This famous movie, many probably did not see

[Robert W]

Well, you are doing threads on it, so it must mean something to you.

And you are replying so it must have meaning for you!

 

[JoeB131]

I have not watched more than moments of any Godzilla movie. When they fake what dinosaurs do, no thanks.

Then you are missing a great movie.

Now, obviously, Gojira has had some seriously silly movies in his series.

Yeah, that was a thing that happened.

But the original movie has a lot of depth to it, as an allegory for nuclear weapons from the only country to be victimized by them.

 

[Robert W]

Then you are missing a great movie.

Now, obviously, Gojira has had some seriously silly movies in his series.

View attachment 1236373
Yeah, that was a thing that happened.

But the original movie has a lot of depth to it, as an allegory for nuclear weapons from the only country to be victimized by them.

So, you believe FDR was wrong all the time.

 

[JoeB131]

So, you believe FDR was wrong all the time.

I'm not sure why you are talking about FDR. Truman made the decision to use the Bomb.

I think the use of the bomb was unnecessary, as the Japanese were already ready to surrender, and the entry of the USSR into the war probably had a lot more to do with their decision to capitulate than the A-bomb did.

I also think that all the flagellation that we do today over the bomb is a little silly. To the people at the time, it was probably just another weapon.

A decade later, when the world faced the theoretical possibility of global extinction, that's when you saw all the consternation over the use of the bomb. And of course, for Hollywood, you had a plethora of giant whatevers terrorizing audiences throughout the 1950s.

Now, getting back to the point of Gojira/Godzilla, the main theme of the Japanese version was that Gojira was the result of nuclear testing. The protagonist of the Japanese version was Dr. Serizawa, who invented the Oxygen Destroyer, the only weapon capable of killing Gojira. But he sacrifices himself in the process so that no one else builds such a weapon.

Again, the problem is that all the sequels eventually turned Gojira into a silly character, especially after Toho realized that the series's biggest fans were children.

 

[Robert W]

I'm not sure why you are talking about FDR. Truman made the decision to use the Bomb.

I think the use of the bomb was unnecessary, as the Japanese were already ready to surrender, and the entry of the USSR into the war probably had a lot more to do with their decision to capitulate than the A-bomb did.

I also think that all the flagellation that we do today over the bomb is a little silly. To the people at the time, it was probably just another weapon.

A decade later, when the world faced the theoretical possibility of global extinction, that's when you saw all the consternation over the use of the bomb. And of course, for Hollywood, you had a plethora of giant whatevers terrorizing audiences throughout the 1950s.

Now, getting back to the point of Gojira/Godzilla, the main theme of the Japanese version was that Gojira was the result of nuclear testing. The protagonist of the Japanese version was Dr. Serizawa, who invented the Oxygen Destroyer, the only weapon capable of killing Gojira. But he sacrifices himself in the process so that no one else builds such a weapon.

Again, the problem is that all the sequels eventually turned Gojira into a silly character, especially after Toho realized that the series's biggest fans were children.

You never mentioned what the thread is actually about, The Day the earth stood still.

 

[JoeB131]

You never mentioned what the thread is actually about, The Day the earth stood still.

I thought we were discussing the qualities of 1950s Science Fiction.

Both movies were allegories about the fear that nukes put into the general audience.

I was just suggesting you open your mind to another culture's views on those fears.

 

[Robert W]

I thought we were discussing the qualities of 1950s Science Fiction.

Both movies were allegories about the fear that nukes put into the general audience.

I was just suggesting you open your mind to another culture's views on those fears.

The OP did not mention your topics. I do not recall the day the earth stood still being about Nukes.

I just watched the 1951 film, the day the earth stood still and he warned them not to attack other planets, but they could do as they wished to Earth. He did want nuclear power to enable men to go into space and attack.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

seriously? That remake was awful!!! And unnecessary. And way too preachy.

Everyone to their own opinion. The original was good for its time, but I liked the effects better in the remake. Leave it at that.

 

[LibertyWeeps]

I've always loved scifi.
Watched all the scifi "saturday night movies" when growing up.
Saw this movie several times.

 

[JoeB131]

Everyone to their own opinion. The original was good for its time, but I liked the effects better in the remake. Leave it at that.

Special effects don't make up for story.


Just for fun, I will repost here my review of the movie at the time that I posted on IMDB in 2008.

Klaatu's (Not so) Excellent Adventure...​

Spoiler
The new version of "The Day the Earth Stood Still" should be offered as a lesson in everything that is wrong with Hollywood today. Robert Wise's 1951 version is perfectly fine on its own, and there was no reason to remake it.

The movie begins with a scene in 1928 where a mountain climber encounters a sphere that collects his DNA to produce a clone who looks just like Keanu Reeves eighty years later. The scene is completely unnecessary and is handled better by exposition later in the movie. Flash forward to the present, where Jennifer Connelly is a scientist and a single adoptive mother. (Keep in mind, the equivalent character in the 1951 version was a simple government worker, and that was just fine.) The government has her prepare for the impending arrival of an unknown space object.

Well, this is pretty much the setup for the 1951 version, the UFO lands, and its occupant is shot by a nervous soldier. The robot Gort emerges from the spacecraft and gets into it with the military. Except now Gort is 40 feet tall and rendered by CGI. The alien Klaatu is rushed to the hospital, where his request to address the UN is refused by Kathy Bates playing the Evil Government Lady. (Incidentally, more of liberal Hollywood – the US is portrayed as the 'bad guys'.)

What follows is Klaatu escaping from the Secret Government Facility and then meeting with another of his kind who's been here for 70 years. (And they meet at a McDonald's. Isn't Mickey Dee part of the problem?) They mutually conclude humanity can't be reasoned with.

Now, the 1951 version was topical because it was only a few years after WWII, and humans were creating weapons capable of destroying the planet. It was a cautionary tale. This one also tries a cautionary tale: we mean, old humans are slowly destroying the planet, so these advanced aliens are going to destroy it quickly after extracting the snail darters and spotted owls. Yup, the environmental reasoning of people who fly around on private jets. They aren't the problem, you are!

Connelly's character convinces Klaatu to meet with one of our great scientists, played by John Cleese (Actually, the former Python gives the only decent performance in the film.) Unfortunately, Cleese asks the sensible question, if you're so worried, use your advanced technology to fix the problem. Oh, wait, can't do that. We'll just exterminate your whole species and most of the others and then reseed the planet. Yeah, that makes more sense than slightly adjusting the CO2 level in your atmosphere.

Well, after a bunch of action scenes that should have convinced Klaatu that we are homicidal maniacs, he changes his mind and decides to save humanity. Except that by this time, Gort has converted into a swarm of flesh and metal-eating Nano-bots that proceed to expand over the East Coast.

The end of the movie is that Klaatu calls off the nano-Gorts, but renders all technology on the planet inert. Of course, this makes no sense. That wouldn't just 'change our lifestyle', it would result in 6 billion people dependent on industrial agriculture, starving to death, leveling forests to keep warm, and probably eating some of those endangered species to stay alive.

Missing are the Christian allegories from the 1951 version. In the classic, Klaatu comes to us with an important message, lives amongst us as "Mr. Carpenter" (who else was a Carpenter?) is betrayed and killed, but rises from the dead. Before he ascends back into the Heavens, he gives us an important message that we need to straighten up our act. This one has no such subtlety; it's just an excuse for CGI and action sequences.

Okay, lessons to be learned, class.

1) If a movie was perfectly good the first time around, it doesn't need to be remade. If it wasn't, then there's no need to try again.

2) Special Effects are NOT a substitute for plot logic, character development, or dialogue. Neither are action scenes.

3) Keanu Reeves still can't act.

4) Product Placement by corporations that are part of the problem you are whining about undercuts your message.

5) No need to beat us over the head with the message. We had to listen to the annoying kid whine about his dead father for most of the film. Wise handled this with subtlety. We see a tombstone with the name and "Anzio" written on it. Got the point across.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The day the Earth stood still. Who saw it? At the time, it was stunning. Michael Rennie stared and we did not know him.

View attachment 1235732

Did you see it?

Now do you recall the film?

/—/-/ I saw it as a kid. I though that it was cool.