Upcoming
November 14
A Christmas Tale
B.O.H.I.C.A.
House of the Sleeping Beauties
How About You
November 21
The Betrayal
November 30
Another Big One?
The one-sheet for The Day The Earth Stood Still (20th Century Fox, 12.12) implies a massive scale to the visiting alien space craft -- a bigger-than-big whoaness. This obviously summons memories (although I really mean "nightmares") of Independence Day, which is not a good thing for reasons I shouldn't need to list here. And if (I say "if") this indicates where the filmmakers are coming from -- scary-gargantuan! eerie-cool! -- it indicates to me a lack of original vision.
Because they mainly seem to be competing with past alien-visitation films (Close Encounters, etc.) that have used a massive sound-and light show approach to the big landings. In so doing the DTESS guys are obviously trafficking in the usual-usual, which is to try and crank up a not-very-hip crowd that mainly wants to be awed so they can sit in the fourth row with their massive buckets of popcorn soaked in amhydrous butterfat and go "kewwwl!"
What if an alien space ship arrived around noon on a sunny day in an open public place? What if it just showed up and plunked itself down on a big green lawn under a cloudless blue sky without any light-beams puncturing through fog and smoke with the usual wind machines blowing every earthling's hair? Not cool enough, right? Maybe, okay, but wouldn't a different sort of landing be more welcome? Something quieter, odder? What if Klaatu's landing isn't witnessed at all?
It was reported today by the N.Y. Times Michael Cieply that the Comic-Con crowd gave the DTESS product reel a spirited response "despite a certain amount of web-driven skepticism that has been swirling around the new movie’s eco-friendly themes.
"One person who posted earlier this month on imdb.com had demanded to know why 'would aliens care about the earth’s environment unless they intended to use it themselves?'
"Released in the fall of 1951, the original Day the Earth Stood Still was directed by Robert Wise and based on a story by Harry Bates. It cast Michael Rennie as an alien, Klaatu, who had been sent with his robot sidekick Gort to hand earthlings an ultimatum: Live peacefully, or die.
"This time around Keanu Reeves, who plays the Rennie role, is apparently detailed to save the universe from earth’s terminal messiness -- think of an alien Al Gore, with serious muscle."
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on July 25, 2008 at 7:22 AM
comment #1
Jeffrey Kunze says ...
I have tremendous respect for Ebert, but the dude just gave the new X-Files movie 3 and a half stars while every other major critic rightfully pans it.
And I have no interest to see this remake. The trailer sucked, now this one sheet sucks even more.
How was the original though? It seems like it's aged kind of badly, but maybe I'll Netflix it...
Posted by Jeffrey Kunze at July 25, 2008 9:44 AM
comment #2
StoneFan1 says ...
People were laughing when the trailer for this thing played before "The Dark Knight." I'm sure it'll still pull in millions, but I don't think it'll be well liked by most.
Posted by StoneFan1 at July 25, 2008 9:56 AM
comment #3
Breedlove says ...
I always thought Ebert had good taste, but he's really lost me this summer with his reviews of Indy, Get Smart and The Happening. I'll always dig Ebert but wow has he recommended some really shitty films of late.
Posted by Breedlove at July 25, 2008 10:08 AM
comment #4
MDOC says ...
I'm a sucker for this kinda of stuff yet I'm completely disinterested.
Posted by MDOC at July 25, 2008 10:12 AM
comment #5
Mr. Muckle says ...
Come on. When was the last time you saw anything that wasn't some version of something else you saw before? At your age, Jeff, it seems silly and, yes, unhip to criticize something as unoriginal. Bespeaks a lack of self-awareness, i.e. knowing that NOBODY has original vision. It's ALL derivative. Our life itself is today merely some altered version of yesterday's. So if you can't make your life (arguably more important than movies) something new and original, why should movies be otherwise? And how could they be?
What would actually be hip would be to propel oneself out of the mainstream of consciousness and all the same old, same old critiques of whatever and try to see if there is really anything new anywhere ever.
IMO, therefore, the criterion of originality is invalid. All that matters is craft.
Posted by Mr. Muckle at July 25, 2008 10:16 AM
comment #6
T. S. Idiot says ...
Awful music, and where's the robot?
Posted by T. S. Idiot at July 25, 2008 10:29 AM
comment #7
Edward says ...
AMC runs the original DTESS frequently. It's aged quite well, but then it's about character and not SFX. Just because a studio gives you 10s of millions of dollars doesn't mean you have to spend them all does it?
I agree with Jeffrey and think it would be more interesting if a modestly sized space craft quietly landed in some green space. I assume the military would have tracked it on their radar, but that doesn't necessarily mean the entire population of a city would have to witness it. Where would the ship land? Washington DC, Moscow, Bejing? Or would the alien civilization just interrupt our regularly scheduled TV programming, since they've probably seen all of the SF films from the last 60 years and know the US probably would shoot first.
Posted by Edward at July 25, 2008 10:35 AM
comment #8
corey3rd says ...
it looks like the box cover for "The Invaders Season One" DVD.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Sl2wvwcsL._SS500_.jpg
Posted by corey3rd at July 25, 2008 10:35 AM
comment #9
Rich S. says ...
Arthur C. Clarke ruined it for everyone when he introduced the city-sized ships in Childhood's End. The ships in Independence Day are a direct (theft? homage?).
The original Day the Earth Stood Still holds up remarkably well. I attribute that mostly to Robert Wise's sparse, no frills direction, the limited amount of special effects and the often-imitated-but-never-equaled theremin score.
Incidentally, in the original short story Farewell to the Master, it turns out that intergalactic mankind has essentially ceded control to the robot police force (Gnut in the story, Gort in the movie). So it's the robot, not Klaatu, that they have to impress to save Earth.
Posted by Rich S. at July 25, 2008 10:36 AM
comment #10
cjKennedy says ...
I think you're reading way too much into a teaser poster, which by design is usually intended to get the attention of the 'unwashed masses'.
It's one thing to admire thoughtful ad campaigns that actually enrich the movie experience, but another to turn around and assume a lame poster is going to lead to a lame movie.
Having said that, there are plenty of other reasons to assume this movie is going to be lame and one of them rhymes with Shmeanu Shmeeves.
Posted by cjKennedy at July 25, 2008 10:38 AM
comment #11
Terry McCarty says ...
Breedlove wrote:
I always thought Ebert had good taste, but he's really lost me this summer with his reviews of Indy, Get Smart and The Happening. I'll always dig Ebert but wow has he recommended some really shitty films of late.
I would think its a case of trying to be at one with the majority of the mass-market critical bretheren. Except with THE HAPPENING.
Posted by Terry McCarty at July 25, 2008 11:09 AM
comment #12
Overstreet says ...
Its. A. Poster.
When I look at the poster for Max Payne, I don't conclude that Max Payne is being played by a brick wall... even though the poster shows Max's image stamped upon that very thing.
There are filmmakers and then there are graphic designers in the studio's marketing branch. Often, the designers don't know any more about the finished film than, well, you do.
This is Scott Derrickson we're talking about, screenwriter of Wim Wenders' underrated Land of Plenty, and director of The Exorcism of Emily Rose. Maybe he's not your favorite new kid on the block, but I wouldn't exactly include Derrickson on the short list of directors who just parrot what has worked in previous blockbusters.
Slow news day, Wells? Why stir up so much negative buzz and contribute to hurting the chances of a film that, for all you know, you may end up liking? Or am I missing something?
Posted by Overstreet at July 25, 2008 11:11 AM
comment #13
Overstreet says ...
P.S. For what it's worth, that poster doesn't do much for me either. But neither did the one-sheet for WALL-E, which made the film look like a cute kiddie flick designed to sell a toy robot. Knowing Pixar, I knew not to trust the poster. I'm inclined to think the same way about this one.
Posted by Overstreet at July 25, 2008 11:16 AM
comment #14
Jack Price says ...
Randy Pausch has passed away.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/memoriam-randy-pausch-innovative-computer/story.aspx?guid={A01E624E-ED45-4C4E-92F3-E59B7C5CC159}&dist=hppr
Posted by Jack Price at July 25, 2008 11:55 AM
comment #15
Chase Kahn says ...
I'm not judging what I see solely based on the poster, but the trailer. It looked like it had more in common with INDEPENDENCE DAY than Robert Wise's original. I'm extremely interested in this, but even more so skeptical...
Posted by Chase Kahn at July 25, 2008 11:57 AM
comment #16
BurmaShave says ...
Is there some reason why everyone hates INDEPENDENCE DAY so much? Maybe you weren't 13 the first time you saw it on the big screen.
Posted by BurmaShave at July 25, 2008 12:36 PM
comment #17
D.Z. says ...
"This obviously summons memories (although I really mean "nightmares") of Independence Day, which is not a good thing for reasons I shouldn't need to list here. And if (I say "if") this indicates where the filmmakers are coming from -- scary-gargantuan! eerie-cool! -- it indicates to me a lack of original vision."
They're also ripping off Akira. http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20213200_21,00.html
Posted by D.Z. at July 25, 2008 12:42 PM
comment #18
D.Z. says ...
Burma: I was 16, and I was unimpressed.
Posted by D.Z. at July 25, 2008 12:45 PM
comment #19
bachelorcool says ...
Looking at that poster, why does The Happening spring to mind?
Posted by bachelorcool at July 25, 2008 12:47 PM
comment #20
hcat says ...
After moving to the DC area, I have always geeked out seeing familiar locations used in movies. The original DTESS was a special treat because I could recognize the locations virtually unchanged fifty years after they were filmed.
That said, not a big fan of the original but this looks much worse. Also changing the theme from Nuclear paranoia to environmental calamnity is a terrible move.
Posted by hcat at July 25, 2008 12:50 PM
comment #21
Josh Massey says ...
"I agree with Jeffrey and think it would be more interesting if a modestly sized space craft quietly landed in some green space."
Wasn't that called Signs?
Posted by Josh Massey at July 25, 2008 12:57 PM
comment #22
Overstreet says ...
Josh wrote: "Wasn't that called Signs?"
Or... E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial?
Posted by Overstreet at July 25, 2008 1:03 PM
comment #23
Mgmax says ...
I liked Independence Day. Borderline loved it, in its sublime stupidity. At least, when the audience is induced to cheer that a dog has been saved at the moment that millions of Los Angelenos have just been fried alive, I knew I was in the hands of superior schlockmeisters in the mold of DeMille. Sadly, nothing else they've done has attained that level of perfection.
Posted by Mgmax at July 25, 2008 4:03 PM
comment #24
Mgmax says ...
Also, Jeff Goldblum totally sells this exchange and really makes it heartfelt and affecting miles beyond its plastic, McKee-scriptwriting formulaicness:
Margaret Colin: Haven't you ever wanted to be part of something special?
Goldblum: I was part of something special.
Posted by Mgmax at July 25, 2008 4:07 PM
comment #25
Mgmax says ...
Also, Jeff Goldblum totally sells this exchange and really makes it heartfelt and affecting miles beyond its plastic, McKee-scriptwriting formulaicness:
Margaret Colin: Haven't you ever wanted to be part of something special?
Goldblum: I was part of something special.
Posted by Mgmax at July 25, 2008 4:07 PM
comment #26
Alpha Base says ...
Jeffrey Kunze says ...
I have tremendous respect for Ebert, but the dude just gave the new X-Files movie 3 and a half stars while every other major critic rightfully pans it.
Ebert was right. I was surprised how good the new X-Files is, considering Carter was given only 30 million dollars to make it. Also, it got quite a lot of good reviews from critics who matter, so let's not exaggerate.
Posted by Alpha Base at July 25, 2008 4:09 PM
comment #27
jse33 says ...
Breedlove says ...
I always thought Ebert had good taste, but he's really lost me this summer with his reviews of Indy, Get Smart and The Happening. I'll always dig Ebert but wow has he recommended some really shitty films of late.
------
It started many years earlier when he gave The Cell 4 stars.
Posted by jse33 at July 25, 2008 4:17 PM
comment #28
Edward says ...
I forgot about Signs, but that sucked. Of course this might suck too, only time will tell.
Posted by Edward at July 25, 2008 11:47 PM
comment #29
DarthCorleone says ...
Rich S.>> You and I had the same thought. I've been hoping for a faithful film adaptation of Childhood's End for a while, but inevitably it will be seen as a retread when in fact it is the originator.
Posted by DarthCorleone at July 27, 2008 11:45 AM
Post a comment