MovieChat Forums > The Day of the Triffids (2009) Discussion > Did they have to throw every single clic...

Did they have to throw every single cliche in it?

posted 12 years ago by elly_l
2 replies | jump to latest

I mean - come on - genuine mad evil guy, Dr. Smart&Handsome the main protagonist, popular loved female, edgy kid, mad scientist, tribe rituals, sudden apocalypse, crazy nature activist, bad guy who is secretly good, what else...

What happened to the real story of the book? In the book, just like in life, there are hardly people who are either only good or only evil. Even Coker in the book is initially believed to be the bad guy, but turns out to be nice. And Torrence (the only genuinly evil character in the book) has so little part...

Why did they have to redo it to fit all the cliches? Do we really need bigger evil than the triffids themselves to enjoy the movie? Do we really need superhero protagonist instead of nice "average biochemist" to save the day?

I did not enjoy it. I believe you either make it according the original story, or don't bother making it at all

[–] weejockxxx 9 years ago

This is the trouble with todays film makers. In the book and the 1981 mini series, the characters were far more realistic. Torrence wasn't some mad genius, he was merely a sighted person who took advantage of the fact he still had his sight and took over a small area of a town. All Eddie Izzard was missing was the twirling moustache.

Oh gravity, thou art a heartless bitch!

[–] CathodeRayTubesRock 9 years ago

You nailed it. This version is just too overblown and unrealistic. I mean, take the premise of the plants and blindness and then just take it from there. If fairly normal people were put in this situation.

Sig, you want a sig, here's a SIG-sauer!