The Day The Earth Stood Still
 

I saw a trailer and it looks like this classic gets released in December. With Keanu Reeves in the Michael Rennie role.

Please do it good.

Good grief.

That's what I said. (JBL's did NOT cheer me up, no surprise there)

one is not optimistic.

No soup for you.

Problem with Reeves as an actor is he has one emotion and it will be terrible here.

WHY DO THEY MESS WITH CLASSICS!!

any modern makeover of any classic movie will be crap. Everyone so far has been IMO.
Just look at war of the worlds. crap.

It also did not help that Tom cruise was a part of that movie. Every thing he touches (with the exception of the first MI movie) has turned to crap.

Why can't anyone have an original idea.


I thought the first MI was crap, his War of the Worlds was mostly crap because of the endlessly whinning kids. I dug out the original WOTW right before halloween and watched it again. Crappy acting but a great film. It was the "Gone with the Wind" of SciFi films

If you have ever read the book, the best War of the Worlds movies just might be M. Night Shyamalan "Signs".

The problem with making The Day The Earth Stood Still starts with the fact it's a dated concept.

Based on the trailer I saw it will be yet another film full of loud explosions and impressive CGI and little else. Another one of those "blockbusters" that will make a ton of money for a couple weeks then disappear into video.

As much as anything else, the original "Day the Earth Stood Still" is a statement on the paranoia and bigotry of the late 40s - early 50s. Many in the film industry were under suspicion because of their alleged political beliefs and/or their associations with so-called "communists." They were often called "un-American" because they had, or knew, someone whose socio-political leanings were left of the supposed center. Films like this were one of the only creative outlets for making a statement against these wrongs. It could not be made as a current "true-life" picture, as had the classic "Gentlemen's Agreement" in 1947; the message had to be rhetorical and methaphorical. It had to be in a sci-fi or a picture set in a previous century. Those were dark days in Hollywood.

These days? The story really belongs in the 1950s so I suppose the current film will really resemble the original only in the most basic way - the theme may be similar and the title is reused.

And Keanu Reeves? Gimme a break! I cannot understand how such a limited actor can have such a big career. He belongs in stuff like "Bill & Ted" and ...... wait a minute! Most of his films aren't any deeper than "Bill and Ted." They just have bigger budgets. Mindless fodder to put asses in the seats. A month in theaters and straight to video.

I remember how much Keanu Reeves stunk up Bram Stoker's Dracula. The only thing that saved that film was Anthony Hopkins entertaining and over the top performance.

Mr. Reeves makes more bad movies than good movies, but I'll give him props for the "Bill and Ted" series, the "Break Point" surfing flick (my wife loves that), and as the cop/drugee in "A Scanner Darkly."

Ken

agree 100%.

It's doomed.

Yeah, Reeves was very out of his comfort zone in that one. His acting range is suitable for light comedy but when he's called upon to actually "act", well, let's say he's subpar. It's not that he can't, the main problem seems to be that his personality is so laid back and he has a serious lack of screen presence, nee "charisma." When he's onscreen with a better actor, say a Larry Fishbourne, Anthony Hopkins, or even a Patrick Swayze, he almost disappears. Surfer dude needs acting school.

Are you kidding? There is nothing dated about this film, except it's original release date. The concept, and the ideology it's against is alive and well! And will never go away.