The Day the Earth Stood Still (Starring Keanu Reeves)

The Day the Earth Stood Still trailer is now posted online. Enjoy!

 

Please, Gaia, no!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooo!

 

I couldn't have said that better myself ^^.

 

I was shocked when I heard of this, they should not do this. What makes the original so special is the whole Cold war paranoia.

I still remember that machine that Klaatu has that gets blown up, I felt so sad.

 

i've seen most of the original
it was pretty good
the remake is probably gonna be a hit even if it's nothing like the original

 

If this is anything like War of the Worlds, it's gonna be incredible. I tend to think (and hope) that Fox wouldn't mess with something as seminal as DTESS if it wasn't going to be phenomenal, and relevant to the here and now.

 

MTV Movies Blog.

The last shot in the trailer is a hero shot, although strangely not of Keanu Reeve?s character Klaatu, but of his trusty robot Gort. The look of the character deliberately recalls his look in the 1951 original.

?It was intentional,? Derrickson said. ?I certainly took a lot of time to explore other possibilities. It wasn?t just a foregone conclusion in my mind that we would be sticking to the original. I tried looking at a lot of different possibilities, worked on a lot of different ideas with artists and just always a nagging sense that there was something right about the way the original, that there was something about this alien entity choosing a human form or being in a human form that had value even by modern standards, not by 1950 standards. I also am such a fan of the original film. You have to also just have some respect for Gort. Gort is Gort. There?s no question what we designed pays homage to the original.?

Klaatu sits in an interrogation room, hooked up to a lie-detector as a government official quizzes him on his purpose. Even in still frames, Keanu Reeves has a rigid, alien quality about his body language.

?One of the biggest challenges of this movie was whether or not audiences would really buy the whole idea ? and there?s no question that you buy it, there?s no question that you believe Keanu?s performance. He really thinks through every moment and every beat with tremendous rigor. And he is very clear, I think, about what works for him and his physicality,? Derrickson said. ?And yet it?s not like he?s doing things that are highly unusual or highly quirky. He?s not performing an alien like Jeff Bridges in ?Starman.? What he?s doing is something that?s not quite so upfront and center or distracting, but it still really gives you a feel of alien-ness and keeps you aware of the fact that this being you?re walking through this movie with is not a human being.?

Reeves told us that Klaatu?s message to Earth was very different from the one in the original, that he was bringing with him a warning to stop destroying the environment. Here it looks like the environment is destroying us (or Giants Stadium, at any rate) ? which is it?

?It?s both and even more,? Derrickson explained. ?I think that this film in some ways is an attempt to address a number of issues that are amongst the most pressing issues for the human race. The original being a Cold War film was addressing what was clearly the greatest threat for the human race at that time, mutual nuclear destruction, and that?s not the most pressing threat that we face now. It?s also man vs. man. We are destroying each other as well. Our country?s at war right now. There is certainly the issue being addressed in the movie of our treatment of one another on the planet. I think it?s a movie about human nature as much as anything else and how human nature is acting itself out in the world right now.?

Jennifer Connelly

In the original, Klaatu finds the character of Helen after he escapes from custody. Here, she goes to him.

?She?s actually a professor at Princeton University and she?s a microbiologist and she?s recruited early in the movie for an event that?s clearly occurring. She?s recruited by the government whether she likes it or not, really,? Derrickson said. ?Helen is probably an expanded role from the original film. Jennifer, of course, is a fantastic actress. She was always my first choice for the role so I?m elated that she?s in it.?

Keanu Reeves

The original was a not-so-subtle allegory for Christ (the alien?s human name is Carpenter, he calls for peace, he is resurrected at the end, etc.). Is Derrickson?s version as overt?

?I don?t think you can really escape that metaphor,? Derrickson said. ?I think the Christ-myth stories make great stories, whether it?s ?The Matrix? or ?Braveheart,? they all are tapping into some kind of deep myth in our DNA, and by myth I don?t necessarily mean false. I mean something that ha

 

I first saw the trailer online, and having never seen the original movie, I didn't really have a problem with it. But seeing the preview before The Dark Knight, Keanu?s acting made me burst out laughing. It's classic Keanu, but that's really not a good thing to carry a movie on

 

not sure what to make of this, but people in the theater were laughing the first time Keanu appears on the screen and shouting Neo.

I'll see it, just cause jennifer connelly is in it, other than that, not really interested in it. They should just leave classic films alone.

 

I'll believe it when I see it. Either the movie is good or it isn't; referring to some mythic resonance supposedly ingrained in our DNA to help sell the movie is not a good sign, IMO.

 

I can't help but note the hypocrasy of wanting to stay true to the original classic while remaking it. So, um, if you value the original so highly, why remake it at all?

"Look! Cassablanca! They've remade Cassablanca!"
"Philistines! The version staring Marla Binglbat and Peter Beardsley was definitive!"

 

Next thing you'll know they'll remake Gone with the Wind

 

Here you go: Hugh Jackman eyed for "Gone with the Wind" Broadway role. It's on Broadway, but I'm sure that one for Hollywood can't be that far behind.

 

Gotta love Red Dwarf quotes. There's usually one for every occasion. Better than Monty Python's Holy Grail.

 

I love the Orignal, probably one of the BEST Sci Fi movies ever made. The Remake, I'm scared of.... You don't have Robert Wise directing, like in the orignal, and Bernard Herrmann's score is one you would NEVER forget. I just can't take Keanu Reeves' seriously.

 

I saw the original years ago, and the new one looks nothing like it. Why even have the same title?

 

Well, what kind of title do you want them to use? The Day the Earth Stood Still Still or something.

 

How about "Dude, Where's My Gravity?" or "Narly, I can control electricity."

I have a better question: why remake the movie at all? I have yet to hear a satisfactory explanation.
In all of Hollywood history, I can think of only one remake that was ever better than the original: DOA. That's the only one.
Now, Little Shop of Horrors and Refer Madness both has musical remakes, but those were actually more film versions of musical stage plays based on cheezy old movies rather than direct remakes.

Invasion of the Bodysnatchers has been remade how many times? What was the closest to correct? The most faithful to the original? So far, the first movie (there have been a couple versions I haven't seen yet).

 

I never saw the original either but I've always been a fan of Keanu and the film looks interesting. I think I might check this one out.

 

Two new trailers have now been shown.

5 Minute Trailer (As Seen Before Final Destination IV)

7:33 Second Trailer (As Seen Before Fringe)

---

Discuss.

 

Some of the best-known films in Hollywood history have been re-makes... it's just that for the most part we've forgotten the originals because the re-makes eclipsed them. Here's a sampling of superior and/or well-known re-makes:

The Wizard of Oz (1939)* Frankenstein (1931) * Dracula (1930) * The Maltese Falcon (1941) * Ben-Hur (1959) * All the Hammer horror films of the 50s - 70s * John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) * Scarface (1983) * The Fly (1986) * Beauty & the Beast (1991) * The Bourne Identity (2002) * Chicago (2002) * Narnia (2005-2008) * The Departed (2006).

EDIT: I forgot to mention: Any version of Hamlet you care to name, and oh yeah, Lord of the Rings (2001-03).

 

And many of those "best known movies" that were remakes weren't so hot.
Though now that I think about it, Alfred Hitchcock made second versions of some of his WWII movies afterward that were better. Then again, that was Hitchcock remaking his own movie (and without CGI replacement technology--he had to do it by refilming the entire thing).
so...
Still not seeing the point of remakes.
Really...
Just make something new and be at least slightly original.

Oh well...

In some ways, Keanu may be perfect for the role--he can't act convincinly as a human (except as a wife-beating red-neck hick). Maybe being an alien will work for him.

 

Wow. Just... wow. Every one of the above-listed films is considered a classic, or in some way brilliant, or special, or an example of superior filmmaking. Your facile dismissal of them as "not so hot" does not revoke their classic or award-winning status. Certainly not every re-make is a piece of genius, and there are plenty of trashy re-makes out there (from Burton's Apes movie to any American re-make of a Japanese horror film you care to mention), but the above list is exemplary despite your insistence that it isn't, and shows the potential that re-makes have to supplant the fame of the original.

The thing about TDTESS is that the original has an excellent concept, but the movie itself is rather dry and slow-paced. This isn't simply a result of its era; there are plenty of films made in the 50s that pack a lot more punch, from War of the Worlds to Picnic. I think it's ripe for a re-make, and I'm looking forward to it the more I see of it.