Although one would imagine that Keanu Reeves would thrive playing the role of an extra-terrestrial being who is almost incapable of showing human emotion (or any emotion for that matter), the 2008 remake proves that just the opposite is true. Reeves and everyone else involved with the remake fail miserably at capturing the same portent and significance which made the original such a success. Moreover, the remake's adaptation of Klaatu's purpose and message is simply trite and irrelevant. No longer does he admonish our expanding nuclear capabilities, but rather our lack of environmental concerns, to which he attributes global warming (gasp!). Originality in the remake is certainly lacking (see The Day After Tomorrow), but did the writers behind it truly believe that global warming would have the same credibility and fear surrounding it as did the threat of nuclear war with the Soviets and Mutually Assured Destruction? Ultimately, contemporary audiences are left with a messy and unclear movie that doesn't know whether it wants to be a remake of the original, or a supplement to Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Repeat After Me: "Klaatu barada nikto"
After viewing The Day the Earth Stood Still (1958) in class last week, I found myself feeling almost entirely satisfied. The movie's effect on me was twofold: I was first deeply intrigued by its exploration of the science-fiction motif dealing with how mankind's seemingly thoughtless endeavors will ultimately hold catastrophic repercussions; Additionally (and, perhaps, more importantly), I was able to rid my mind of the unpleasant experience that was The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008) remake.
Although one would imagine that Keanu Reeves would thrive playing the role of an extra-terrestrial being who is almost incapable of showing human emotion (or any emotion for that matter), the 2008 remake proves that just the opposite is true. Reeves and everyone else involved with the remake fail miserably at capturing the same portent and significance which made the original such a success. Moreover, the remake's adaptation of Klaatu's purpose and message is simply trite and irrelevant. No longer does he admonish our expanding nuclear capabilities, but rather our lack of environmental concerns, to which he attributes global warming (gasp!). Originality in the remake is certainly lacking (see The Day After Tomorrow), but did the writers behind it truly believe that global warming would have the same credibility and fear surrounding it as did the threat of nuclear war with the Soviets and Mutually Assured Destruction? Ultimately, contemporary audiences are left with a messy and unclear movie that doesn't know whether it wants to be a remake of the original, or a supplement to Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth.
Although one would imagine that Keanu Reeves would thrive playing the role of an extra-terrestrial being who is almost incapable of showing human emotion (or any emotion for that matter), the 2008 remake proves that just the opposite is true. Reeves and everyone else involved with the remake fail miserably at capturing the same portent and significance which made the original such a success. Moreover, the remake's adaptation of Klaatu's purpose and message is simply trite and irrelevant. No longer does he admonish our expanding nuclear capabilities, but rather our lack of environmental concerns, to which he attributes global warming (gasp!). Originality in the remake is certainly lacking (see The Day After Tomorrow), but did the writers behind it truly believe that global warming would have the same credibility and fear surrounding it as did the threat of nuclear war with the Soviets and Mutually Assured Destruction? Ultimately, contemporary audiences are left with a messy and unclear movie that doesn't know whether it wants to be a remake of the original, or a supplement to Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment