^^^ Only viewers residing deep in the south, where watching interracial stuff always awakes the inner crackah in them and makes them grab a gun, stuff their sisters/daughters in a basement and wrap themselves with the confederate flag.

Silly mo-fo’s.

About the movie… yeah it blows chunks. Remakes almost always do… always.

2. I agree with comments of eric g, the kid should have been terminated early in the film. It would have provided viewers with a feeling of deep satisfaction.

3. Really important point. In the original Klaatu leaves a message “we are watching you”, “change or die”. In this movie he just leaves, no message. You can see the message the humans will take from this. “We beat the bastards, no need to change. We need bigger weapons”.

4. I think there should be a law: If you remake a movie and make a hash of it, we should be allowed to staple the director’s pink bits to a wall. (also included would be the directors of Planet of the Apes remake).

That stupid retarded kid of hers would have made me want to destroy the earth too.

Yeah, Hollywood nepotism strikes again. That kid ruined the movie.

First off, I’ll skip the grammar, which really makes this article unreadable.

Second, look up logical fallacy, and count how many times you ignore these rules.

I’ll bitch about a few of your points, then drop it.

The bridge in Cloverfield WAS destroyed. Why do you say it’s safe? The thing gets demolished and falls to pieces. Did that movie not end with bricks falling and the actors getting covered in rubble?

Airplanes are always X-rayed during maintenance, to look for cracks and weaknesses in the structure. Google it. The MRI/Xray technology is not limited to your ankle, dude.

Complaining about the government is always silly! Our government constantly blows things. Our president read a childrens book for 15 minutes after being told that our country is under attack from terrorists. What makes you think we would handle an alien invasion any better???

The ending DOES suck, but it’s an enjoyable film none the less. You have to suspend some belief to enjoy it. What, you walked into a Hollywood remake starring Keanu Reeves and expected Blade Runner? If I were you I would focus on your own derailed thoughts, and leave the movies to the pros.

The rest, agreed.

When did science fiction movies join the ranks of techno-phobic neo-Luddites? All electronic devices are wiped out, killing everyone with a pacemaker and condemning more than half of the world’s population to starvation (current population levels cannot be maintained absent current mechanical means to grow and store and move food) and forcing the remainder back into an agrarian existence – and this is supposed to be social commentary?

One of the big advantages of science fiction is that it makes a comment on the relation of man to technology. If so, this movie is not science fiction, it is the fiction of anti-science.

Still way far fetched, but I believe I heard him say something like that.