Apocalyptic movies are a specific genre that are tremendously exciting due to human's curiosity with the end times. As much as we try to extend life as long as possible, we are fascinated by the end of it and how and when it will occur. Some apocalyptic films, as in this case, focus on the science fiction possibilities of how people think the world will end while others see the world succumbing to a more natural cause. Whatever the disaster, you can be sure that these movies will captivate audiences until the end of time.
SYNOPSIS (2008): A remake of the 1951 classic sci-fi film about an alien visitor and his giant robot counterpart who visit Earth. Source: IMDb.com
DIRECTOR: Robert Wise vs. Scott Derrickson
When just comparing the directors to each other, it's pretty clear who the winner is. In addition, when you compare the director's style in each of the movies, it's a clear winner also (to me at least) who is more deserving of the accolades.
Wise had numerous films under his direction by the time Earth... was released. Derrickson, on the other hand, had only one, The Exorcism of Emily Rose. By another stark contrast, Wise went on to direct two of the most well known musicals: The Sound of Music and West Side Story whereas Derrickson stayed in the horror genre with films like Sinister and Deliver Us From Evil, which received slightly better ratings from IMDb.com than his sci-fi film we're featuring here.
Wise's directorial style in the original was also superior to the remake's. In one particular scene when the main protagonist, the alien Klaatu, is introduced to the rest of the main characters, he is found standing in the shadows watching them view the unfolding newscast of the spaceship landing on the television. It offers a heightened sense of tension as the audience doesn't quite understand Klaatu's intentions and is subsequently riveted to what's about to happen.
The remake was over-saturated with special effects that didn't help hold the flimsy story line together. I think Derrickson could have utilized more fear-inducing filming techniques to draw the audience further into the picture instead of basically saying "just sit there bored in your chair waiting for the next big effect to try to make it all worth it, but it'll ultimately fail anyway."
The decision to film the original in black-and-white also helped the nuance of the film, even though technology existed to make it color if the director so chose that route, and made it appear more "alien."
WINNER: Original, Robert Wise
SCREENPLAY: Edmund H. North vs. David Scarpa
Often, movies often reflect the moral, political, or social issues of the time, and this film is no different. The greatest different between the original Earth... and the remake is the shift from world peace to environmental awareness.
In the 1951 original, Klaatu's warning was the effect of human's nature to develop weapons to destroy each other, and therefore putting all other planets at risk of war. This threat of destruction to other planets is what Klaatu, acting as a representative guardian for the other species, says needs to change or else Earth and its inhabitants will be exterminated.
In the remake, however, it dumbs down the idea of inter-galaxy peace and turns it into a save the planet because humans are destroying it. The idea in the remake being that the humans will be exterminated for the sake of 'Mother Earth' as opposed to humans in the original being given an ultimatum to live in peace or be destroyed for the sake of the survival of other species in the universe.
Also something I found troublesome in the remake was, toward the end of the film, Klaatu is emotionally changed in his quest to eliminate the human race based on the tears of a small child. After seeing the child's breakdown, he suddenly switches his course of action and says "You have shown me that you can change" and sets out to help reverse the events set in motion to destroy the planet.
WHAT?!
After most of the movie trying to show Klaatu as an unsympathetic alien representing the planet earth, you want me to believe that he suddenly cares about the human race because of one child?! Not only that, but why would a member of the alien race care so much about Earth (as opposed to, say, his own planet) that he would be sent to warn them to change or die?
As I said, a flimsy story line, at best.
WINNER: Original, Edmund H. North
CAST/ACTING: Michael Rennie, Patricia Neal, Hugh Marlowe vs. Keanu Reeves, Jennifer Connelly, Kathy Bates
This may be the first time that, while the remake did have a better cast than the original, it actually hurt the film rather than made it better. The main actors, and even several of the supporting cast (like Jon Hamm from Mad Men, John Cleese from the British Monty Python troupe, and Jaden Smith, son of famous actor Will Smith), were so recognizable that it deterred from the story being plausible. Reeves, most famous for his role as Neo in The Matrix trilogy, is not known as a great actor by any stretch and didn't contribute
Because the original didn't have a lot of well-known actors, it helped the actors to make the characters their own and not detract from telling its own story without the audience having preconceived notions of who they thought the actors were trying to portray. Not to mention that Rennie's interpretation of Klaatu was ten times more believable and sincere than Reeves more robotic and seemingly forced portrayal. He appeared very stiff and
CAST/ACTING WINNER: Original
MUSIC/SCORE: Bernard Herrmann vs. Tyler Bates
The music in neither film really struck me as outstanding and essential to the telling of the story and eliciting emotion in the audience. So if I had to choose, I would go with the remake just because modern films typically utilize more music than older films do.
WINNER: Remake, Tyler Bates
The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951):
- Rotten Tomatoes: 94% or 8.1/10 average rating
- IMDb.com: 7.8/10 from 61,661 users
- Metacritic: none
- Rotten Tomatoes: 21% or 4.1/10 average rating
- IMDb.com: 5.5/10 from 133,886 users
- Metacritic: 40/100
While one could argue that these films weren't technically of the apocalyptic nature, the end of the world is implied by Klaatu's warning to the inhabitants of Earth. By the end of the original, you're left with the cliffhanger of wondering whether or not the human race will choose to heed the warnings. By the end of the remake, it's pretty clear that the planet is spared with absolutely no real basis for such a decision other than the alien witnessing the tears of a child and the compassion from his step-mother.
Weak. Very weak.
No comments:
Post a Comment