What is Digg?121 Comments
- sdellboy, on 08/17/2008, -6/+71Wow. A review without there actually being a film yet.
- PHLAK, on 08/16/2008, -6/+42Klaatu Barada Nikto.
Indeed, this movie should be left alone. - MetalHead73, on 08/17/2008, -9/+29Buried because you can't possibly make such a negative assumption about a movie accurately without seeing. It's just ignorance.
- GeorgeXIV, on 08/17/2008, -4/+22I love the original film even though comparatively to modern standards it seems almost silly. That said, as a 16 year old I would say maybe 1 other person my ages that I know has seen this film. I only saw it on my mum's recommendation. A remake serves to bring this classic story to a new audience.. I've heard it develops it's own style more than a perfect remakes so it's just borrowing ideas from the original.
In this day and age "classic" films are a lot rarer, meaning this remake may be forgotten in a couple of years, so it won't tarnish the greatness of the original.
Personally I think it looks alright and will probably go and see it. - Gimjee, on 08/17/2008, -11/+28... Does everyone just like to cry about remakes without even seeing them, and even if they're good there's still reason to hate them? I mean seriously
- duckyinc, on 08/17/2008, -12/+28Answer: Stop taking films so seriously, and don't watch it if you don't want to -.-
- BXRWXR, on 08/17/2008, -6/+20FYI - I saw the trailer - it stars Keanu.
- HallenbeckJoe, on 08/17/2008, -8/+22If you don't like it, don't watch it.
I like remakes, because they draw attention to good movies unknown to a broader audience. - mikelieman, on 08/17/2008, -6/+18I agree that it seems premature to start whining about this, but the author makes a very insightful point.
The film is perfectly executed and remains wholly relevant to today's society and situation, even after FIFTY SEVEN years.
As evidenced by it's continued relevance, there's *nothing* to remake. There's no *alternative interpretation*. 1951's TDTESS *is* perfect.
Now, a film explaining why this is so after 57 years -- given TDTESSs message of change and survival, that would be interesting. - john570, on 08/17/2008, -7/+15The original movie is FAR FAR from perfect. It is so 1950's. Don't get me wrong I love it but to call it perfect is absurd. Why not re-make it. Hollywood has run out of ideas.
- yosserhughes, on 08/17/2008, -3/+10"never seen the...... 1969's The Italian Job,..... that's probably okay "
Stopped reading right there. - SeaweedWater, on 08/17/2008, -1/+8That's exactly what I was going to say.
Every time they remake 'I Am Legend', there are millions of people who are introduced to the story for the first time.
It's not the original, but who'd want to see a shot for shot remake of the same film?..
and I'm drunk. - mikephimikephi, on 08/17/2008, -0/+7fyi:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIaxSxEqKtA - inactive, on 08/17/2008, -4/+11I'm confused. We're giving a negative review to a movie that hasn't even seen the light of day simply because the original was good?
Its not like Lucas has come to rape our childhood, or the Wachowski brothers have produced another turd. - IphtashuFitz, on 08/17/2008, -0/+6Get with it. They've already filmed the remake and it's going to be released in December: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0970416. What I want to know is why a comedian like John Cleese was cast in a sci-fi/thriller. There wasn't any comic relief in the original so why is there in the remake?
- SilentScream, on 08/17/2008, -1/+7What I find so disappointing is that there is plenty of great SciFi material out there that has never made it to the screen. Where is Rama? Where are the Cherryh stories? Where is Greg Bear's Eon/Eternity?
- fzammetti, on 08/17/2008, -0/+6You'll get no argument from me that the original was a great, classic movie. I love it to death. You'll also get no argument that the never-ending flow of crap remakes is absurd, to put it mildly.
But two other things I have to say... first, I'm not going to judge ANY movie before I see it. Sure, I'll have a thought on how I think it's going to be, but to not afford it the chance to change my mind is pretty stupid.
Second, I may be the only one on the entire planet that thought so, but I really did find the trailer for the new version pretty interesting. I actually thought Keanu's delivery of the "you really should let me go" line was pitch-perfect (granted, it's 100% typical Keanu Reeves, but I think it fit perfectly).
I don't know...my expectations aren't very high for the remake, and I wish the money had been sunk into something original, that's all true, but I have just a TINY bit of hope that this might not such as bad as most others seem to think it will. And in any case, I'm not going to form a solid opinion until I see it, whether I decide to go to the movie or wait for it on cable. - dcmjzero, on 08/17/2008, -0/+6my second favorite use of this phrase: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THV1KkPXIxQ
- Optiks, on 08/17/2008, -0/+5Hollywood has plenty of ideas. That's not the problem. The studios and the producers simply have no balls anymore. They'd rather spend money rehashing tried and true formulas that used to make money then actually go out on a limb and make something special.
Once the law of diminishing returns kicks in on all the sequels, they have no choice but to turn to other creative outlets. - seantubridy, on 08/17/2008, -1/+6Movies and tv shows that were popular or had potential are always going to get remade. I'm going to be pissed of when they remake North by Northwest, for example but there's nothing you can do about it. If there's money to be made, it will happen. Sometimes it's a good thing, like in the case of Battlestar Galactica and sometimes it's not, like Planet of the Apes.
Start worrying when they try to start rewriting books. - duckley, on 08/17/2008, -0/+5The problem with remakes is the CRAP REMAKES have the same name as the GREAT ORIGINALS.
Several times, I've tuned in to watch "Psycho" and found the recent piece of crap. - trogdor282, on 08/17/2008, -1/+6A remake is like the 10 millionth guy to say "IM RICK JAMES BITCH!!!"... It was great the first time, and repeating it is a great way to cash in, but it doesn't contribute to the human experience like something original.
- palehorse864, on 08/17/2008, -2/+7If the remake sucks, the original will still stand and be there whenever you want to watch it. Doing a remake won't hurt the original filmstock or change anything really. The only time I've seen something bad happen to the original due to a new version was when Lucas screwed with the original Star Wars trilogy and wouldn't release the theatrical versions. Even when he did, they weren't anamorphic DVD's or anything.
As long as the original is around, the remake won't do any damage to the original. It will still be there just as you remember it. I'm not expectingg this to be as good as the original or even come close. Whether it rocks or completely sucks though, I can always watch the alien antics of the original (Oh Gort, you lovable alien killbot.) - aethelberga, on 08/17/2008, -1/+6But the broader audience will never watch the better film. All they will do is see the Keanu one and assume that's all there is.
- Threlly1, on 08/17/2008, -0/+5The Original Italian Job is FAR FAR superior to the awful star-vehicle shambles that the new one is.
An absolute classic, the remake was an insult.
TDTESS was a good movie, the premise was interesting, and Gort was brilliant, BUT, the dialogue was at best 'clunky', even for the day.
A far better sci-fi movie of its day, and one that has neither aged, nor requires a remake, is Forbidden Planet.
Now we're talking. - opticwind, on 08/17/2008, -2/+6No, you didn't RTFO. While he's kindof stupid, you've misunderstood the argument. He is saying that because the original was "perfect", a remake is unnecessary.
- IphtashuFitz, on 08/17/2008, -1/+5Most people haven't read those books so very few people know about them or what they're all about. Many people have seen the original Day the Earth Stood Still so Hollywood assumes a lot of folks would be interested in a modern remake. That's the typical Hollywood recipe. Find an old movie that people have likely heard of and remake it for a new audience. They've done that with War of the Worlds, King Kong, The Thing, I Am Legend (although titled differently each of the three times), Oceans 11, Psycho, and on and on. A lot of the people in charge in Hollywood seem to have lost all sense of originality...
On a related note, some sci-fi books that have been made into movies have seriously sucked as movies. The problem is that a book can easily span months or years of time, and trying to condense all that action into a single 2 or 3 hour movie always means hacking out or rewriting huge chunks of the book. Battlefield Earth is an excellent example of that. To really make a book into a decent movie you need to have the backing to do something like the LotR trilogy... - inactive, on 08/17/2008, -5/+9That's what I said to your mom.
- lektroluv, on 08/17/2008, -3/+7That she's absolutely perfect? Aaaw, thank you!
- chaos7, on 08/17/2008, -3/+7"pure sucky evil" how do you know? have you seen it yet?
- Ch33t0, on 08/17/2008, -0/+4I happened to catch the original a few years back on Turner Classics. I was really impressed. The part that I enjoyed the most was the insight it gave you on people in America at that time. The war was over but everyone was still paranoid as hell. I don't think the new one will capture that at all much less even try. That movie was brilliant and when I saw the new one being advertised I was dissapointed. The old one is by far one of my favorite movies of all time. Leave it alone Neo!
- SeaweedWater, on 08/17/2008, -0/+3I don't know, I've never seen the original and I went out and bought a copy just the other day.
Everything is a remake of everything you know, so as long as it's an enjoyable cinematic experience, I could care less where the idea was taken from. - Danleykubrick, on 08/17/2008, -1/+4There are hundreds of thousands of screenplays that will never make Harvey Weinstein's desk, but as a former script reader, let me tell you, the chance that there are more than a dozen unproduced specs at any time that are any good is incredibly small. And those have mostly been avoided for one reason or another (not commercial, too much like something else that just came out, too expensive, needs a star but there's not stars at the moment who want it).
- banmaster, on 08/17/2008, -0/+3Go watch the remake of The Omen.
It IS a shot for shot remake!! - inactive, on 08/17/2008, -0/+3apples and oranges. Iron Man has had a lot of writers over the years, and there a difference in adapting a comic book into a movie, and remaking a classic that doesn't need to be remade.
- betheturtle, on 08/18/2008, -0/+3 You (MacSuxWindozSux), sir are an incompetent bastard. The original movie makes almost anything pale in comparison. Sure, there's no giant action sequences with robots and explosions, but if you actually follow the dialogue and watch the characters, a story begins to unfold.
This is a story that takes the best of Sci Fi and the most touching of the Cold War and puts it together in a vat of ept plotcrafting that makes, say, Iron Man, which, though enjoyable, look like a ***** fairy tale.
You can't judge the original if you've never seen it. And it certainly doesn't suck. Speaking as a person firmly stuck in this century, I can appreciate a story when I see it.
Jeez, just because it's in Black and White... - inactive, on 08/17/2008, -0/+3Whilst we understand your point, the current remake track in Hollywood is that the movie won't be as good as "The Thing" or "Invasion of the Body Snatchers (Philip Kaufman version)" but will be as good as "Psycho" and "Invasion of the Body Snatchers (after 1978)"
- Spartandog, on 08/17/2008, -0/+3What bugs me about the trailer for the remake is the level of destruction, where it's obvious that innocent people would die - trucks and cars disintegrating in mid-transit, buildings vaporizing - where the original only had armed soldier destroyed when Gort was threatened. Hardly an indication the remake is about world peace. It seems the message of non-violence has been replaced with something else. One article claimed the story is about the environment rather than nuclear proliferation. If that's true, then Klaatu came from light years away to tell us to clean up. I hope that's not the case or indeed this movie will suck.
- norman619, on 08/17/2008, -1/+4Not everything in a comicbook storyline translates well into a live action movie. Often what seems cool in a comicbook looks silly and cliché in live action.
- bullioncube, on 08/17/2008, -0/+3apples and bananas. I like fruit.
- Niightwitch, on 08/17/2008, -1/+4No, they're not replicating it exactly, they're replicating it poorly.
- GeorgeXIV, on 08/17/2008, -0/+2I know I have the ability to easily come across these old movies, and I have, but my friends aren't as film curious as I am and would find the original TDTESS a ridiculous and silly film. It definitely is not but to a lot of people including myself but modern teenagers don't appreciate old films. For those that do however, after seeing the remake, they may search for the original to watch and yes, thanks to DVD, they can do. Without the remake a lot of teenagers would have zero chance of stumbling across the original gem.
You really seem a bit self righteous that your opinion is the best. It's best to be an open minded person to get on in the world :)
And yes, I am high - arjie, on 08/17/2008, -0/+2I have to agree. While I have come across entire descriptions of the movie inadvertently while browsing the Internet, I haven't seen the movie yet, it's pretty hard to find. But I've just moved to a new city, maybe the rental stores here will have it.
- ZutroyZuuts, on 08/17/2008, -0/+2I loved the original, it's one of my favourite's too. But I do understand the need to remake it. TDTESS has an important message that needs to be heard by today's generation and let's face it, they're not the kind of people that would watch an old B&W film with actors they've never heard of.
Let's just hope that the new one doesn't betray the original and go all 'formula' on us. - Crashwithuhk, on 08/18/2008, -0/+2I would argue that not only is that wrong, but the opposite is true. For instance I saw the trailer for this movie and thought it looked cool, but I didn't want to see it without context so I went and watched the original on Netflix.
I saw the original because of the remake. - mellowmonk, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3Keanu Reeves replacing Michael Rennie. No further questions, your honor.
- IamZed, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3Didn't stop Dark Knight, did it?
- john570, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3Your comment sucks because you haven't seen it.
- virtualblogger, on 08/17/2008, -1/+3I wish every director who is embarking on a 're-make' would read this.
Im sick of re-makes... give me something original ! - lebatte, on 08/17/2008, -0/+2Replicating things is awful. A remake that is better than the original is still unnecessary and a horrible excuse for artistic contribution.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 122 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is