People put too much in A remake movie comparing it to the Original rather judging the movie by itself.

There's a reason for that. Many great movies have a special place in our hearts and minds, and any change to the original is usually considered a bastardization of the original artwork. Very infrequently, if at all, can a duplicate or remake ever be held with such admiration as the original when the original gets to set the precedence.

In point of fact, I don't think I've seen a remake that I have liked better than the original. The only remake that I've liked separate from the original was Time Machine (2000).

Watched "The Day The Earth Stood Still" last night, and really enjoyed it.

Michael Rennie and Patricia Neal went together well, and it was a classic "perils of war" story for the Post-WWII era.

Been a while since I'd seen it.

Just watched it myself last night, and I have to say that I didn't really enjoy it. It wasn't absolutely horrible, but it did make me wish I didn't spend my $9.50 to see it (that's for two of us). Its definitely a "rent it cheap if you want to see it" or "wait until its available on free TV/cable". I feel they made Klaatu to much of a jerk in this one, whereas the original he was much more respectable, nor do I feel they spent enough time explaining much of any kind of story other than "humans suck and we're all gonna die if we don't change our ways".

I have to admit, the original was far better.

---

People put too much in A remake movie comparing it to the Original rather judging the movie by itself.

There's a reason for that. Many great movies have a special place in our hearts and minds, and any change to the original is usually considered a bastardization of the original artwork. Very infrequently, if at all, can a duplicate or remake ever be held with such admiration as the original when the original gets to set the precedence.

In point of fact, I don't think I've seen a remake that I have liked better than the original. The only remake that I've liked separate from the original was Time Machine (2000).

Watched "The Day The Earth Stood Still" last night, and really enjoyed it.

Michael Rennie and Patricia Neal went together well, and it was a classic "perils of war" story for the Post-WWII era.

Been a while since I'd seen it.

Just watched it myself last night, and I have to say that I didn't really enjoy it. It wasn't absolutely horrible, but it did make me wish I didn't spend my $9.50 to see it (that's for two of us). Its definitely a "rent it cheap if you want to see it" or "wait until its available on free TV/cable". I feel they made Klaatu to much of a jerk in this one, whereas the original he was much more respectable, nor do I feel they spent enough time explaining much of any kind of story other than "humans suck and we're all gonna die if we don't change our ways".

I have to admit, the original was far better.

Of course the Original was better, This one almost looks like an Earth First EcoTerrorist propaganda movie, As in Humans are the problem, Get rid of all Humans as the Earth won't miss them and will be better off without them type of movie. But then Klaatu says from the trailers: Your Planet? Sounds a bit arrogant to Me, We sure didn't colonize this planet, We evolved here over several million years. So I'd say we're part of the local life and potentially is the earths guardian too. Genetics for as far as they go back say 160,000 years(mitochondrial Eve) and 60,000 years for the male half(Genetic Adam).

---

Savoir-Faire is everywhere!
The T1 Trust, T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, America's First HST

People put too much in A remake movie comparing it to the Original rather judging the movie by itself.

There's a reason for that. Many great movies have a special place in our hearts and minds, and any change to the original is usually considered a bastardization of the original artwork. Very infrequently, if at all, can a duplicate or remake ever be held with such admiration as the original when the original gets to set the precedence.

In point of fact, I don't think I've seen a remake that I have liked better than the original. The only remake that I've liked separate from the original was Time Machine (2000).

Watched "The Day The Earth Stood Still" last night, and really enjoyed it.

Michael Rennie and Patricia Neal went together well, and it was a classic "perils of war" story for the Post-WWII era.

Been a while since I'd seen it.

Just watched it myself last night, and I have to say that I didn't really enjoy it. It wasn't absolutely horrible, but it did make me wish I didn't spend my $9.50 to see it (that's for two of us). Its definitely a "rent it cheap if you want to see it" or "wait until its available on free TV/cable". I feel they made Klaatu to much of a jerk in this one, whereas the original he was much more respectable, nor do I feel they spent enough time explaining much of any kind of story other than "humans suck and we're all gonna die if we don't change our ways".

I have to admit, the original was far better.

Of course the Original was better, This one almost looks like an Earth First EcoTerrorist propaganda movie, As in Humans are the problem, Get rid of all Humans as the Earth won't miss them and will be better off without them type of movie. But then Klaatu says from the trailers: Your Planet? Sounds a bit arrogant to Me, We sure didn't colonize this planet, We evolved here over several million years. So I'd say we're part of the local life and potentially is the earths guardian too. Genetics for as far as they go back say 160,000 years(mitochondrial Eve) and 60,000 years for the male half(Genetic Adam).

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

Yes, it did sound arrogant, but let me explain that part of the movie.

They do not try to pass off that Earth was colonized a long time ago. In fact, when Klaatu made that comment in the movie, he was actually implying that humans are the arrogant ones for thinking that the entire planet was exclusively theirs when it belongs to all inhabitants.

Apparently, according to the story, Earth is one of the very few planets in the entire universe that is capable of supporting advanced lifeforms and we humans are screwing it all up. So this group of intergalactic beings plan on gathering the DNA of every single life form on Earth with the exception of the human race so that they can all be exterminated (and anything man-made as well), thereby saving the planet in case it needs to be colonized by another race who for some reason may need to leave their own planet.

People put too much in A remake movie comparing it to the Original rather judging the movie by itself.

There's a reason for that. Many great movies have a special place in our hearts and minds, and any change to the original is usually considered a bastardization of the original artwork. Very infrequently, if at all, can a duplicate or remake ever be held with such admiration as the original when the original gets to set the precedence.

In point of fact, I don't think I've seen a remake that I have liked better than the original. The only remake that I've liked separate from the original was Time Machine (2000).

Watched "The Day The Earth Stood Still" last night, and really enjoyed it.

Michael Rennie and Patricia Neal went together well, and it was a classic "perils of war" story for the Post-WWII era.

Been a while since I'd seen it.

Just watched it myself last night, and I have to say that I didn't really enjoy it. It wasn't absolutely horrible, but it did make me wish I didn't spend my $9.50 to see it (that's for two of us). Its definitely a "rent it cheap if you want to see it" or "wait until its available on free TV/cable". I feel they made Klaatu to much of a jerk in this one, whereas the original he was much more respectable, nor do I feel they spent enough time explaining much of any kind of story other than "humans suck and we're all gonna die if we don't change our ways".

I have to admit, the original was far better.

Of course the Original was better, This one almost looks like an Earth First EcoTerrorist propaganda movie, As in Humans are the problem, Get rid of all Humans as the Earth won't miss them and will be better off without them type of movie. But then Klaatu says from the trailers: Your Planet? Sounds a bit arrogant to Me, We sure didn't colonize this planet, We evolved here over several million years. So I'd say we're part of the local life and potentially is the earths guardian too. Genetics for as far as they go back say 160,000 years(mitochondrial Eve) and 60,000 years for the male half(Genetic Adam).

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

Yes, it did sound arrogant, but let me explain that part of the movie.

They do not try to pass off that Earth was colonized a long time ago. In fact, when Klaatu made that comment in the movie, he was actually implying that humans are the arrogant ones for thinking that the entire planet was exclusively theirs when it belongs to all inhabitants.

Apparently, according to the story, Earth is one of the very few planets in the entire universe that is capable of supporting advanced lifeforms and we humans are screwing it all up. So this group of intergalactic beings plan on gathering the DNA of every single life form on Earth with the exception of the human race so that they can all be exterminated (and anything man-made as well), thereby saving the planet in case it needs to be colonized by another race who for some reason may need to leave their own planet.

I saw the movie last night I give 3 out of 4. The only character that I think was missed cast was the part of the Secretary of Defense. I think Marel Streep would have been better for that role rather than
Katy Bates.

---

LETS BEGIN IN 2010

People put too much in A remake movie comparing it to the Original rather judging the movie by itself.

There's a reason for that. Many great movies have a special place in our hearts and minds, and any change to the original is usually considered a bastardization of the original artwork. Very infrequently, if at all, can a duplicate or remake ever be held with such admiration as the original when the original gets to set the precedence.

In point of fact, I don't think I've seen a remake that I have liked better than the original. The only remake that I've liked separate from the original was Time Machine (2000).

Watched "The Day The Earth Stood Still" last night, and really enjoyed it.

Michael Rennie and Patricia Neal went together well, and it was a classic "perils of war" story for the Post-WWII era.

Been a while since I'd seen it.

Just watched it myself last night, and I have to say that I didn't really enjoy it. It wasn't absolutely horrible, but it did make me wish I didn't spend my $9.50 to see it (that's for two of us). Its definitely a "rent it cheap if you want to see it" or "wait until its available on free TV/cable". I feel they made Klaatu to much of a jerk in this one, whereas the original he was much more respectable, nor do I feel they spent enough time explaining much of any kind of story other than "humans suck and we're all gonna die if we don't change our ways".

I have to admit, the original was far better.

I'm in no hurry to see the new one. That's why we watched the original on a nice, really big TV.

---

You guys are going to hate me because I haven’t seen the original and I rather like Keanu R (though, admittedly, not for his acting) so I am looking forward to seeing it. Though I will probably wait until it comes out on DVD and rent it.

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

It doesn't matter how many times they remake it, humans still won't get the message.
It will still be, "Me first, me first, greed rules and sod the planet"
But don't worry folks, Earth will survive the very short existence of Man and will recover eventually even from an all-out nuclear (pronounced Nookular)war.

The latest excuse for not saving the planet is the Credit Crunch. We have to get all the unemployed on this way overpopulated planet, back to work so that they can continue to "Consume" because the financial world survives on consumers.

When do you think that the human race will go against the dictates of all of the man made "GODS" and adopt human intervention in reproduction?
20 Billion, 50 Billion? More?

---

Join the #1 UAE Team.

It was a good movie. Sort of ended abruptly, though.

It doesn't matter how many times they remake it, humans still won't get the message.
It will still be, "Me first, me first, greed rules and sod the planet"
But don't worry folks, Earth will survive the very short existence of Man and will recover eventually even from an all-out nuclear (pronounced Nookular)war.

The latest excuse for not saving the planet is the Credit Crunch. We have to get all the unemployed on this way overpopulated planet, back to work so that they can continue to "Consume" because the financial world survives on consumers.

When do you think that the human race will go against the dictates of all of the man made "GODS" and adopt human intervention in reproduction?
20 Billion, 50 Billion? More?

Writing bigger won't help humans "get the message."

More to the point, I prefer that my entertainment come without a message. If I want to learn about how we're destroying the planet, I can watch the Discovery Channel.

You can be right, and still alienate the exact audience you're trying to reach by getting too preachy.

---

It doesn't matter how many times they remake it, humans still won't get the message.
It will still be, "Me first, me first, greed rules and sod the planet"
But don't worry folks, Earth will survive the very short existence of Man and will recover eventually even from an all-out nuclear (pronounced Nookular)war.

The latest excuse for not saving the planet is the Credit Crunch. We have to get all the unemployed on this way overpopulated planet, back to work so that they can continue to "Consume" because the financial world survives on consumers.

When do you think that the human race will go against the dictates of all of the man made "GODS" and adopt human intervention in reproduction?
20 Billion, 50 Billion? More?

Writing bigger won't help humans "get the message."

More to the point, I prefer that my entertainment come without a message. If I want to learn about how we're destroying the planet, I can watch the Discovery Channel.

You can be right, and still alienate the exact audience you're trying to reach by getting too preachy.

Ditto Ned, I couldn't have said It better.

---

Savoir-Faire is everywhere!
The T1 Trust, T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, America's First HST

You guys are going to hate me because I haven’t seen the original and I rather like Keanu R (though, admittedly, not for his acting) so I am looking forward to seeing it. Though I will probably wait until it comes out on DVD and rent it.

I plan on seeing the double feature tomorrow.

---

me@rescam.org

The new movie stinketh. One mans opinion.....Keanu acts like he still thinks he's in Matrix, and he probably does he's such a California airhead. There is simply nothing to this movie, low-grade says I. Go make up your own mind, I says it stinketh says I... HHAAAARRRGGHHHHH

---

I liked the movie over all. I think Keanu will always be typed casted with the matrix no matter what other movies he makes in the future.

---

LETS BEGIN IN 2010

You make it sound like that's a bad thing! ;) The Matrix is still my favorite movie of all time.

The new movie stinketh. One mans opinion.....Keanu acts like he still thinks he's in Matrix, and he probably does he's such a California airhead. There is simply nothing to this movie, low-grade says I. Go make up your own mind, I says it stinketh says I... HHAAAARRRGGHHHHH

"California Airhead" born in Beirut, Lebanon, and raised in New York and Toronto.

---

The new movie stinketh. One mans opinion.....Keanu acts like he still thinks he's in Matrix, and he probably does he's such a California airhead. There is simply nothing to this movie, low-grade says I. Go make up your own mind, I says it stinketh says I... HHAAAARRRGGHHHHH

"California Airhead" born in Beirut, Lebanon, and raised in New York and Toronto.

That Bill and Ted thing stays with people.

---

me@rescam.org

..........or Issac Asimov's "Foundation" Series. Now that would make an interesting series of films!

The only Asimov-related film that's been any good so far was Fantastic Voyage, and he wrote the book after the film had been made.

I'd love to see Foundation made as well (I've always envisioned Michael Richards as the Mule!) but I fear what Hollywood will do to his stories; he's a smart man, and Hollywood doesn't do smart very well at all.

---

Atlanta Bankruptcy, California Bankruptcy, or moral Bankruptcy -- choose your poison.

There are so many books out there just begging to be made into films, why does Fox have to remake a classic? Why not film Joe Haldeman's,"Forever Wars"? Or "Alfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination"? Or Arthur C. Clarke's "Rendezvous With Rama"? Or "Childhood's End"? Or the Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson? Or quit stalling Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game" as a movie?

..........or Issac Asimov's "Foundation" Series. Now that would make an interesting series of films!

So would The Mote in Gods Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle set in the distant future of Pournelle's CoDominium universe.

Robert A. Heinlein, who gave the authors extensive, detailed advice on the novel, blurbed the story as "possibly the finest science fiction novel I have ever read".

Google Search on The Mote in Gods Eye

---

Savoir-Faire is everywhere!
The T1 Trust, T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, America's First HST

There are so many books out there just begging to be made into films, why does Fox have to remake a classic? Why not film Joe Haldeman's,"Forever Wars"? Or "Alfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination"? Or Arthur C. Clarke's "Rendezvous With Rama"? Or "Childhood's End"? Or the Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson? Or quit stalling Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game" as a movie?

..........or Issac Asimov's "Foundation" Series. Now that would make an interesting series of films!

So would The Mote in Gods Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle set in the distant future of Pournelle's CoDominium universe.

Robert A. Heinlein, who gave the authors extensive, detailed advice on the novel, blurbed the story as "possibly the finest science fiction novel I have ever read".

Google Search on The Mote in Gods Eye

. . . eh Paul - been readin' RECALL NOT EARTH - interestin' to say the least

i'll let you know when i finish it - but so far, so good - well written and should also become a film plot . . .

---

BOINC Wiki . . .

Science Status Page . . .

There are so many books out there just begging to be made into films, why does Fox have to remake a classic? Why not film Joe Haldeman's,"Forever Wars"? Or "Alfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination"? Or Arthur C. Clarke's "Rendezvous With Rama"? Or "Childhood's End"? Or the Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson? Or quit stalling Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game" as a movie?

..........or Issac Asimov's "Foundation" Series. Now that would make an interesting series of films!

So would The Mote in Gods Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle set in the distant future of Pournelle's CoDominium universe.


Robert A. Heinlein, who gave the authors extensive, detailed advice on the novel, blurbed the story as "possibly the finest science fiction novel I have ever read".

Google Search on The Mote in Gods Eye

. . . eh Paul - been readin' RECALL NOT EARTH - interestin' to say the least

I'll let you know when i finish it - but so far, so good - well written and should also become a film plot . . .

Yep, I'm surprised no has looked at these Books, They were excellent stories.

Just don't go into the photosphere of a RED Giant with an expanding Langstrom field, Or poof. :o

---

Savoir-Faire is everywhere!
The T1 Trust, T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, America's First HST