"...need not have taken its title so seriously that the plot stands still along with it." - Roger Ebert
Director Robert Wise's original THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL from 1951 was a rare gem for that time in that it actually had the audacity to tell a serious science fiction story, and likewise maturely accept the genre instead of mocking it. Wise's EARTH also had everything else you might ask for in a film, with terrific acting chemistry, smart scriptwriting with memorable scenes, a good solid story, and thought-provoking, then-topical political preaching against the pre-Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty world with the uncontrolled and wreckless proliferation of atomic bombs.
Either way, the 2008 remake keeps the basic premise but uses a whole new political angle which would compel a prophet of doom from the stars named Klaatu to come visit us. The advanced aliens are now prepping for an armed intervention to save the planet with its dying ecology, and if necessary, exterminate the humans that are trashing the place. Yet I think that whole framing is the fatal flaw of this entire endeavor. Now look, I care about the rain forest and polar bears and all that shit, I really do. But the problem is the same that afflicts every other Hollywood picture that tries to preach a pro-environmental sermon, which is that I have a hard time taking that crisis to heart like I would with a nuclear holocaust. I think environmentalists mean well, but they usuallyfight their noble cause by personalizing plants and animals, but guess what?
They aren't people. I truely think that they should try instead to highlight Earth's biology will evolve and adapt to whatever we do to our world, for in fact about 99% of all lifeforms that have ever existed on Earth are now extinct. The point is they will survive, but we won't. That's more effective ideological argumentation, and notice that the movement has in recent years used this sharp point regarding Global Warming or whatever. Good for them.
Not though for this EARTH "revisioning," a Hollywood term I despise for the original is arguably still more relevant and universal, what with war-front nations like North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, and India having gained nuclear weapons in recent decades either by ignoring or outright violate the nature of the 1968 NNPT Treaty. The West got Libya some years ago to disarm itself, so there's hope for our future on that front. Plus let's be honest: Why logically would aliens, even if they are highly advanced in technology and civilization, launch an armed intervention for an ecology? Shit the West at least wouldn't for sure.
To use a metaphor, this EARTH alreadys has its legs broken, and then ordered to run a marathon. Then it gets blindfolded with barbwire, and stumbles about for it's produced like a Roland Emmerich-esque big budget disaster movie. You know what I'm talking about: so-called scientists acting like morons, a thin story merely an excuse for tons and tons of CGI to detone the threat of the danger, the military (led by Kathy Bates doing her best Hillary Clinton impersonation) being evil warmongers who want to blow up everything (that would be Michael Bay) and all the usual stock footage used to show global panic and civil unrest over this new global peril. Yet amazingly enough, Emmerich wasn't the director.
The imposter is Scott Derrickson, who's previous movie was THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE which I didn't see because of my allergies to contemporary American horror cinema. But with the amount of intelligence and artistic grace (or lack thereof) displayed here, maybe I'm not missing out on much. Take that sequence borrowed from Wise's EARTH where the visitor is peacefully greeting and he gets shot out of a simple misunderstanding. Thing is, in the original you can understand that knee-jerk mistake, for Michael Rennie looks like he's reaching into his belt for a weapon (like unfortunately way too many civilians gunned down by cops because they only were getting cellphones from their jackets.) In the remake, it occurs when the visitor is only reaching out to Jennifer Connelly for a handshake.
Yes, a fucking handshake.
He did have a few nice clever ideas, like how the alien spaceship isn't the traditional mechanical vessel, but a primordial glob of goo. The alien astronaut travels by being mixed within this giant orb, and with a collected strain of human DNA, he mutates and is "reborn" as one of us. But fuck man, couldn't they belong in a good film? What's strange is how ole Gort retains his iconic industrial design, but it just contrasts strongly with the spaceship. Why couldn't those aliens simply have a giant blob as the ultimate weapon? I'm sure it could be just as effective, but yeah then it wouldn't be a remake, now would it?
Now I know Keanu Reeves is a punchline with many, but here and there I've defended. Yes he's famous for his limited emotional acting range, yet somehow he's gotten involved in quality productions worked to his advantage. From a dimwit in the BILL & TED series to being a surfer-cop (POINT BREAK) and a solid credible foil to insane baddie Dennis Hopper in SPEED. Don't forget THE MATRIX where ironically or intentionally that human savior acted more Vulcan and distant than his angry and pissy digital-enemy Hugo Weaving. Anyway his legendary blank stare is actually perfect for Derrickson's EARTH, an alien basically wearing a humanoid suit, and initially awkward in operating basic functions like drinking water.
But what I don't like is how his character is scripted. Rennie's Klaatu may come from an alien civilization more advanced technologically and culturally, but he's still fascinated by these primitive and barbaric humans. Take that scene when he's amazed by the humble-but-majestic words of Abraham Lincoln, and he beat Barack Obama by what, more than 50 years? Plus, Rennie had some good touching moments with that orphaned boy, like in Arlington. Seriously, they'll always deny it, but I'm dead certain that BBC was inspired by this smart friendly-but-forceful alien explorer for their DOCTOR WHO.
Anyway, Keanu's Klaatu though hears the classical music of Bach, and flatly says that it's beautiful. Dude, try be a fan of The Clash before I'm impressed. Otherwise, he doesn't seem curious about his hostile foreign environment and is convinced that Earth must be wiped clean as a plate. But guess what? He supposedly he changes his mind because Connelly and adopted son Jayden Smith finally bond together, that humanity can change for the better or whatever the fuck.
Supposedly. Obviously we the audience are supposed to take to heart this transformation for both them and Keanu, but the vibe I got from the crowd at the screening was that they never cared, and why should they? That whole storyline's climax just feels so underwhelming, and since Derrickson pinned on this drama for his EARTH, it's a crippled project with a messy message that does the best that it can to crawl its way to the finish line. Plus Will Smith's boy, his fault or the screenplay, just comes off as whiney and annoying.
I know it sounds like I hate EARTH, and I do but not because it's a bad movie. It's just so uninspired, empty, and even warrants the accusation of being pointless. It's your roommate who has a job across the street from your joint, but he's too lazy to go to work and gets fired. That feeling of fustration is what I got with this EARTH. I did like John Cleese playing the intellectual uses good logic to demolish Keanu's entire argument, which we don't get much of at the movies. Too bad he's only a glorified cameo. I even dug the James Hong appearance, though I guess it finally makes sense that David Lo Pan from BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA was an alien all along.
But memo to Hollywood, please never hire Connelly to play a scientist again. She seems like a nice woman and all, even a good actress at times, but the last two times that she's worn a thinking cap were in both EARTH and Ang Lee's HULK. I guess three times is the charm, but it's not worth finding out if that's true, even if it was for the PUNISHER franchise.
