The remake or the continuation? Anyone remember the 1951 movie in which this remake is based on? One of my favorites as you can plainly detect with me Gort avatar. I hear it opens this month next Friday. I wonder if Gort has a wife by now?
Just wonderingk if any of you give a rat's ace?
2 X Intel i7 920 sys. 12 gigs Ram. XP & Win 7 64
Cubase 5. Kontakt 4. EWQL C.C.C. (Play)
Vienna Instruments SE & Plus. Symphobia. GPO.
RME HDSPe AIO KRK V8s Avalon Vt-747sp
M-Audio Keystation Pro 88
My two passions. Music and Cooking.
Both require just the right ingredients....
I sure hope the story is based on the ideals of the original, rather than on the clips we see in the current trailer.
The original challenged mankind to become peaceful. The trailer implies an all-powerful, malicious intruder, whom we must defeat at all costs. At first glance, the two films seem to have opposite premises.
The original idea of the 1951 film is really about communism, American family ideals, single parenthood, children without a father, dysfunctional syndromes, religion, social behaviour, McCarthy and robots - like a lot of 1950's sci-fi films - brilliant stuff - so as with most Hollywood moronic remakes I can't see how relevant the 1951 premise could be. You are targeting younger viewers don't forget - attention spans have dwindled exponentially over the years. You need to always remember this simple rule when doing a remake and plan accordingly.
Bernard Herrmann aye? - well - fancy that!
He didn't use those funny things that you wave your hands at did he?
The new version is thus:
A representative of an alien race that went through drastic evolution to survive its own climate change, Klaatu comes to Earth to assess whether humanity can prevent the environmental damage they have inflicted on their own planet. Klaatu himself already has a negative opinion of humans, and when barred from speaking to the United Nations, he decides they shall be exterminated so the planet – with its rare ability to sustain complex life – can survive. It is up to Dr. Helen Benson and her stepson Jacob to convince Klaatu humans are worth saving: but it may already be too late
Puhlease. I for one am fed up with this sort of anti-human tripe. We had it shoveled down our throats in Shyamalan's "The Happening". (I normally love Shyamalan, BTW.) I think it's a dangerous view that more and more people are being taught that nature exists as a good in itself completely separate and apart from mankind, such that "Gaia" may be better off without the human race around. I maintain that nature is "good" when it serves human life and well-being. When human life and well-being can be improved by altering nature, then it should be done (though cautiously to make sure we aren't harming our well-being in the long-term). But ultimately, the test of "good" or "bad" when it comes to the environment is whether or not it makes the world a better place for humanity. Anything else is inhumane.
Why should Klaatu be pro-human? He ain't one.
Maybe he has a copy of that famous cookbook "To Serve Man."
Regarding environmental issues, both sides generally want to serve the human race. One side takes a short-term view - damn the consequences. The other side takes a longer-term view - making sacrifices in the here and now.
Long-term vs. short-term is the basis for many ethical dilemmas. Hopefully, we can find a good balance.