|
|
Post by rizdek on Nov 21, 2021 9:52:38 GMT
I've watched both versions of The Day the Earth Stood Still 1951 and 2008 and understood that the title applied to the way the alien made all the machines 'stand still.' But I couldn't figure out what was supposed to have happened in the last one when all the machines were at a stand still at the end. I realize the alien was supposed to have stopped them. But why? In the first I understood it was a demonstration of power to 'get' the everyone's attention so he could give his speech and then leave...as if that was going to do any good. But what was the point in the second? When she pleads with him not to destroy all humans he says something like he could but it would be difficult or painful or something...can't remember the quote. Was he permanently disabling all machinery forever more or less putting humans back into, as they say, the stone age thus protecting the planet from the ravages of technology and other advancements that depleted earth's resources and were destroying the environment?
|
|
lune7000
Junior Member
@lune7000
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 678
|
Post by lune7000 on Nov 21, 2021 13:29:45 GMT
Now you know the difference between the 1950's and today. Back then there was a logical reason to do things- today nobody cares about reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 21, 2021 14:20:06 GMT
I think it was the latter. The remake was rather muddled with its messaging.
|
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Nov 21, 2021 15:16:33 GMT
I think it was the latter. The remake was rather muddled with its messaging. Yeah, but Jennifer Connelly!
|
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Nov 21, 2021 15:41:26 GMT
Ditto to above comments.
Funniest thing is, even though this remake was pretty lame, it wasn't nearly as lame as most modern day remakes. Night of the Living Dead, Clash of the Titans, Flight of the Phoenix all make this remake look great in comparison. But none of them try any logic, not even movie logic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Nov 21, 2021 16:45:36 GMT
Ditto to above comments. Funniest thing is, even though this remake was pretty lame, it wasn't nearly as lame as most modern day remakes. Night of the Living Dead, Clash of the Titans, Flight of the Phoenix all make this remake look great in comparison. But none of them try any logic, not even movie logic. Apart from the Kraken in the Clash of the Titans remake being better designed than the Kraken in the original the original was better in everything else. |
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Nov 21, 2021 19:23:34 GMT
Now you know the difference between the 1950's and today. Back then there was a logical reason to do things- today nobody cares about reason. Regardless of how much sense it may or not have made, I was really asking what anyone thought the ending meant. I take it no one so far knows...or maybe no one cares to discuss it.
But...to be honest, I never quite understood the first one. I mean I know what happened, but didn't believe it was a feasible premise. Why would the alien who was sooooo concerned with humans and their warlike ways that they would threaten to destroy us if humans didn't change, just give a speech and leave? Would someone ostensibly as smart as the alien (civilization) actually think THAT one speech and a threat heard by a few hundred at most people, would make a difference in world politics? I mean...look at what the vast majority of scientists are saying about climate change now and man's part in speeding it up and look at the attitude of a large portion of the population. If some small group claimed they met an alien who warned them about the fate of the world...would anyone believe them?
If my interpretation of the ending of the remake is right, THAT strategy, at least, would work. I think he sent humans permanently back to the stone age...thus ensuring we would not destroy the earth with our technology and machines. Whether such would actually keep humans from bouncing right back I don't know. But...if it worked it would certainly protect the earth from the environmental decline so many are worried about today.
|
|
lune7000
Junior Member
@lune7000
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 678
|
Post by lune7000 on Nov 21, 2021 23:49:56 GMT
Now you know the difference between the 1950's and today. Back then there was a logical reason to do things- today nobody cares about reason. Regardless of how much sense it may or not have made, I was really asking what anyone thought the ending meant. I take it no one so far knows...or maybe no one cares to discuss it.
But...to be honest, I never quite understood the first one. I mean I know what happened, but didn't believe it was a feasible premise. Why would the alien who was sooooo concerned with humans and their warlike ways that they would threaten to destroy us if humans didn't change, just give a speech and leave? Would someone ostensibly as smart as the alien (civilization) actually think THAT one speech and a threat heard by a few hundred at most people, would make a difference in world politics? I mean...look at what the vast majority of scientists are saying about climate change now and man's part in speeding it up and look at the attitude of a large portion of the population. If some small group claimed they met an alien who warned them about the fate of the world...would anyone believe them?
If my interpretation of the ending of the remake is right, THAT strategy, at least, would work. I think he sent humans permanently back to the stone age...thus ensuring we would not destroy the earth with our technology and machines. Whether such would actually keep humans from bouncing right back I don't know. But...if it worked it would certainly protect the earth from the environmental decline so many are worried about today.
The original movie had the alien stop all machines b/c they knew a speech wouldn't do it- it was a threat as to how much power they had
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 21, 2021 23:59:15 GMT
I think it was the latter. The remake was rather muddled with its messaging. Yeah, but Jennifer Connelly! She looked nice but not as nice as she did in Mulholland Falls!
|
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Nov 22, 2021 2:46:04 GMT
Ditto to above comments. Funniest thing is, even though this remake was pretty lame, it wasn't nearly as lame as most modern day remakes. Night of the Living Dead, Clash of the Titans, Flight of the Phoenix all make this remake look great in comparison. But none of them try any logic, not even movie logic. Apart from the Kraken in the Clash of the Titans remake being better designed than the Kraken in the original the original was better in everything else. Yes, I should have made it more clear by saying "THE REMAKES of "Night of the Living Dead", "Clash of the Titans", and "Flight of the Phoenix" all make this remake look great in comparison." Meaning that they were so inferior to the movies they were remakes of. I just tried to be brief. Sorry. I think the reason that remakes are usually so poor is because the movie industry promotes "mechanics" instead of "artists", especially in writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Nov 22, 2021 3:02:19 GMT
Apart from the Kraken in the Clash of the Titans remake being better designed than the Kraken in the original the original was better in everything else. Yes, I should have made it more clear by saying "THE REMAKES of "Night of the Living Dead", "Clash of the Titans", and "Flight of the Phoenix" all make this remake look great in comparison." Meaning that they were so inferior to the movies they were remakes of. I just tried to be brief. Sorry. I think the reason that remakes are usually so poor is because the movie industry promotes "mechanics" instead of "artists", especially in writing. Most remakes are better than the originals it's nostalgia and a misguided infatuation with what has come before that keeps some weirdos tied to the past. Unless the original had Keanu Reeves playing an alien I would have to disagree with you. This remake was better than original. It's honourable to like what has come before but I just find those types of people stupid. |
|
