Derrickson also skillfully provides an explanation for why Klaatu would be a bipedal hominid (an unlikely product of independent evolution on another planet)—genetic engineering of placental tissue surrounding his original alien body, with embryological development sped up hundreds of times to transform him into a being recognizably human. "What were you before you were human?" Benson queries. Klaatu's response: "It would only frighten you." That is a far likelier scenario than the portrayal of aliens in most science fiction films.
Derrickson was also a stickler for scientific accuracy, employing the astronomer and astrobiologist Seth Shostak of the SETI Institute to check the dialogue (and chalkboard equations) for precision. As Derrickson explained at a panel discussion on his film at the California Institute of Technology—where he was joined by Keanu Reeves, Caltech cosmologist Sean Carroll, and Jet Propulsion Laboratory roboticist Joel Burdick—Shostak redacted some meaningless mumbo jumbo in the description of the spaceship's approach to Earth and replaced it with "The object was not following a gravitational free-fall trajectory; as such its path was recalculated." (Caltech students delighted in firing both technical and nerdy questions at the panel. Sample question for Carroll: "Are the laws of physics invariant?" Answer: "I see you've been reading my recently published technical paper in which I show that it is possible that the laws of nature could be different in different times and places in the universe." A slightly less technical question for Keanu Reeves: "Are you human?" Answer: "If you cut me do I not bleed?" Nice. My favorite part of the evening was seeing a handmade sign hoisted by a group of Caltech coeds—probably 800-on-their-math-SAT-tests all—that read "The Day I Met Keanu the Earth Stood Still".)
Some additions were unnecessary, such as Gort's name as a military acronym for Genetically Organized Robotic Technology; or heavy handed, as in overplaying the environmental destruction theme by turning the spaceship into a species-saving ark. At least the robot wasn't renamed Gore.
Klaatu is no longer Mr. Carpenter, but he fills Jesus's shoes by resurrecting a Lazarus-like state trooper from the dead. When Benson's stepson asks Klaatu to do the same for his father who died in the Iraq war, Derrickson self-censored by having Klaatu explain that "There are some things I cannot do." (Why not? Is resurrection restricted by length of time after death?) Gone, too, is the electrical blackout, but in its stead (and escalating the seriousness of Klaatu's warning), the 28-foot (8.5-meter) metallic Gort dissolves into billions of tiny nanobots that feed on man-made materials—tanks, trucks, cars, roads, sports stadiums, office buildings, and everything else that represents civilization—growing as they spread around the globe. (It's the gray goo from beyond!) Klaatu has not come to destroy Earth; he has come to save Earth…from ourselves: "If the Earth dies, you die. If you die, the Earth survives."
The Day the Earth Stood Still has stood the test of time and its remake is far more than that, and well worth seeing. Both touch on timeless mythic themes: destruction and redemption, death and resurrection, mortality and immortality, individual liberty and group unity, national sovereignty and global community, and, of course, scientists playing God and technology run amok. Myths, whether in written or visual form, serve a vital role of asking unanswerable questions and providing unquestionable answers. Most of us, most of the time, have a low tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty. We want to reduce the cognitive dissonance of not knowing by filling the gaps with answers. Traditionally, religious myths have served that role, but today—in the age of science—science fiction is our mythology.
Subscription Center
See what we're tweeting about
14 Comments
Add CommentI liked this article.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe last sentence of this article is the phrase: "Traditionally, religious myths have served that role, but today—in the age of science—science fiction is our mythology."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe term 'religious myths' perhaps needs clarification. I would suggest that there are no 'religious myths'. All mythologies were once active religions. These religions became mythologies to our perspective once they ceased to be living beliefs. To take an obvious example, when Zeus was no longer actively worshipped as an existing god, then he passed into mythology. First comes the religion, then when it ceases to be an active belief, it passes into myth. So the phrase 'religious myths' telescopes two individual terms which are in reality separated by time and human circumstances.
From our perspective, the religions which exist today are 'true', and what was believed in the distant past is consigned to 'mythology'. But this is as illusory as any past empire imagining that it could cheat eternity. The beliefs of today are the mythologies of the future, as any historical perspective demonstrates, no matter how fervently 'eternal' they might be considered by their adherents.
And, no, science fiction is not necessarily our 'mythology' for the above reasons. But, as in 'The Day The Earth Stood Still' it does at times throw up an effective allegory.
As we all know, the truth is always stranger than the fiction....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn 1988., a "message was received from another dimension of
reality." It was, 4.6.32.15.31.27....
In 1993., the details were reviewed by senior researchers at
Princeton University, who forwarded an emphatic verification....
This is the story:
http://www.groundreport.com/Opinion/THE-NOSTRADAMUS-CODE-EXPLAINED
A rather different review from the Guardian:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.guardian.co.uk/film/video/2008/dec/12/the-day-the-earth-stood-still
"....4.6.32.15.31.27...."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd here I thought the Answer was,,, 42
I was very disappointed with the way the movie rapped-up, only two people got to hear why Klaatu came to destroy the earth. As far as the rest of the public are concerned the aliens came to destroy us for no reason by disabling our technologies. No lesson learnt, entirely pointless. Granted that we have Conservative leaders that would lock-up an inter-galactic emissary here to deliver a message in Gitmo, but where were the Liberal voices? Nobody stands up to say lets roll out the red carpet ? At some point you would think they would stop trying to kill him.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisP.S. was it me or did Gort look like he was at least 100ft tall?
In response to the articles assertion that a bipedal hominid is an unlikely product of independent evolution on another planet I challenge him or anyone else to come up with a more efficient design for an evolved intelligent being that is not humanoid.
Basic requirements for animals being:
(1) sensing the environment
(2) communicating
(3) location over various terrain (from vertical cliff to flat desert as with humanoids)
(4) object manipulation (from as small as a needle to as large as a refrigerator as with humanoids)
@abaniquo: The final form of our evolution is a product of the environment in which it was created, therefore is well suited to it. In other environments, a different outcome is just as likely. For example, suppose our gravity was twice Earth norm...it seems to me more likely that a multi-legged version of ourselves might've evolved to support our forms. Such a creature could still fit your criteria, and might be better at some of them than ourselves, but not be bipedal.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlso, your inclusion of the idea of specific object manipulation is a post hoc fallacy. Just because we have need to manipulate objects in such manner doesn't mean another species might. Some sort of tentacle with small suckers might meet the same needs as hands with fingers.
I believe Mr. Schermer is using the word "myth" in the academic sense, not the popular one. In academia, for a story to be "myth" it does not need to be false. For example, the story of Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus has achieved the status of myth in this country, even though it also happens to be true.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for whether science fiction plays the role of myth, I think it can and does. George Lucas drew heavily from Joseph Campbell's study of myth in creating the Star Wars series.
Tentacles with suckers can replace hands and fingers but they are not effiecient in any appreciable gravity. Outside neutral buoyancy or zero gravity such a limb would expended several times more energy than that with some sort of skeletal system. Also suckers cannot manipulate anything as small as a needle accurately.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the gravity was twice Earth norm, instead of a multi-legged version of ourselves what you would find is stocky humanoids with restriction on height and stiffened limbs like those found on elephants and sauropods. Having six limbs instead of four would be too costly and inefficient sacrificing brain power that is needed for intelligence.
I have not seen the remake yet, but I think the movie should have been titled: AFTER THE DAY {the earth stood still]. This would make it a sequel with the requisite new characters updated for the present. This way the integrity and importance of the original film would have been maintained.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have not seen the remake yet, but I think the movie should have been titled: AFTER THE DAY {the earth stood still]. This would make it a sequel with the requisite new characters updated for the present. This way the integrity and importance of the original film would have been maintained.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAddendum to previous comment
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKlatu's last words were that the other members of the universe did not care how the people of earth handled their affairs. This seems to make the remake a contradiction.
Newyorknew2: Where do you get your drugs??
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA note to the Publisher:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe know that this is off-subject. It’s an out-and-out. no-fooling, no disguise, PR release promoting our web site, Guys That Lie.com (we protect women from guys who lie to them online).
BUT WAIT!
If you’re unhappy about the release being off-subject, it also contains new and valuable scholarly research on single mom online dating from the U.S. Department Of Justice
If you wish, you have our permission to just use the research stuff and delete all mention of Guys That Lie – However, if you do – we just hope that you can handle the guilt…
So here goes:
San Francisco, CA
Pedophiles In Love With Single Moms. Can It Be?
Pedophiles are learning to love single moms. Why? because thousands of single moms are inadvertently creating happy hunting grounds for that subspecies of pedophiles who like their prey young – really young.
“Think of it” says Crystal the Jacquez, managing editor of Guys That Lie.com, the online back grounding site. “If you’re one of the tens of thousands of pedophiles with a taste for really young kids, how do you get to them? Children under five or six are just too young to be online by themselves.”
“So what does this most dangerous form of pedophiles do?” asks Jacquez, “He surfs social networking sites looking for the pages of proud single mothers just aching to show potential dates how beautiful their children are and just hoping to attract men who will not only will love them, but will love their children too.
Well, the single moms who put photos of their pre-school kids on their social networking homepages are certainly attracting at least one type of child-loving guy – pedophiles”
Here’s an excerpt from a report in the journal American Psychologist, published by the American Psychological Association, regarding pedophiles stalking pre-schoolers on the internet:
“Finding prepubescent victims directly (on the Internet) is quite rare; such offenders use the Internet in other ways. Pedophiles typically get access to preschool victims through online contact with parents”
“If you have pictures of your child on line,” says Jacquez, “don’t be too surprised to get a message like the following from some nice sounding guy”:
“Hey! I just saw your profile on Facebook and you are one great looking lady --- and that little girl of yours is just marvelous looking! She looks so bright etc. etc. etc!”
“You’re going to have a new best friend very soon,” she says. “Count on it!”
Jacquez cites the following statistic from: Offender Characteristics, U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics re. Victim-offender relationships in sexual assault regarding who sexually assaults children under 6 years old.
Who assaults children under 6 years old:
Trusted family members: 48.6%
Strangers: 3.1%
Trusted family acquaintances: 48.3%
“If a pedophile targets your child’s photo on your homepage, trust us,” says Jacquez, “they’ll become a ‘trusted family acquaintance’ soon enough. “
“One thing more thing,” says Jacquez, “when you meet a new guy online, check him out immediately with us at Guys That Lie.com (www.guysthatlie.com). Our site is free and was built in order to empower women to check out the backgrounds of guys that they meet online.
“First, check him out in our Child Molesters Section, then in our Criminal Records Section. After that, check out all his other claims about his background. There is no way,” she says, “that you can be too careful.”
Guys and Lies also has a special page on Facebook at www.facebook.com/guysthatlie and on MySpace at www.myspace.com/guysthatlie.
Jacquez asks you to please forward this article to single moms you know who have their kid’s photos online..
Contact:
crystal Jacquez, managing editor
Guys That Lie.com
415 678-8610
crystal01@guysthatlie.com
http://www.guysthatlie.com