MovieChat Forums > The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) Discussion > Is this better than the Keanu Reeves's ...

Is this better than the Keanu Reeves's remake???



Just wonder because I haven't watched it yet, and I didn't like the remake at all.












Life is a Bitch, then you die!!!

reply

IMHO, this is one of the greatest sci-fi films EVER! Why they remade it, I don't know. And with Keanu Reeves!?

Trust me, if you didn't like the remake, that's a very good thing because it *beep* sucked. If you watch this you will NOT be disappointed. it's amazing.

"I wished Her back but the dead adored Her, Even wild winds sang in chora for Her"

reply

by FinalFantasyFanatic87 - IMHO, this is one of the greatest sci-fi films EVER! Why they remade it, I don't know.

Trust me, if you didn't like the remake, that's a very good thing because it *beep* sucked. If you watch this you will NOT be disappointed. it's amazing.

Agreed.

reply

Keanu Reeves should have played the part of Gort. At least we would have been spared the embarrassing experience of Mr Reeves trying to act.

reply

LOL!

"I wished Her back but the dead adored Her, Even wild winds sang in chora for Her"

reply

I actually enjoyed watching the remake and gave it a score of 5 (of 10). But the original is an absolute classic and much more enriching and enjoyable.


"At a time when cynicism masquerades as sophistication, [AWTR's] theme is worth touching upon."

reply

The remake is useless and had no business being made.
The original, is "The One and Only" and is truly one of the most brilliant anti-war films of it's kind.

reply

"The remake is useless and had no business being made."

Exactly. Just more money down the drain that might have been spent making something good.

The original has its flaws, obviously, but its assets easily surpass its inconsistencies. Far better cast, superb music, makes a lot more sense, and it doesn't pander to its audience.

Stick to the 1951 original. (And that goes for another '51 classic, The Thing From Another World.)

reply

Better by light years and parsecs!!!

I agree with you about the remake. It gave me the impression that the writers decided to get really "creative" and threw out everything but the title.

Even Keanu Reeves doing his best to show an extremely non-human alien trying to function in a human body wasn't enough to save that turkey.

Biggest hole in the remake plot: Since Klaatu had already decided to destroy all life on the planet in order "save" it, why did he bother to land?

---
All I can say to the writers, director(s) and producer(s) of the remake is:
I admire your ability to get paid for that.
---

reply

I taped this last night because I haven't seen it in years. I was shocked how appropriate it is for our times. The remake was ridiculous, but I guess that's because they changed the story. The lesson learned from the original is what we face today, unless we stop the aggression we will destroy ourselves. When I first saw it I considered it science fiction, now it is science fact. The writer was definitely light years ahead of us, an Ayn Rand of the science world. But to remake something this important they could've used an allegory which showed that the world is making a mistake in persuing atomic warfare. And yes, the biggest hole was the landing to tell us part. And Michael Rennie was brilliant, something they should have considered before they cast the remake. And his Klatu was compassionate and acted human.

reply

by Frumious_Bandersnatch - Biggest hole in the remake plot: Since Klaatu had already decided to destroy all life on the planet in order "save" it, why did he bother to land?

Not to mention the fact that by rewriting the remake the way they did, the freaking title no longer made any sense. There WAS actually an important meaning in the original to having a day (or half an hour as was specifically the case) where the Earth stood still, but by eliminating that 1/2 hour demonstration in the remake, well, need I really say more...

reply

Slightly off the track:
From your remarks, I thought you might like this.
There is a 3rd (and very different) story about a traveler named Klaatu and his giant robot.

"Farewell to the Master" by Harry Bates.
First published in a 1940 issue of Amazing Stories Magazine.
http://www.digital-eel.com/blog/library/Farewell_to_the_Master.pdf

Enjoy!
---
Frumious_Bandersnatch_46
your Computasaurus Emeritus
---

reply

I DID like Farewell to the Master. It had also been suggested awhile back by another poster on this message board and I read it at that time. Thanks for the heads-up just the same though.

reply

Most all modern remakes suck and this original is a classic in every sense of the word....

reply

I think the original 1951 version of this movie is much better than the remake ((Nichael Rennie was an accomplished actor). I give the earlier version of this movie 8 marks out of ten.

reply

Yes. There's no comparison.

reply

Is this better than the Keanu Reeves's remake???
Oh, yes. As if infinitely so.

Forget the stupid dumb jackassed remake--see the real Classic original, a true Sci-Fi AND Hollywood icon, legendary to this day. It might be among the greatest films you will ever see.

--
StrangerHand: Now 75% more afro-free!

reply

The 2008 remake is probably the worst remake of all time. At least in my opinion. All 3 main characters were miscast. The film had no heart. Jaden Smith's acting was worse than Keanu Reeves! Not to mention there was zero chemistry between him & Jennifer Connelly. There also was no chemistry between her & Jaden Smith. Why do that? It made no sense for it to be a stepmother-stepson relationship when in the original they were mother & son. As for Gort. He stole the 1951 movie! To this day he is still the main man! (lol) I love him and Klaatu together. Which was the other relationship ruined in the remake!

Keanu Reeves should have played the part of Gort. At least we would have been spared the embarrassing experience of Mr Reeves trying to act.

So true! 

MOJO2004

reply