There was a thread on this prior to the release in 2004, everyone was so hopeful! Man you must feel let down. Well not to dig up a old thread posted before the release I'm making this one.
Anywho ...
You've probably seen it so not need to post a story line and plot ... was there a plot. Oh yeah, run around scream and avoid the noid.
So for some brain damaged reason I watched this again tonight ... aside from fact I think Tom Cruise is a whiny little phallic who puts gerbils up his rear. This movie was just as annoying this time I watched it as before, cliche and boring.
Form the the shrill scream of the little girl ... she'd be the first to go.
To the snot nose teenage boy who would be next to go.
And Tom Cruise would have his blood drained and sprayed, along with Tim Robbins.
Why must they turn what could have been a good movie into some boring ass family drama. The wayward dad, bratty teen, annoying child and ex wife with a boyfriend .. who are they marketing this to?
I swear I almost turn it off and put it in the sell/give away/burn/blow up/use it as a coaster pile.
I forgot about just how much promise this movie had and was lost on a stupid story line. the CGI was decent but it takes more than cool F/X to save a movie. Stupid arguments, screaming, more stupid arguments, more screaming, it was so predictable even the first time I saw it, it was even more obvious the second time. You just wanted the go "Oh like a blind man could see that coming." but not to be totally negative this movie sucked .. the special effect where good for the year and well done. Damn shame they didn't have any money left for a decent writer and actor.
I would have cast Bruce Willis, p**sed off because one of the tripods stepped on his '69 GTO. No kids, no teenager, no ex love ... just one man mad as hell who's going to get even and saves the earth on the process. I get so tired of the I must save this person or that person ... how about you just want to win, you want to beat the alien, monster (Coverfield), enemy for no other reason than to win. Is that so hard?
I loved War of the Worlds. I also agree with all your criticisms.
I watched it in the movie theater and was enthralled. It is a "bad movie," but the sheer spectacle put on screen was amazing. That's my entire complaint against Spielberg, he fails on most of the coherent movie levels, but the sheer amount of spectacle he puts on screen is amazing. I'd been waiting for years for good death rays, and they finally showed up in this movie. This was Spielberg putting all his work on Saving Private Ryan to use for a stupid alien invasion film. I loved it.
But yeah, bad film. The spectacle? Amazing. In fact, these kind of reiterate my feelings about the latest Indiana Jones film. It would be nice if Spielberg could work a good movie into this explosive set pieces, but what he does he does well.
I should mention I think Tom Cruise is a horrible actor, but I really like War of the Worlds.
I thought the first ten minutes was so cool that I called my wife and oldest daughter in to watch it with me. Yeah, I was hearing about that for two weeks afterwardes :bluesad:
Well, the first ten minutes WAS really cool.
I have not seen this Spielberg adaptation... however I have seen the Timothy Hines' version: The classic war of the worlds(or whatever he calls it now). I urge everyone here to check it out, it's very ambitious and sets out to be the book as it is filmed. Filming a book like it is written without cutting much is never a good idea, and when you add to the fire that the director is a complete hack, the actors horrible, the script atrocious and the effects....well... you'll have to see those to judge for yourself. I dare say this film was even more ambitious than the Spielberg one, and the result is fail of epic porportions.
It also sports the worst mustache you have ever seen!
3blWODE8pN4
FfxxZ4a5WMw
I sort of agree with Mojo on this one --
I was flying to Europe in '05, and this was one of 4 inflight movies shown in tandem.
I actually enjoyed it quite a bit -- Yes, Speilberg wanted it to Focus on Family, and the trials thereof, but I consider Dakota Fanning a truly gifted actress -- anyone see "I Am Sam"? -- & enjoy watching her hyperventilate here.
Plus I liked the monsters-in-the-basement nod to George Pal.
No, I've seen a lot worse -- actaully watched it 2 1/2 times before the cockpit lights came up --
peter johnson/denny can't name a movie for me
Quote from: InspectorDC on June 05, 2008, 01:36:31 AM
I have not seen this Spielberg adaptation... however I have seen the Timothy Hines' version: The classic war of the worlds(or whatever he calls it now).
Whenever anyone mentions the 2005 WAR OF THE WORLDS this is the version that immediately pops into my mind. :teddyr: You'd think by following Wells' novel almost religiously Hines' version couldn't be
that bad, but . . .
There's also walking. Lots and lots of walking.
How could I forget the walking? :smile:
He even has stand in's to walk for the film's "stars", particularly the old professor chap. Close up on him barely staggering along...cut to someone in his clothes sprinting along like he was 20 again
I've been a big advocate for this film on this site for a while. :thumbup:
About my favorite of Hines' "special effects" are the brightly colored, terribly animated CGI skeletons that continue to wiggle and scream even after all the flesh has been roasted off of them. If nothing else, the weird speed at which the film runs is enough (is it missing every third frame or something?!?) to produce a blinding headache all on its own. Those clips you posted are exactly right - imagine this for three or four hours, or however long this thing runs.
Pendragon was pushing their version as a theatrical release and it ended up at Walmart for $8 I think. My brother bought it and I watched it (except for the walking parts I fast forwarded through. I had followed that movie for year while it was being made and had always thought it needed to be a period piece. Boy, was I let down.
I did a review of it back in 2005, but for some reason couldn't find it using the search function.
As far as the Speilberg version, I thought it was okay, but I've only watched it the one time.
Quote from: peter/dennyI consider Dakota Fanning a truly gifted actress -- anyone see "I Am Sam"? -- & enjoy watching her hyperventilate here.
Not taking anything away from her, it was that
shrill scream that went straight to my nerves. I have girls, I know that scream, I hate that scream, it finds my spine. I hear that scream somebody better be missing a body part. You know what I mean?
Over all the F/X were really good I just didn't care for the family line story they tried to put into it, that gimmick get old.
I liked the whole concept of people getting blasted by death rays and the reason the aliens are defeated (same as in the original story I believe), but I too couldn't stand the family story where each person was a complete ass.
Reminds me of the cast of a lot of movies. Is it me, or do most recent movies have a cast that's annoying as hell? It's like suppossed to be cool for every character to act like a complete jerk from the WB?
I wasn't too thrilled with this movie, either. I saw it in the theater, and while it had some amazing moments involving the tripods (the effects really were wonderful), and the sound they made was awesome, but for the most part it felt like a big clunky mess. You mention the little girl's scream. Afterwards, a friend who saw it with me came up with an impression of Spielberg directing the film that went something like, "MORE SCREAMING!!!!!!"
If you edit out all the non-alien stuff, it would be reeeeeeal short...and more fun. :thumbup:
One of the things I didn't like about this version was the idea that the aliens had apparently been to Earth before to plant there ships millions of years ago, and were returning now to conquer Earth. What were they waiitng for? It would have been much easier to take over the planet when we were all australopithecus or something. And wouldn't thier own technology advance in time. It would be like if during our curent war in Iraq, we flew over in our Stealth Bombers and F-16's just to uncover and use Civil War era weapons we had buried there over a hundred yeats ago.
And if they'd been to Earth before-didn;t they know it was full of germs? Wouldn't a scouting mission been helpful?
I'm sorry-this is turning into a rant. Like a lot of people, I thought this movie had too much Tom Cruise-hype. Scence with the aliens were cool but the story needed to be a little tighter.
Quote from: WingedSerpent on June 10, 2008, 07:03:35 PM
And if they'd been to Earth before-didn;t they know it was full of germs? Wouldn't a scouting mission been helpful?
I'm guessing the germs were more benign in the older environment, before they had to mutate so many times to adapt to humans, but then I'm not really educated in that sort of thing
Quote from: Mr. Briggs Inc. on June 10, 2008, 08:05:38 PM
Quote from: WingedSerpent on June 10, 2008, 07:03:35 PM
And if they'd been to Earth before-didn;t they know it was full of germs? Wouldn't a scouting mission been helpful?
I'm guessing the germs were more benign in the older environment, before they had to mutate so many times to adapt to humans, but then I'm not really educated in that sort of thing
They focused on pollen in the movie if memory serves me, I know the ending that Morgan Freedman spoke, but the movie showed pollen ... so one could assume they came down with hay fever, which would have been around million of years ago too.
Spielberg's thoughts during production: Hey! This would be the perfect film for me to vent my worries that I wasn't a good enough father. I'll have to cut a lot of the Martian scenes out to make room for that but what the hell.