Genres

Visitors Review

shirazh 2012-05-25 05:42:15

The movie is not that bad

I read the reviews from those disheartened viewers who were expectingthe same or beyond the quality of the original one. all of them havewritten the comparisons with the 1951 classic.I did not see theoriginal one and may be that is why this movie wasn't that bad forme.movies like 'transformers' 'the day after tomorrow' were moredisappointing than this and they didn't get battered like this one.ihaven't come across any intelligent criticism from any one other thanblind comparison,and hate for the movie. may be for not raising to thelevel of the old classic. a good sharp script would have made thismovie better.the dark eerie ambiance was effective.and the movie isn'tover burdened with special effects.but this movie surely don't deservethis kind of hate and rage.

systmcrsh 2012-05-24 20:29:22

totally 1-dimensional crap, offensive to human intelligence

completely 1 dimensional characters, 1 dimensional acting, and ascreenplay dumbed-down for a 6 year old.the handling of the "humans are destroying the earth" subject is incompletely poor taste. not because its not valid, but because the filmleaves the impression that the solution is easy, quick, and simple.furthermore, the emphasis of "when humans are on the precipice ofdisaster, we change and do the right thing", is deeply disturbing. itsas if the filmmakers are intentionally trying to keep the audiencepassive, by giving the impression that love will save us, or that we asa species can reverse the laws of nature by dialing up some quick fix.vapid and offensive. avoid.

maddog-50 2012-05-20 05:53:33

The time my brain stood still...

...was five minutes after i saw this movie. Click...what was that, ehwait a minute: Do they have real actors in Hollywood, i mean those whoare master of their business ? If so why ruin a movie why a goodpotential to be at least an acceptable 'remake' or new point of view ofa classic, by casting the completely wrong actors for every role inthis movie.Jennifer Connelly overacting by playing her only stereotype of adelicate intelligent and whiny woman, plagued by the incomprehension ofthe rest. Jeez, can she play anything else ? Connelly seems sonarcissistic and arrogant.The Smith kid Jaden, what a spoiled arrogant pita. Not enough that helives with the golden spoon in his mouth, no, he is casted for bigscreen movies because his daddy said: you want to be an actor? fine!You can be whatever you want to be.But he probably forgot to tell him, that he has not the talent foreverything he wants to be and that what the producers of the movieforget too. Jaden as the gutsy gutsy factor was a total mistake.And Keanu Reeves, he could have played an alien felling uncomfortablein the human body but willing to endure that state of suffering becauseof fulfilling his mission. BUT, Mr. Reeves, playing anelectro-static-toaster is not roughly the same of the job MichaelRennie did 57 years ago.Besides the terrible cast, Scott Derrickson did a decent job to ruinthe movie with his 'talent' and ideas.Nowadays, good quality CGI is not a matter of technical equipment, itsa matter of ability. What amateurs designed Gort ? Nanobots lookinglike blowflies...etc. These creatives should have watched the originalmovie some times more, just to get some inspiration.Do not watch this movie if you liked the original. Do not watch themovie if you want to watch a good movie.

gmbialk 2012-05-19 15:15:11

How To Ruin A Classic

Growing up in the 50's & 60's, I grew up with the original Day TheEarth Stood Still and had memorized Klaatu's famous words my whole life(in case I ever needed to disarm Gort). I was about as excited asanyone when I saw the first preview come out and had hopes that I wouldbe seeing my favorite black and white sci-fi movie replaced with an allnew, up to date, high tech remake. Well, it was a major disappointment.The story line was damaged beyond compare as they added stupid scenesas the army leader with the hillbilly accent attacking Gort, theterrible casting for the secretary of state and the whiny little kidwho kept changing his mind. The worst disappointment was that thismovie seemed to be another pitch for how we are ruining this planet forour animal friends. The little Noah's Ark spheres were ridiculous.You may be one of those people (like me) who has to see this movie nomatter what you read about it. If you are, keep your expectations waylow. If you are not, let me encourage you to just rent or buy theoriginal and leave your memory of the original unscathed and save yourhard earned dollars.

siderite 2012-05-10 16:16:31

I liked it, but it's not great

The shadow of the 1951 film darkens all the reviews here. I haven'tseen the original movie, but I did see the last scene of it, where thealien tells humans that "they have a system and it works" and that arace of robots was created to attack any and all aggressors, thereforethere is no more aggression in the universe. That seems so silly now,especially in this political climate.As for the new one, Keanu does his job. I liked that his presence, inperson and script, is so immense that humans feel like tiny insects. Ihave been longing for a movie like this, since it is obvious that noamount of human spirit would be a match for the technology (andexperience) of a space faring species.The reasons why the alien comes and leaves are ridiculous, though. Onecan only update a concept so much before changing the entire thing. Andone can only tell so much without spoiling the movie. Also, thedifferent acts of the script seems too disconnected to be part of thesame movie.Bottom line: the movie seems a bit slow in pace, but if you look back,you realize that there isn't much they could have left out. The littlepsychopathic black kid as a representative of the human race almostmade me want GORT to destroy humanity. I wish the script would havebeen more consistent. All in all, average.

2012-05-10 01:36:55

60 Minutes

This review is from: The Day the Earth Stood Still (Two-Disc Widescreen Edition) (DVD) Having been on earth for just more than six decades, I feel qualified in saying that the remake of this Sci-Fi classic is definitely the day the movie theatres stood still. I was 2...that's right, 2, when the 1951 classic TDTESS was released starring Michael Dennie and Patricia Neal...in black and white (of course). The 2008 remake stars Keanu Reeves and Jennifer Connelly, a handsome and beautiful duo that have earned Academy recognition through the years. Stick to the 1951 classic. This one has all the millennium effects, sound and dull script, but it would have been much better if it had been condensed to a 60-minute remake on cable (like Masters of Horror). This was a yawner...had its moments...and the only saving grace was the beautiful countenance of Jennifer...she is just filled with natural beauty but she is much better cast in other films. I have to give 3 stars because of the casting and special effects. Cut this baby to 60 minutes and you have a winner.

g-bodyl 2012-05-02 22:18:50

Am I the Only One Who Likes This?

When most people declare movies utter crap, I tend to say they aregreat films(with the exception of Meet the Spartans Ugh!). This is notan exception. I read so many negative, biased reviews about this film.I rate this movie in its own, not comparing it to the original fromfifty years ago.This film is about a scientist who get called in by the gov't becauseweird things are happening. A giant orb has landed in Central Park. Nowthey have to stop Klaatu from making the Orb destroy Earth.The acting is decent. I have always known Keanu Reeves to be somewhatof a good actor. Connelly also surprised me here. Jaden Smith does needto work on his acting skills.The visual effects were OK. They were the not the best except for maybein one or two scenes.Overall, this is a really good sci-fi film. I rate this movie 9/10.

2012-05-02 13:40:46

Surprisingly few special effects

As others have noted, the fatal flaw of this version is that we never care about Keanu's Klaatu. Yes there is something of a character arc (the growth of the character) in this version, but it's so subtle that those who have not seen the original might miss it completely. Edmund North, who wrote the screenplay for the classic 1951 version, intended for the Klaatu character to appear like the second coming of Christ. That subtle element is even stronger in this version, but Keanu missed an opportunity to play the role in harmony with a Christ-like character. Indeed, Klaatu's true intentions would have seemed far more menacing if our first impression of him was as gentle and kind. Spencer Tracy was supposed to play Klaatu in the original film, but the producer wisely opted for an unknown actor in the lead. It would have been laughable for a familiar face like Tracy's to walk out of a spaceship. In this version, the director worked around this problem by not revealing Reeves at the spaceship, but the movie would have been strengthened by using an unknown lead. Since Klaatu isn't given much to do here, much of the film is wasted on the completely uninteresting supporting cast, Jennifer Connelly and Jaden Smith. Kathy Bates, as the government official, gives her role a star performance, but alas, her character is was written one dimensionally.As big budget, "popcorn" movies go, this one is a great disappointment in the special effects department. The robot, GORT, is a delightful update of the original. But there's too little of him. He had much more screen time in the 1951 version and we would have expected about 20 minutes worth in contemporary film. Perhaps the oddest element of this picture is the title. In the original, the title referred to a key plot incident that is completely gone in this version. Indeed, that clever plot twist was a highlight of the original. The updated twist is revealed too late (about 1 hour, 16 minutes) into the film and then sort of fizzles out as a serious threat.Overall, the film has the look of something written by a committee. There are lots of walk-on, walk-off characters with little continuity (foreshadowing). And the whole thing seems padded by pointless traveling. There are even some serious continuity errors, such as when a government official refers to the robot as G.O.R.T. How did he know what the robot's name was?

2012-05-01 15:44:03

Try it anyway! You may like it! I did!

I never seen the original version. So I may not be as critical. It is really a good popcorn movie. The X-files sequel movie should have been done in such a scale. Loved it. FX was eye candy but I really thought that the basic premise of the movie was engaging. The only thing they could have done a little better was to develop further more why the alien decided to change his mind about humanity. The scene was short and sweet to help the alien see the better side of humanity but not enough for me to believe the alien. There were 2 other scenes that helped the alien to change his mind but they were barely mentioned toward the end. Little bit of apocalyptic feel to it but overall very intriguing storyline. Despise the harsh review, just watch it for the fun of it all...one of better sci-fi I have seen recently...

tedg 2012-04-30 19:40:29

NoNano Smoke

As far as I can tell, the only substantial change that was intended hadto do with the robot. In the original, this was a guy in a cardboardsuit with a red light that was enhanced in what we now callpostproduction. Here it is a giant with roughly the same shape and initial behavior.But instead of him stomping about, lasering things retail, here hebecomes an infinite and growing swarm of nanowasps.I rather liked the idea, working in the field myself. The idea appeals,but not the effect or the rendering. Oh, you should know that the moviefails for ordinary reasons that you can learn elsewhere, but this is aninteresting failure.Clever nanotech systems do not borrow their behavior from conventionalmetaphors. What we have here are insects — definitely not microscopic,because we actually see them in various sizes, usually about 1/8 to aquarter inch. These bugs behave like regular bugs or at least as wewould imagine them. Its a sort of locust plague, except instead oferasing crops, they erase manufactured artifacts, presumably makingmore of themselves from the material (because nothing is left).Thinking of this potentially wonderful machinery in this blunt, stupidway makes on wonder if we are worth saving.An imaginative nanoswarm would not be small elements with wings thatmove in formation like birds. It would be dust that swarms in magneticvortices, propelled by qubit anticipation. Jees.The one unanticipated change from the original is the loss of thisscene. In the original, the space fellow has been shot, indicating thatwe are dolts. The next day, coming from the hospital room, two doctorsdiscuss the miraculous healing of the wound. They gather next to eachother and remark on all the medical knowledge this advancedcivilization must have that we do not. These doctors are smoking.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do withthis part of your life.

Doug 2012-04-30 00:14:43

First time I'm doing this...

So as I walked into the theater, I started to wonder if my five dollar ticket and nine dollar snackage combo would be a waste. After all, the only reason I went to see this movie is to give myself a break after my week full of freshmen college exams and to see the trailer for X-Men Origins: Wolverine (Which looks totally awesome). I found however, that this was a huge payoff. The effects were amazing, the acting pulled me in (I cannot tell you how often I wanted to strangle the Kathy Bates' character), and although the film was preaching global warming, it was still a solid plot. I truly enjoyed this movie and I would be more than willing to see it again.

2012-04-29 02:46:57

Don't waste your time OR money

What a horrible movie. Thankfully I was on a date and didn't pay...otherwise I would have asked for my money back. It stunk.The original is 1 gazillion times better that this piece of doodoo.

Cali Girl 2012-04-26 21:27:32

What a mess!

Don't get me wrong, I love Keanu Reeves! I will watch him in just about anything, but this film is truly awful! The script was ridiculous! Even as an alien, Keanu was even more wooden than usual. (And special effects aren't going to help him out of that hole.) Do yourself a favor and watch the original 1950s classic. Micheal Rennie's Klatuu was brilliant, and Robert Wise's direction was inspired genius!

mawdo 2012-04-26 06:14:54

Truly Truly Awful

I kept myself from watching this for so long. Now I am preparing toblank my mind with a litre of vodka! I am a fan of the original andthis does not deserve the same title.If this movie had not attempted to piggy back on a classic movie, Iwould just have hated the story, but watched it for the visuals. As itwas, I despised even the visuals purely out of spite.Why oh why was Will Smiths' kid in the abomination? He helped suck thelife out of this already lacklustre story.If you have not watched this movie, then DO. Yes I recommend you DOWATCH this! Just to remind yourself why it is so many people pirate the(in general) pap that spews from the movie business.

mencius_89 2012-04-25 04:15:53

The Matrix Revultions!! Sigh :( This time its the blue pill...

If there's something else you want to watch then do it. I realise KeanuReeves is supposed to have that blank alien feel but what can you sayabout a performance like that, hes expected to act like a robot. Whenyou see films like the Matrix and Constantine you grow someexpectations and when i see a Reeves film titled "The Day The EarthStood Still" I was ready for another Reeves!! But No... In all themovie wasn't that bad, but a sci-fi reeves is supposed to bebrilliant!! Also some seriously frustrating characters, the whiningchild and the presidents step in to name a couple.Bit too cheesy and not enough reeves kicking ass.

lopcar1993 2012-04-24 18:27:27

An amazing remake of a great classic!

This movie was good for a number of reasons, my top one was that KeanuReeves was in it my other was that it was Sci-Fi ,I love Sci-Fi . Thismovie had a certain appeal to it it was very dark and intense, it wassmart and intimidating.It was all around a great film.This remake of the 1951 Sci-Fi political inept classic is nothing shortof brilliant. It brings so much more to the table than the original andit does great with all the new technology and upgrades in the story andplot. The one thing I did find that I didn't like was the lack ofbackground into Klaatu's past that was the only thing I found I did notlike. This 2008 update brings a certain feeling of moral sense aboutwhat is going on in the environment it's a story that tells us that ifwe don't change our ways we'll all die. Which is partly true but whatreally drew me to this film was it's dark nature, I mean one alien hascome to our planet to deiced our fate by judging whether or not we arefit to continue to live on this planet.It's a great "change your ways" story that seems to leap off the screenand drag you into it's world of chaos and destruction. But ti did havea righteous pull to it as well I mean it was trying to tell us thatwe've got this one world and this one life and we need to cherish asbest we can and to mean that made it great to watch.Keanu Reeves turns in an amazing performance as the otherworldly hitman/ judge and he brings a dark forbearing and boding sense of justiceand style to a very old character, Jennifer Connelly does well here asthe widowed scientist Helen Benson. Jon Hamm showcase's he's got somegood acting chops outside his Mad Men role and Kathy Bates is fantasticas always. The only weak link in the group was Jaden Smith, son of Twotime Oscar nominee Will Smith, He gave such an annoying and badperformance that it made everyone else look bad he was bratty and crassand didn't really show off any real talent at all. But besides that thecast held up pretty well and did good with the material that they weregiven.This film is what you would call a dedication to the environment, anEco friendly Science Fiction movie( which is very rare.) and that givesit more of an appeal to Eco fanatic's and regular moviegoer's. But whatreally takes it outside the conventional Sci-Fi thriller genre is it'sforce and undeniable strength, it's will is unstoppable and it's grandand almost detailed way of telling the story makes it all the morepowerful and amazing.The Day the Earth Stood Still is a force to be reckoned with it'spowerful, ingenious and oh so entertaining to the point that thepassage of time is meaningless. All in all T.D.T.E.S.S. is anenthralling and mesmerizing Sci-Fi adventure to see it's wild fun andthe fans of the original will love it if they give it a chance. Thisfilm rocked my world and I know if your forgiving it will rock yours aswell. The day the earth stood still is an event you don't want to miss.

brownah18 2012-04-23 23:01:45

End of the world sort of movie, in this remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still!

Dr. Helen Benson (Jennifer Connelly) is asked to come with federalagents for some kind of national emergency along with other people whoare experts in their field having to do with science. They are allshown a slide show of an object that has set course for Manhattan whichis a city of 8 million inhabitants which will end its destination in 78minutes time.In something of an end of the world film, but in this film it's morelike an alien invasion like from the film "War of the Worlds". Althoughthis movie stars Keanu Reeves and Jennifer Connelly, what really makesthis movie exciting are the special effects and graphics bringing youinto the film and making you feel the old films from this remake from1951 classic sci-fi film which probably doesn't compare to this movieto some people, but might be fun to check out anyways. When it comes tothe end of the world you look deeper into things, it shows you how thecharacter sort of runs from the disaster or how they figure out what isgoing on. In this film Connelly's character Benson is the head honchoas some people would call it to stop the aliens from destroyingeverything and starting anew. I'm not really sure what it is when Iwatch sci-fi, but it intrigues you so much probably because it is lesspredictable than a movie based off something that is realistic.

2012-04-23 09:40:43

Bit of a bad rap

While I understand why people find this movie inferior to the 1951 original, I think it has been given a bit of a bad rap. Sure, the plot is as full of holes as a swiss cheese, but when I watch a sci-fi action movie I'm not really looking for deep analysis of the human condition. This movie gets right on with the action and doesn't stop till the end of the film. It's not a good script, but things happen and keep on happening. Don't watch it to elevate your mind or gain new insights; watch it to see some amazing special effects, good camera work and non-stop action. On those terms, it's a three-star movie.

Richard N Balz 2012-04-20 03:54:30

Klaatu Reeves...?

After reading many reviews...I still went to see this movie...glad I did. I'm a longtime fan of the original and really have few complaints of this version...albeit, the Smith genetic material is tiresome....and I'd hoped for a little more screentime for Gort to strut his stuff. All in all, this was a good reprisal of the older movie...updated.

2012-04-19 21:10:40

Happy Presidents Day!!!

I watched the original for the first time two days before I saw this one. This pretty much has the same plot, but it's done in a very different way. I didn't like that the flying saucer was a gigantic glowing ball, but it was cool. I loved that Gort was 100 feet tall in this one and looked more scary. Keanu Reeves did a pretty good job as Klaatu, who warns that if the people of Earth that if they don't stop the violence, the humans of Earth will be destroyed. I wasn't a big fan of Helen Benson' step-son being black and hated Klaatu, because in the original, her son was white and became friends with him. (I'm not racist.) My dad might have been a little disappointed because he thought it wasn't as good as the original. I did like the awesome night scenes and when it rained. If you are a fan of the original classic, you might like THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL!!!