Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I don't mind that this movie was made...What I do mind is why did they have to call it THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL?...Judging by this review and from what I've seen in the TV ads it is SORTA reminiscent of the earlier, wonderful film...but I wouldn't call it a remake...The original EARTH STOOD STILL was a wonderful story based film with a great script and directopn.....This sounds and looks like an excuse for Whiz bang Computer graphics...
It would have been interesting to see a version of THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL LITERALLY UPDATED with the added whiz bangs...BUT the story of the original still works today...by all means throw in environmental degradation into the mix but don't change the story...I was looking forward to seeing John Cleese as Sam Jaffe but from what I've seen and heard Cleese may be the only thing worth seeing in this film...WHat a shame..
Not all remakes are horrible (the original and first remakes of Invasion of the Body Snatchers) and fewer still, such as the Sci-Fi Channel's miniseries version of Dune correct originals that were inexcusably bad.
But why even try to remake something so iconic and memorable, like The Day the Earth Stood Still? Science fiction movies, it seems to me, live and die on good word of mouth from a core of fans who can't wait to see it. You could have cast DiCaprio and Winslet in this movie and you'd never have had that kind of reaction. More importantly--in the current atmosphere, who is going to see an inferior remake when they could Netflix or rent the original for a fraction of what a movie ticket is going to cost them?
The Forbidden Planet. I LOVE that movie. It is one of the most clever, intelligent scifi movies made. The ONLY thing wrong with it is the few social aspects vis a vis modern sensibilities (the heroic men, the damsel that needs saving by said heroic men). The special effects were good (and there was no attempt to over do beyond technical capabilities at the time) but would be great if done today.
Want to remake a great old movie? The Forbidden Planet is a prime target - just do it right. There is very little (beyond the social interaction of male/female) that needs to be changed - just done with an eye to make it MORE ominous and the effects even better.
Check that movie out, you wont regret it.
http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/j-michael-straczynski-talks-the-forbidden-planet/
I'm hoping that this remake fails horribly so they scrap current plans to remake Forbidden Planet. That's the best SF movie of all time and any attempt to remake it is bound to fail. What's the point of remaking it other than having no new ideas?
The fact that it is Straczynski doing the Forbidden Planet remake allays any fears I have. He did well by Tolkien, he does well period. His own comments (from the link below which leads to another link in comments) tells me he takes it very seriously, as he should.
Easily one of THE best sci-fi movies of all time and Straczynski has the skilz to do it right.
But there's really no point to remaking it. As you've acknowledged, it is a fantastic movie, what could he improve?
Tolkein had never really been in movie form before. I don't care who is doing it, remaking Forbidden Planet will be a disaster.
In this new century, is difficult to find
Why write new classics
When you can just go back and back
And tap, and retap
That good old, golden age gold mine..?
There's a ton of great SF being written today. There's no need at all to remake the classics. Hollywood is just engaging in nostalgia and/or being lazy.
As long as Bruce Willis in a dirty wifebeater fights Gort.
Look, I love Forbidden planet, too. And I was not astounded the other day when I heard they were remaking it (this in a conversation about the sheer unneccessariness of TDTESS).
But let's not forget that Forbidden Planet is itself a retelling of Shakespeare's "The Tempest."
Remaking Shakespeare is a time-honored movie technique.
Those Hollywood producers
Are just a bunch 'o slow
Slug headed
Draggin' ass finks...
Tempus, if Straczynski's remaking FORBIDDEN PLANET, he's earned my trust.
But when did he work on Tolkien?
For steering me away from this thing.
For some reason I mixed up Jackson and Straczynski. Nevertheless, Strac is an "A-list" writer and does excellent work.
I just read too that he is working with Plan-B productions (Brad Pitt) to adapt World War Z to film. Good book, given the subject matter.
Forbidden Planet is not a remake. It was based on Shakespeare, but wasn't a remake of the Tempest. A remake of Forbidden Planet will simply be new actors and new special efects with a slightly changed script. The same characters, events, location and situations will all be there.
Remaking Shakespeare is a time-honored movie technique.
By this logic, there is no such thing as a truly original story. EVERYTHING simply retells already known stories, be they folklore, history, fiction, religion, etc.
If you are simply waiting for absolutely new, non-derivative work, you will be waiting forever. No such thing.
There's a ton of great SF being written today.
True, but not all of the truly great SF is adaptable to film. I would list any of the books by Gregory Benford, Greg Bear, Neal Stephenson (possibly doable with a good writer/director), Vernor Vinge. Often, their very very great SF is simply too big for the screen. Some of them spans eons and/or entire universes.
Forbidden Planet was already successful at being on film. It is ready-made for it and it would be nice to see it updated for the modern age, technologically and socially.
I don't care who is doing it, remaking Forbidden Planet will be a disaster.
I will wait and see to judge. There IS value in remaking some old movies so that they move out of the realm of being kitchy and can/will be enjoyed by younger generations.
Kids these days think SF movies began with Star Wars.
Damn kids.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
