Comments on: Klaatu Barada NoRemake!

By: Natalie

Natalie — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:43:09 +0000

On a lighter note, here’s something to possibly wear while going to see the movie: http://www.topatoco.com/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=TO&Product_Code=WIGU-KLAATU&Category_Code=WIGU-SHIRTS

By: D. Taibi

D. Taibi — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 03:37:21 +0000

Fair enough. Yes, faithfulness to source material is another can of worms, but probably worth discussing too at some point. Thanks for the discussion!

Best,
Diana

By: ckage

ckage — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 11:04:54 +0000

Hum… I still think that if people go to see a movie about, say, an archeologist who gets in adventures and is afraid of snakes, but refuse to see anything else on screen but that old guy who’s married to Ally McBeal, I say the problem is more with the audiences being too lazy and one-sided; not “blame” the actor for still wanting to work and producers and directors for wanting to work with him.
As for Constantine, that would be opening an all new can of worms: though I’ve read some stories from the comic, and am aware the character portrayed had some physical and philosophical differences, I don’t get why is it such a complete outrage that a film does not follow the source it’s based on to a T. Specially, when the fact that the film doesn’t follow a source does not detour from the possibility it might be a good film. Constantine is a good example of this: many people that have no idea about the comic think it’s a pretty decent flick, and don’t get the bad press it got.

By: D. Taibi

D. Taibi — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 19:34:18 +0000

It is not my intention to critique Keanu Reeves’s acting chops or suggest that anyone is obtuse. Sure, I’ve seen him in films where I though he did a good, non-stereotypical job (The Gift, Little Buddha).

What I am saying is that, in this era of celebrity, the aura around a certain celebrity can greatly influence the role. Reeves, like any actor, chooses a range of roles, but he is particularly well-know his Neo-type roles. The choice of casting a well-known actor, rather than an unknown, and imposing on him an appearance similar to his other sci-fi roles is going to impact the effect of the film. I think it is quite fair to question whether the casting of a certain actor is best for the film as an artistic product or whether it is mainly aimed at box office draw (if studios are lucky, both are true). Constantine was a prime example of poor judgment in this respect. Anyone who has read the Hellblazer comics knows that casting Reeves was entirely wrong for the character. This has nothing to do with pigeon-holing an actor, but does call into question the judgement of the producers, directors, etc.

My skepticism does not rest on Reeves’s shoulders, but rather on the Hollywood machine for offering warmed-over, mediocre redos rather than fresh material. It’s entirely possible that the casting of stars like Reeves and Connelly will take the remake in the new direction it needs. You’re right in that we do have to be careful about jumping the gun and assigning judgment too quickly. As I said, it would be nice if Reeves and company deliver a well-done remake.

By: ckage

ckage — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:00:13 +0000

So, let me get this straight: a role is nothing more than the garments an actor wears, and viewers are so obtuse, that if an actor looks remotely similar on two or more roles, they are completely unable to tell apart each character. Never mind the fact that the attitude displayed by the character Constantine had absolutely nothing to do with that one of Neo: they were wearing black, so they were the same. Is that it?

Also, Keanu Reeves is becoming stereotypical: so tell me, where is the black-suited super-hero in roles like The Lake House or Street Kings? I don’t mean to sound obtuse myself, but I think that, at times, people are so set on pigeonholing this particular actor, they don’t even look at his work; they simply pull out abstract notions out of vox populi of what Keanu’s supposed to do, not what he ACTUALLY did.

By: D. Taibi

D. Taibi — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:06:13 +0000

I agree with Elliot’s skepticism about remakes, especially in the sci-fi genre. Most have ranged from mediocre (War of the Worlds, Solaris, Stepford Wives), to terrible (Godzilla, The Fog, various iterations of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, not including the good 1978 version). If you’re going to remake a movie that was well-done in the first place, you’d better have a clear intention on why an update is needed. One rare success I can name offhand is Invasion of the Body Snatchers, 1978, which updated 1950s paranoia to circe-1980 anxiety about the ongoing Cold War.

I think it’s quite fair to assert that Keanu Reeves is becoming stereotypical in his roles, and that this might not serve the remake well. Maybe he doesn’t save the world as often as Will Smith, but he does tend to play black suit-clad heroes with extraordinary powers – Constantine, Johnny Mnemonic, The Matrixes (yes, in the sequels he did wear a non-leather suit, with a Nehru jacket). But it’s all conjecture until the movie comes out. All that being said, I would be pleased if it were a good movie.

By: ckage

ckage — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:41:51 +0000

“Keanu Reeves can make for an easy critical target”, particularly when said critics are set on diminishing him. Some of them, don’t even mind distorting images in order to do so. Then, Neo’s black-leather, trench-coat cyberpunk apparel can easily turn in to a dark blue suit-and-tie(?!!!). And Klaatu’s characterization as a menacing, strong presence versus the inquisitive, unsure Neo gets ignored, because, Oh Dear, the alien has powers.

What this tells me is that, sometimes, the problem is not with the remake per si; it’s the distortions some people make around it.