[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Go see “Four Christmases” with Reese and Vince instead…
[/quote]
Weird. That movie is called Four Holidays over here. I wonder why they feel a need to change the name. I can never understand that.
[quote]hardgnr wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Go see “Four Christmases” with Reese and Vince instead…
Weird. That movie is called Four Holidays over here. I wonder why they feel a need to change the name. I can never understand that.
[/quote]
Because it has religious overtones and your government thinks you are too sensitive to handle it?
Starts with a bang, ends with a fizzle. Hollywood did a poor job of making this movie. GORT should have had more of a role. I agree with all that the boy should have been monkey-stomped into his next movie. As for the federation of planets and races, they should have definitely expounded on that a bit more. Perhaps actually allowing them to speak with NATO and such… eh…I don’t know…the movie really let me down.
[quote]Beast27195 wrote:
Starts with a bang, ends with a fizzle. Hollywood did a poor job of making this movie. GORT should have had more of a role. I agree with all that the boy should have been monkey-stomped into his next movie. As for the federation of planets and races, they should have definitely expounded on that a bit more. Perhaps actually allowing them to speak with NATO and such… eh…I don’t know…the movie really let me down. [/quote]
SOMETIMES I think Hollywood can become a little enamored with themselves and become more interested in making a “statement” than a good movie.
I agree with you, Beast…it let me down.
The potential of this movie was almost limitless…
Mufasa
[quote]Professor X wrote:
There aren’t that many really good sci fi shows for the standard to be raised that high. Most of the current ideas…are just revamped OLD ideas, like Battlestar Gallactica and the Sarah Connor Chronicles. X-Files was about as unique as we’ve seen…or will see for quite a while.
I haven’t seen this movie, but I am one of those who thinks people are just spoiled lately.
You sort of have to expect to deal with several “ok” attempts before you get an Iron Man or a Dark Knight.[/quote]
PROF:
Those of us who love the genre of Sci-Fi/Fantasy have LONG contended that it is the “bastard Step-Child” of the movie industry. While OVER and OVER again, Sci-Fi/Fantasy have proven to be some of the largest and consistent money makers; the Academy, while recognizing many of the TECHNICAL advances simply will not reward the creative.
Many of us firmly believe that recognizing and rewarding the creative side would most likely yield greater and greater screenplays.
With that being said…I don’t think that Sci-Fi yields any more or less “hit-or-misses” than any other genre. (Like “Romantic Comedies”…there sure as hell have been a lot of crap from that genre!)
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Professor X wrote:
There aren’t that many really good sci fi shows for the standard to be raised that high. Most of the current ideas…are just revamped OLD ideas, like Battlestar Gallactica and the Sarah Connor Chronicles. X-Files was about as unique as we’ve seen…or will see for quite a while.
I haven’t seen this movie, but I am one of those who thinks people are just spoiled lately.
You sort of have to expect to deal with several “ok” attempts before you get an Iron Man or a Dark Knight.
PROF:
Those of us who love the genre of Sci-Fi/Fantasy have LONG contended that it is the “bastard Step-Child” of the movie industry. While OVER and OVER again, Sci-Fi/Fantasy have proven to be some of the largest and consistent money makers; the Academy, while recognizing many of the TECHNICAL advances simply will not reward the creative.
Many of us firmly believe that recognizing and rewarding the creative side would most likely yield greater and greater screenplays.
With that being said…I don’t think that Sci-Fi yields any more or less “hit-or-misses” than any other genre. (Like “Romantic Comedies”…there sure as hell have been a lot of crap from that genre!)
Mufasa
[/quote]
I agree with that. I also agree that we should push Hollywood to come out with better quality movies than simply eye candy and explosions. They have proved with at least three movies lately that they can write a great story, have tons of special effects, great acting, and standout performances and still create a solid sci fi movie (I throw Dark Knight, Iron Man and even Hulk in that category).
I guess my previous response was more to those who are quick to claim everything sucks even though it may have actually been a decent attempt even if it wasn’t perfect.
Someone in another thread claimed Wall-e sucked. I saw the movie and thought it was decent, especially for kids. I am not sure what that person was expecting to claim it sucked.
For a movie to really suck, that means the writing was bad, the acting was bad and it was overall a waste of film.
Maybe we need to come up with a “T-Nation Movie Rating System”.
Did this movie get one fist…or four?
I have a question. 50’s version of The Day the Earth Stood Still was and is a classic.
I understand they changed the theme of nuclear annhilation with a theme of enviromental destruction…but if the rest of the movie was consistant with the one from the 50’s…why was it so bad?
What else did they change to make it suck so bad?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I have a question. 50’s version of The Day the Earth Stood Still was and is a classic.
I understand they changed the theme of nuclear annhilation with a theme of enviromental destruction…but if the rest of the movie was consistant with the one from the 50’s…why was it so bad?
What else did they change to make it suck so bad?[/quote]
Good question.
I think you have half of the country who acts as if any discussion about humans negatively affecting the planet is simply “liberal lunacy”.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I have a question. 50’s version of The Day the Earth Stood Still was and is a classic.
I understand they changed the theme of nuclear annhilation with a theme of enviromental destruction…but if the rest of the movie was consistant with the one from the 50’s…why was it so bad?
What else did they change to make it suck so bad?[/quote]
G:
Just to add to what Prof said:
We tend to view “Classics” through rose-colored glasses, as some “perfect” example of a genre…and they are not.
They were just often ground breaking for a genre.
One example. I have an enhanced disc version of the original “War of the Worlds”. My hell! I can see the cables that are holding up the “Sting Ray” Martian vehicles! And a lot of the dialogue is BEYOND cheesy…but its a Classic.
The 1951 “Day the Earth…” doesn’t compare effects wise even to the worst Sci-Fi TV show today. But it was a great screenplay; there was a bit more character development; and the only reason we know ANYTHING about GORT in the 2008 movie is because of what we learned for the 1951 movie.
Why was it “frustrating”? (Told you! I don’t like “bad”!)
Most of us enthusiast went into the film expecting it to be more, and go FURTHUR than the 1951 classic…
Mufasa
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I have a question. 50’s version of The Day the Earth Stood Still was and is a classic.
I understand they changed the theme of nuclear annhilation with a theme of enviromental destruction…but if the rest of the movie was consistant with the one from the 50’s…why was it so bad?
What else did they change to make it suck so bad?[/quote]
The problem was environmental destruction wasn’t the theme, it was an afterthought. I think an entire 5 lines was spent discussing humanities poor waste management skills and its effects on planetary health. Most of the movie focuses on a handful of characters who you are supposed to fall in love with, however the more you watch the more you want to smack the folks with a ball peen hammer.
The whys? and hows? of humanities destruction was given maybe 10 minutes of screen time.
Interesting thing about the character played by Will Smiths son…
In the original, the one who “gave away” where Klattu and the female protagonist were hiding was actually a jerk of a fiance…
I have no idea why the writers of this remake placed the things we disliked about this character onto the Smith boy…
(I agree with you guys…he should have been a character that we liked…)
The “Environmental Thing”…
I remember thinking to myself “damitt” when it was obvious that this was where they were going to take this. By that time, the film was already floundering…
Mufasa
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
I have a question. 50’s version of The Day the Earth Stood Still was and is a classic.
I understand they changed the theme of nuclear annhilation with a theme of enviromental destruction…but if the rest of the movie was consistant with the one from the 50’s…why was it so bad?
What else did they change to make it suck so bad?
Good question.
I think you have half of the country who acts as if any discussion about humans negatively affecting the planet is simply “liberal lunacy”. [/quote]
good point, but there are also people who are tired of hearing the bitching from celebrities who most likely consume far more than the everyday person does. or al gore, telling evryone how bad we f’d up, while he zips around in a private jet. (not to mention he didnt seem to do a whole lot to protect the environment when he was VP for 8 years).
the problems are obvious to anyone with a brain. we as individuals can either do something about it in our lives, or shut the hell up. yet another movie with a message isnt going to change a damn thing, at this point.
I think they should have stuck to the original theme. It’s not like we’ve exactly dropped the war-like tendencies.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
I think they should have stuck to the original theme. It’s not like we’ve exactly dropped the war-like tendencies.[/quote]
maybe im wrong, but wasnt the aliens reason for visiting in the original because we presented a potentail threat to them?
[quote]hypnotoad wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I think they should have stuck to the original theme. It’s not like we’ve exactly dropped the war-like tendencies.
maybe im wrong, but wasnt the aliens reason for visiting in the original because we presented a potentail threat to them?
[/quote]
It was our tendency to attack other people that made them come. They created a race of robots like Gort to keep the peace throughout the known universe. I don’t think it was them specifically, it was other less advanced races (that were still more advanced than us, but only slightly) that they were concerned for.
Like it or not, we do tend to attack people weaker than us.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
hypnotoad wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I think they should have stuck to the original theme. It’s not like we’ve exactly dropped the war-like tendencies.
maybe im wrong, but wasnt the aliens reason for visiting in the original because we presented a potentail threat to them?
It was our tendency to attack other people that made them come. They created a race of robots like Gort to keep the peace throughout the known universe. I don’t think it was them specifically, it was other less advanced races (that were still more advanced than us, but only slightly) that they were concerned for.
Like it or not, we do tend to attack people weaker than us.[/quote]
Exactly!
As a matter of fact, Klattu stated (in so many words) that he could care less about all out little internal “sqabbles” between our peoples…but what concerned the other planets was our developing missle technology that would allow us to expand beyond our own planet.
(I’ll see if I can find that final speech and post it.)
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Most of us enthusiast went into the film expecting it to be more, and go FURTHUR than the 1951 classic…
Mufasa[/quote]
I agree, just like the movie The Time Machine. The George Pal movie was killer, though the effects, cool for their time did not stand up today. In the volcano scene, for instance, you can see it’s a model city. But so what? The movie rocked.
Imagine what it would look like with today’s cool special effects…another crappy turkey.
Just like the forementioned War of the Worlds which I had the misfortune of seeing…
Day the Earth Stood Still seems like another missed opportunity.
Ah, the wonders of “YouTube”!
Mufasa
A classic Sci-Fi Moment that I kept waiting for in the remake…
And it never happened!
(Oh, well…)
Mufasa
Alas the remake. So much potential, so poor execution.