Spoilers...

Why do a remake of a classic? It's a good question that needs answering. For one, many of todays generation can not relate to the older films, in which nuances are often lost in generational gaps. I see this with my own son. It was not my constant buying of Star Wars toys, or showing him the classic films that got him into the classic series, but rather the new animated Clone Wars series that finally sucked him in, as episode 4 once did to me back in 1977. It has nothing to do with classics not being classics, but rather more with todays kids just not being able to relate. There is too much out there today for the kids to sit still and notice subtlety in one single film and let it dictate the direction their generation will take.

With The Day The Earth Stood Still it was time for a remake. The classic is still there for all to see, generations behind us now. Getting my 7 year old to sit still for that would take a lot of wrangling.  The new one however took no convincing at all. Once he saw the trailer that was all he needed to see, which is I'm sure how easy it was for kids who saw the original in the theaters.

Now when making a remake, especially a classic that is highly regarded by the populace one should never seek to redo. To me a remake, a good remake should take all the great elements of the original and just supplant them into a modern film with all the trimmings and gravy.  Too often, and this film is unfortunately no exception, the new filmmakers can not resist making it their own, rewriting good dialogue out, taking away great story elements, and redesigning many crucial aspects of the film that need to stay for the remake to be even slightly tangentially linked to it's original. The 1978 Philip Kaufman version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers is to me one of the best remakes ever made. It takes all that the original had to offer and added rather than subtracted. 

The famous crazy line form the original TDTESS, "klaatu, barada, nikto..." was not in the remake. Why not? Instead they never go to find Gort like in the original. The film jumped around taking trips out to NJ when a good writer could have easily had one of the pond ark/globes that suck up all the animals just be in the pond in Central Park. Also, there probably should have been thousands of ark/globes, not dozens. All the life on earth needs more than just a few globes to help save it. They were not big enough for the whales and elephants either. Any alien would be remiss for not saving them.

In the end the film broke many of it's own rules and somehow the main characters are not destroyed by a micro insect cloud that easily laid waste to a stadium in seconds. klaatu helped I think, but they kept showing that klaatu could only help if he could complete some sort of circuit. This clever plot point was thrown out at the end, as was Gort, the robot that the original is famed for. I think a swarming dirty cloud is cheaper to animate than a cool robot.

The film had it's good moments. A cemetery scene, a scene with a scientist, and a few others here and there. It also sparked a great conversation between my son and I on the nature of man and whether we are ultimately good,  bad, both, or none. Is the universe indifferent?  Where does a creator fit in? What about God? What about the hypocrisy of a alien far more destructive than ourselves telling us we are too violent?  How come no one in the film called Klaatu on his violence? It was a fun evening between my son and I and I can never ask for more than that.

Was this film great? No. Was it fun? For us it was, but I am sure it will not be for many, especially those that do not like being preached to. Still, there were people clapping at the end in the theater and I can not remember the last time I heard that in the movies.

I give the film 3 out of 5 stars. Many problems but fun, and not a complete strike out.