Just got done watching two sci-fi movies in 48 hours - rented The Day the Earth Stood Still Saturday night and saw the new Star Trek movie today. Which is kind of a big deal, as most of my movie watching these days is limited to whatever I happen upon as I'm channel-surfing TBS or TNT (which means I've seen Oceans Eleven and the Bourne flicks multiple times). If I rent a movie it's typically not something for me (think Scooby-Doo or Spongebob - you get the idea), and my wife and I frequent the movie theater about as much as we have dates in general. Ah, married life!
I didn't plan it this way, you know (I'm back to talking about the sci-fi movies). I'd seen the big sign at Blockbuster about the remake of the 1951 classic and had a Saturday evening to kill while my wife was engrossed in reading Twilight. And then today, on a whim, the DCE at the church and I had some program staff bonding time at the matinee of the latest installment in Gene Roddenberry's creation. To make a poor attempt at a pun, sometimes the planets align like that (I told you it was poor).
What struck me was how underwhelmed I was with one movie and how impressed I was with the other. Bet you're wondering which is which, aren't you? I'll spare you the suspense.
I never saw the original version of The Day the Earth Stood Still (heretofore known as TDTESS), so I don't really have much to compare the newer version with. I didn't know a whole lot about the story line either. But here's the gist - an alien race has been keeping tabs on earth for a few million years and comes to the conclusion that everything has been great - except for those pesky humans, who mess it up for everything else. So all animal life is removed from the planet in preparation for the total extermination of everything man-made - including, of course, all humans. The animals would then be returned to bask in the joy of a human-less world. The "twist" in the story is the character Klaatu, played by Keanu Reeves, who comes to earth to announce the end of humanity. I don't think I'm giving away any huge story plot to inform you that the human race, in the end, is not annihilated; as Reeves' character comes to see the brighter side of humanity and averts an all-out catastrophe just in the nick of time.
I tried very hard to like this movie - I really did. It had a lot of components that I'm typically drawn to - the whole "life outside this planet" thing, the threat of the end of the world (same reason I was drawn to The Day After Tomorrow and Deep Impact). But it just didn't work for me. About the only real bright spot came from witnessing the acting chops of little Jaden Smith, son of Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith. This kid is amazing, folks; and if you saw him and his dad in The Pursuit of Happyness you know what I'm talking about. He's got a future, I can tell you that. Sadly, though, his latest movie does not.
That was that movie. And then there's the new Star Trek flick. I'm no Trekkie by any stretch of the imagination, although on sleepless nights I've been known to wander downstairs and tune in to TV Land to catch some reruns (which promptly put me to sleep). Still the hype surrounding this movie was enough to entice me. That, and at the very least I admired the chutzpah of those involved in putting this together. I know the place this story has in the science fiction world, and you just don't go messing with an institution like it unless you know what you're doing.
This was a good movie, folks. It obviously borrowed a lot from the original story line, but you never had the sense that they were outright copying everything. It had a good story with lots of interesting twists that included a healthy dose of solid action scenes. The casting, in my opinion, was dead-on. Chris Pine played James T. Kirk wonderfully, Zachary Quinto nailed the vulcan-human balance of Spock, and Eric Bana was quite the vengeful fellow as the movie's antagonist. Even bit appearances by Wynonna Rider, Bruce Greenwood and the illustrious Leonard Nimoy (as Spock too - part of the interesting plot twist) felt right. Again, no big spoiler here, but in the end the good guys win and Kirk becomes the undisputed captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise. The fact that you know this is coming before you set foot in the theater, and yet you still leave duly entertained, means they did a great job getting you there.
So - what's the difference between the two? Why did one bomb and the other excel? Well, to be fair I have to acknowledge that the new Star Trek film is not a remake but a prequel. So it's not having to duplicate outright as TDTESS had to. Then again, the Star Trek folks knew they were playing within a box they couldn't deviate much outside of, lest they receive the wrath of Star Trek nation. They could tell a new story, but it had to be pretty darn close to the first one.
Here's my gripe about TDTESS. First, it seems to make the failed assumption that a great story line automatically translates to a great movie. Just because it worked the first time doesn't guarantee you success again. Throughout the movie I kept having the feeling that they were messing up what could've been a good thing - it had so much potential, but they were blowing it at most every turn. Good stories must be told well in order to be received well. My other complaint about TDTESS is one that seems to undermine a lot of movies these days - especially sci-fi movies, and especially as technology changes the way movies are made. And that is that a movie can't stand on special effects alone. They did some pretty incredible special effects in TDTESS to be sure - but if the story line surrounding it is not strong enough, it doesn't mean much. In fact, it winds up looking silly.
What did Star Trek do right? Good casting, I felt; along with a great story line and special effects at just the right amount (not too much, not too little). The movie also took a few risks here and there that seemed to pan out (the romantic relationship between Spock and Uhura being one - talk about a risk!) I don't know if J.J. Abrams and the gang put years of thought into how all of this would go down, or if they just got reeeaaaally lucky. Either way, they seemed to have hit all the right notes - and not just with the Trekkies, but with folks who had no real tie to any of the previous incarnations. Now that takes some mad skill.
One day when I'm a movie maker I'll keep all of this in mind. Till then friends, enjoy the movies. Or, should I say, live long and prosper.
You had to know that was coming, didn't you? Please say you did.
One last thought:
I haven't seen either, although I plan on seeing Star Trek -- soon! The only comment I have about TDTESS is see the original. That would have been enough reason not to waste your time with the re-make. The 1951 movie is a classic, taking a great story and artistically translating it into a great film. Do yourself a favor Steve and rent the original TDTESS and enjoy a science fiction movie the way it was originally intended: to scare/excite you while making you think at the same time!
That's the formula that has made Star Trek a long lasting science fiction franchise (though some may disagree). Nevertheless, I am looking forward to its reinvention for the new century.
Posted by: The Commander | May 12, 2009 at 08:47 AM