The Day the Earth Stood Still

Preliminary comment #1: I don't know what the title means. The action doesn't take place in one day, or at least that wasn't my impression. And the earth doesn't stand still. Maybe someone can enlighten me on this point.

Preliminary comment #2: I haven't seen the original. People always seem to think the originals are better, and yet I've seen 1950s-era movies, and they're terrible. Not just the special effects, either; the acting is terrible. Maybe this one was an exception.

Preliminary comment #3: I like Keanu Reeves.

So, are we all set? Good. The movie was . . . OK.

Keanu Reeves was great. He makes a wonderful alien, as other reviewers have noted, and the moment when we first see him in a suit was a nice visual joke. (Hello-o-o, Mr. Anderson . . .)

The child (Jaden Smith) was cute, and a decent actor. Jennifer Connelly was very thin. That's all I could think about, looking at her. Wow, you're like a toothpick.

I remember Connelly from The Rocketeer--a movie which I loved, by the way--and in that one she was the perfect, bright-eyed 1940s girl to go with Billy Campbell's gorgeous, bright-eyed 1940s boy.

Here she looks worried alot - and thin.

The special effects were good, but these days that almost goes without saying. I particularly liked the plague of tiny mechanical locusts (you'll remember the disintegrating 18-wheeler from the movie trailer--that's their handiwork). And the scene where we are introduced to their extremely fast method of reproduction was nice and creepy.

Now, I'm a special-effects afficionado, as I think I've said before - but I'm going to reverse myself here, and claim that in this case the story would have benefited from a simpler telling. More time to get to know our alien and our heroine. Even a little banter, maybe. The one scene where the movie really came alive for me was a quiet piece of dialogue between Reeves and John Cleese, playing a Nobel-winning scientist. They both sounded thoughtful, intelligent; two real individuals, discussing something important.

Because the message is an important one, and the movie approaches it in an interesting way. We know (or at least some of us do) that human beings--by their bad habits, their over-consumption, and their sheer numbers--are causing environmental damage to the Earth.

The movie asks: Do we have the right to destroy a planet? And what will it take for us to change? The situation (Al Gore absolutely hit it right on the head) is inconvenient. It is inconvenient to think we might not be able to continue as we wish. It is inconvenient to think that we can't have whatever we want to have.

It is just damned inconvenient that life can't be all Christmas morning, with shiny packages (big screen TVs! $1.50 gasoline!) spilling endlessly from under the tree.

The Day the Earth Stood Still wants us to consider whether we can change our behavior to save our lives. And I can only say that - IMHO - this question is probably worth a little more dialogue.