Was watching the film again and it is proving to be an intriguing case-in-point for my ongoing thoughts around how seemingly hairline the boundary is between something good that contains quality element across the board, but that fails to be actually good as a whole. If we look at the music charts, every one of those artists is trying to create a track that captures everyone's enthusiasm with essentially equitable levels of skills - yet we have very successful tracks and flops. Maybe it is like football (take AFL) where if each player plays just a few % better, then they will outdo their direct opponent and with that across the field equates to an utter domination. Just like genes - small changes can have big effects. So I am thinking film is the same, a few small changes have big effects and an extra couple of % in the skill department throughout again makes a huge impact.
So, if the above brain-dump has any merit, then perhaps that is why it is proving difficult for me to pin down where a film like The Day the Earth Stood Still went awry. Maybe it didnt, it was still the product of an army of very talented film makers but somehow it either missed that catalyst gene or we didnt get that last percentage point from everyone.
Here is the trailer, which is actually pretty good as it draws from a heap of pretty good content (I have mentioned many times how cool trailers are):
Note that things arent all bad here and it is still completely watchable, yet it falls flat when compared to a growing armada of films in this very specific genre alone. Plus we do get some awesome CG effects work to admire, the Giant's stadium being swept away is awesome: