War of the Worlds

John Uskglass said:
HH, you have any reason for thinking War of the Worlds will be a 'turd' other then your propensity towards disliking things?
Click to expand...

Maybe it could be what is said about the movie, especially in regards as to how it is being set. Orson Welles used H.G. Wells work in an artistic way that more than gave it credit - a feat hard to top. However, in how the movie is being promoted, it looks simply like Yet Another Alien Invasion Flick, set in contemporary times. We've seen that already - it was called ID4. Maybe if there was some art direction to it, as in recreating what the book depicted in that time period it was set in, then I could find artistic merit for calling this movie a decent remake. Other than that, it could be tenuously called "derivative work".

I've read reviews in Newsweek and Time, they where positive.
Click to expand...

I've read positive reviews for MI2. Good reviews mean jack shit around Hollywood's steaming piles.

I'm sure it will have fantastic effects as the cameraman goes up Tom's left nostril, but as actual "War of the Worlds" content goes, that still has yet to be proven in some form other than aliens come, invade Earth, and die from a common microbe. I'll watch it expecting YAAIF; if they manage to do anything other than that, then bonus.

OT: Speaking of potential to suck...
 
Maybe it could be what is said about the movie, especially in regards as to how it is being set. Orson Welles used H.G. Wells work in an artistic way that more than gave it credit - a feat hard to top. However, in how the movie is being promoted, it looks simply like Yet Another Alien Invasion Flick, set in contemporary times. We've seen that already - it was called ID4. Maybe if there was some art direction to it, as in recreating what the book depicted in that time period it was set in, then I could find artistic merit for calling this movie a decent remake. Other than that, it could be tenuously called "derivative work".
Click to expand...
From everything I have read (quite a bit, I am excited) it purposefully tries very hard to not be ID4: the film is not about powerful people or about monuments being destroyed. And, unlike ID4, this appears to have several diffirent scenes from the novel that I personally enjoyed including the bizzare effect on modern technology the Martians have, the special weed they use, not to meniton the obvious; Tripods.

True, this is 'Another Alein Invasion Flick', but it's quite close to War except in terms of setting (and the 1953 version turned the setting to the modern day as well), and unlike ID4 has a *gasp* talented director with an okay cast.
 
I would have to say that I missed the parts with the red weed and other elements that make me think of the setting, though I do notice a hint of the crater scene, but that is mainly because the trailers seem to just keep alternating between CGI, destruction, and camera-kissing scenes of Tom Cruise dishing out useless dialog.

As for the 1953 remake of Orson Welles' depiction...it was a mixed bag.
 
I'm pretty excited, I haven't seen the original but maybe its better that way. I won't be comparing this new remake to the original version.
 
I would have to say that I missed the parts with the red weed and other elements that make me think of the setting, though I do notice a hint of the crater scene, but that is mainly because the trailers seem to just keep alternating between CGI, destruction, and camera-kissing scenes of Tom Cruise dishing out useless dialog.
Click to expand...
That's what trailers are all about: beautiful people and destruction of things. Does not mean the movie will be similarly one dimensional, methinks.

As for the 1953 remake of Orson Welles' depiction...it was a mixed bag.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was, certainly.
 
John Uskglass said:
That's what trailers are all about: beautiful people and destruction of things. Does not mean the movie will be similarly one dimensional, methinks.
Click to expand...

Uh...I've seen trailers that actually have a purpose, rather than follow the same kind of formula as the MI trailers and just about every goddamn movie with Tom Cruise in a revised role. Cheap summer action flicks are one thing, a good presentation is a completely different beast entirely. I might be more forgiving if it weren't for the fact that this style of trailering is quickly indicative of Tom Cruise in a shitty action role.

At least he isn't wholly one-trick pony like Keanu.
 
2 reasons I think Spielberg sux and they both have to do with War of the Worlds.

1. The 'Martians', are not Martians.

2. They are not from Outer Space, but Inner Space!

Ole Steve in an interview has said that the bad guys are not Martians and they come from under ground! Yeah thats right under the fuckin ground!

All Steve did was rape the book by Welles for all the choice action bits then toss the husk of a real story away. Bastard. :evil:

Hell the bastard is not even giving H. G. Welles any credit, notice it says "Steven Spielberg's War of the Worlds". As Harlan Ellison so eloquently pointed out, Steve is stealing the parts he wants and not even giving a nod towards the original Writer.

That is why Spielberg sux donkey balls.



Cheers Thorgrimm
 
I have seen more of the preview material, noticed a bit of the red weed, good touch, but a lovely screwing of the pooch with the origin on the aliens and how the aliens start the invasion (not with a meteor shower, but an electric storm). They have been underground all this time, without anyone noticing, and with giant machines built to...you know, it's far simpler to call the screenwrighters and directors all morons.

How about they instead be from subterranean Mars, which would certainly be a hell of a lot more plausible and less skullfucking of the setting?

Oh, that's right. The "Mars" and "meteor" fads died out of Hollywood a few years back, plus "weather fucking up the world" and "subterranean" are probably still "in". Yeah, I have to agree that now Spielberg has bought into Cruise's ego-pandering trash and bought into Hollywood Whore status. Just with a big budget.
 
Wait, the aliens somehow got to earth and dug inside it for many years without getting infected?!

I think this movie will be somewhat okay if you can mentally disassociate it from HG Welles' work and watch it as if it were just another brainless summer blockbuster, which it is...
 
I have seen more of the preview material, noticed a bit of the red weed, good touch, but a lovely screwing of the pooch with the origin on the aliens and how the aliens start the invasion (not with a meteor shower, but an electric storm). They have been underground all this time, without anyone noticing, and with giant machines built to...you know, it's far simpler to call the screenwrighters and directors all morons.

How about they instead be from subterranean Mars, which would certainly be a hell of a lot more plausible and less skullfucking of the setting?

Oh, that's right. The "Mars" and "meteor" fads died out of Hollywood a few years back, plus "weather fucking up the world" and "subterranean" are probably still "in". Yeah, I have to agree that now Spielberg has bought into Cruise's ego-pandering trash and bought into Hollywood Whore status. Just with a big budget.
Click to expand...
I don't know, the Aliens-Where-Always-Here-OMFG actually seems to keep with the modern Aliens-As-Terrorists theme I think they are trying to set up. A sleeper alien cell.

I lub the red weed though.
 
It takes a lot to scare me, to be honest. Land of the Dead was a good movie, but did'nt scare me at all. Same goes for half a dozen other movies.

Personally, I was scared by this movie. In the beggining, when the Tripods seem invincible and destroy almost all hopes for mankind (notice the Cross rolling off the first tripod when it comes up? Pretty cool shot, Lovecraftian almost), with the Aliens simply going about the buisness of xenocide.

It's really well done. The tripods are awe-inspiring, and the death rays manage to scare me and at the same time remind me of 9/11 (a big theme).

I loved that part of the movie, actually. Most of the movie is about seemingly senseless genocide of people by almost Godlike intellegences bent on doing...something...to earth. I really think there's an amazing movie in that part.

It falters. Later on, it does fall somewhat into the Spielbergian ending (SPOILER: Personally I thought it would have been a lot better if the son had actually died an honorable death). And overall I think the movie's point is just WRONG: Occupations can succed, even if I appreciate once again updating the social commentary to the modern age. If the French had deathrays, massive tripods that suck blood and shoot it into the air, and was bent on destroying every native living thing in the area, The Battle For Algeria would be Jesus, The French Killed Everything! Fuck!

And Rosh, the Tripods are in the ground, but the Alien Pilots actually come down the day the Invasion begins.
 
Well, Spielberg again proved that he sold his soul to the Devil to make asskicking movies -)

It's really a great movie, and IMHO the best "War of the Worlds" movie to be created
Its really scary(or should I say "depressing"?) and the first part(not the crappy ending) is the best catastrophe-movie ever

The fact, that Spielberg not only focuses on human genocide by aliens, but on the conflict between humans again proves that he's a brilliant movie maker(the Ogilvi part, especially his death, is *insert the word that proves Spielberg is a movie-God*)

And yes if that young sucker died , it would be much better -\\

So 9\10
 
And Rosh, the Tripods are in the ground, but the Alien Pilots actually come down the day the Invasion begins.
Click to expand...

This only makes the movie's pretext slightly less retarded, since the Aliens made a presence for the sole purpose of harvesting whatever may have evolved on the planet.

Besideswhich, why wouldn't they have made any effort, despite that presence, to try and detect harmful earth-born contagions?

All of which has nothing to do with the pretext of the book, which is all about forced Emigration.
 
Roshambo said:
DirtyDreamDesigner said:
Wait, the aliens somehow got to earth and dug inside it for many years without getting infected?!
Click to expand...

DING! DING! DING! DING!

We have a winner!
Click to expand...

Those who dug inside the earth long ago to prepare for the massacre were robots, not aliens, no? Still, them aliens were pretty fucking stupid not to take bacteria into account.

Also, I doubt that ALL of the aliens took part in the invasion. If I was an Alien who had, say, lost my gay lover fighting in the invasion, I would go "Ok, if we're not getting earth, no one is" and blow it up from afar.
 
I remember thinking of how stupid it was that the aliens died from bacteria. What a shitty way to go.

Anyway, just saw the movie, actually really enjoyed it. I'm not big into analysis, I just don't have it in me. So I generally tend to judge movies on number of explosions and people killed, and on this scale the War of the Worlds goes very well. Entertaining shit.

Not the greatest review I know, but it's a review for the common man (ie. me).
 
Murdoch said:
MI was okay
Click to expand...
No it wasn't. An abomination is what it was.

As for this movie, I liked the tripods, and there were quite a few cool scenes, so overall it was entertaining but not great.

The idea that the tripods had been buried for billions of years... what were the aliens waiting for?
 
Claw said:
The idea that the tripods had been buried for billions of years... what were the aliens waiting for?
Click to expand...


They were waiting for resistant, fatal bacteria to develop so they could die of disease once they got to Earth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top