they're giant budget films with giant name stars. Not that theres anything wrong with that, its just that these are not '4 star' quality films.

Just a thought.
A lot of people place the blame for this at the feet of Lucas and Star Wars: A New Hope.
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2008, 10:41 PM
 
i just saw it with a couple of friends of mine (one of their dads is an amc owner and let us have a room for a private watching) it was alright. i havent seen the original, so i had nothing to base it on.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 1, 2009, 12:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by brassplayersrock² View Post
i just saw it with a couple of friends of mine (one of their dads is an amc owner and let us have a room for a private watching) it was alright. i havent seen the original, so i had nothing to base it on.
Rent or borrow the original. No major explosions, no massive (compared to the 2008 version) space ships, but a really tight story with strong acting and solid direction. I think you'll like it.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2009, 02:16 AM
 
Ok i just watched the original movie and there is something i don't understand...

These aliens created the robots to police the universe to make sure that no violence is extended from one planet to another so they all live in a violence free universe and war.

...yet, if you don't follow the rules they will nuke the earth? Is that's weapon of violence and war in itself? Dictatorship? Isn't that exactly what they are supposed to be free of?

Geez the new movie almost made more sense.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 12:34 AM
 
You're asking too much of a 50s B-Movie. It wasn't high art. It was Saturday matinee sci-fi for 10 year old kids.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 12:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
Ok i just watched the original movie and there is something i don't understand...

These aliens created the robots to police the universe to make sure that no violence is extended from one planet to another so they all live in a violence free universe and war.

...yet, if you don't follow the rules they will nuke the earth? Is that's weapon of violence and war in itself? Dictatorship? Isn't that exactly what they are supposed to be free of?

Geez the new movie almost made more sense.
It seems like you could apply to the same thinking to anyone who defends anything. "So they have this police force that's supposed to prevent violent crime. But if you try and attack someone, they'll shoot you first! Isn't that what they're trying to prevent?"
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 06:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
Ok i just watched the original movie and there is something i don't understand...

These aliens created the robots to police the universe to make sure that no violence is extended from one planet to another so they all live in a violence free universe and war.

...yet, if you don't follow the rules they will nuke the earth? Is that's weapon of violence and war in itself? Dictatorship? Isn't that exactly what they are supposed to be free of?
It's not if it doesn't happen.

The whole point of a police force, even in a democracy, is that they have a legal monopoly on violence: They're the only ones legally allowed to respond with violence in order to keep the peace.

I realize this is different in today's United States, where it's legal to kill someone if you have the impression that he might want to steal your stereo, but in most democracies, this state monopoly on violence is one of the basic pillars of society.

It's supposed to guarantee the relative *absence* of violence.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 09:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
You're asking too much of a 50s B-Movie. It wasn't high art. It was Saturday matinee sci-fi for 10 year old kids.
No, it was higher concept than that. At the time, there was much concern about nuclear proliferation and conflict, and one major idea was to give the UN control of all nuclear weapons everywhere. Here, the aliens would be such an organization, ready to "deter" bad behavior by any planet's people through the threat of annihilation.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
It's not if it doesn't happen.

The whole point of a police force, even in a democracy, is that they have a legal monopoly on violence: They're the only ones legally allowed to respond with violence in order to keep the peace.

I realize this is different in today's United States, where it's legal to kill someone if you have the impression that he might want to steal your stereo, but in most democracies, this state monopoly on violence is one of the basic pillars of society.

It's supposed to guarantee the relative *absence* of violence.
Good points here. However, it's not so much "you can kill someone you think is trying to steal your stereo" as it's "you do not need to flee your own home when attacked." I think this is a very important point: in such a case you know that the thief was only after goods. What about the person who invades your home while you're there? Do you know what he's after? Are you right to fear for your life and the lives of your family members? I think you are. In context, this would be akin to a localized conflict between two neighboring countries over a disputed border.

But the aliens in the original film weren't apparently interested in the "little conflicts" going on at the time, like a country invading its neighbor, but the big ones between nuclear-armed players. The whole psychology of the early Cold War was "I can wipe you out in an instant, so don't try anything funny" paired with "I am going to goad you as much as possible short of making you attack with everything you have." Compared to the idea of home invasion/neighboring countries invading each other, this is much more dangerous. I think the term "brinksmanship" applies here. Brinksmanship is dangerous and infectious: those without nukes sought to obtain them so as to have more "pull" in the international theater. And isn't that what Klaatu was talking about in his warning?

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 10:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
No, it was higher concept than that. At the time, there was much concern about nuclear proliferation and conflict, and one major idea was to give the UN control of all nuclear weapons everywhere. Here, the aliens would be such an organization, ready to "deter" bad behavior by any planet's people through the threat of annihilation.
Sometimes, a wheelbarrow is just a wheelbarrow.

Don't make the mistake of students of poetry or film and read what's not there. Or better, perhaps - do it zen style. First, it's a teacup. Then, it is a mountain. Then, it is a teacup again.

The threat of nukes in a society where students in schools practiced "duck and cover" for nuclear attacks, air raid sirens were a sound known to the ear, and more than a few people built shelters stocked with food is a good threat for a movie.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 12:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
Sometimes, a wheelbarrow is just a wheelbarrow.

Don't make the mistake of students of poetry or film and read what's not there. Or better, perhaps - do it zen style. First, it's a teacup. Then, it is a mountain. Then, it is a teacup again.

The threat of nukes in a society where students in schools practiced "duck and cover" for nuclear attacks, air raid sirens were a sound known to the ear, and more than a few people built shelters stocked with food is a good threat for a movie.
And don't make the mistake of underestimating the people of the early 1950s. To suggest that every science fiction movie of the 1950s was kid stuff and drivel is to miss the point of most of it. Sure, there were indeed a lot of kiddie films. But there were a lot of others, TDTESS being one, that actually examined a contemporary theme without a bug eyed monster.

A whole lot of people in the 1950s worried hard about where all this proliferation was going to go. First they worried that the Soviets might get nukes, then they worried that they had them and that by itself, the U.S. could not do anything but go head to head with them.

I should add (I had to re-check the interview with Robert Wise who directed the original film) that there indeed was a message behind the film. It was "let's stop messing around with the atomic bomb and start being sane about this" (Wise). It was a scary time, and society at the time saw films as both entertainment and sometimes as social commentary.
( Last edited by ghporter; Jan 4, 2009 at 01:05 PM. )

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
calverson
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 01:55 PM
 
The fact that Keanu Reeves was in it should immediately indicate the general quality of it.

And that he gave the best performance in the movie should give further indication.

By far the worst movie I saw in 2008.
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2009, 02:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
It seems like you could apply to the same thinking to anyone who defends anything. "So they have this police force that's supposed to prevent violent crime. But if you try and attack someone, they'll shoot you first! Isn't that what they're trying to prevent?"
No these aliens are trying to hold their dominance. Who's to say that humans don't come up with better robots that can do a better job, the problem is they aren't allowed to.

These robots aren't just police, it is like white man traveling to some primitive tribe in the Amazon and saying you don't follow our rules of no violence we'll nuke you all out of existence.

My point is that it is a rather ironic thing to call yourself a non-violent race that doesn't have wars or violence and then destroy a planet when it doesn't develop by your standards.

I guess it is the same way the US has nuclear weapons but doesn't want other select countries to have some of their own because they aren't as responsible or entitled by THEIR standards.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:59 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,