PDA

View Full Version : War Of The Worlds [speilberg Version



cresshead
07-03-2005, 02:41 AM
what a ride!
very neat, entertaining film...

best bits?
the sound design..truly stunning
great camera angles
believable characters [including cruise who was "human" not a "hero"]
nice panic scenes too.

one to watch on the big screen..don't wait for the DVD.

hrgiger
07-03-2005, 05:08 AM
Just a few big plot wholes big enough to drive a minivan through (and they do), but overall, I really liked it. Spielburg rarely disappoints. It was good to see some Evil E.T.'s this time around.

Jaffro
07-03-2005, 05:25 AM
stunningly terrible i found!

Some o the shots were amazing tho. really good visuals with a number of cool scenes. however i found it dragged on for far too long with predictible ending for the characters, imo not one to watch for anything but visual effects.

few things to bring up, what was the tripod foghorn sound about?! y kill people if u are goin to eat them? and why was the granmothers house and neighbourhood completely untoutched?! bah too many things dont add up in this film - but then terminator managed to get away with it and thats entertaining :)

hrgiger
07-03-2005, 05:53 AM
few things to bring up, what was the tripod foghorn sound about?! y kill people if u are goin to eat them? and why was the granmothers house and neighbourhood completely untoutched?! bah too many things dont add up in this film - but then terminator managed to get away with it and thats entertaining :)

**by the way, this is a spoiler alert in case I reveal something. If something is spoiled, it's your fault now**


Just my opinions but...

The tripod foghorn sound was probably used with purpose. Mostly likely to cause panic and mayhem which of course disrupts resistive behaviour. Or it could have been to alert other tripods to the existance of a large group of pesky humans. And they are very pesky.

You probably kill people when there are 6 billion people on the planet. Still plenty of people to eat and yet, not so many to cause trouble for your plans of inhabiting the planet. And they are very pesky.

Not every building was destroyed so it could have just been dumb luck that the block of houses that old grandma resided in were spared. I don't know grandma, but she was probably pesky too.

If you want to talk about things not adding up, try these:

**Ok, so if Tom Cruise has the only working vehicle in the city because the mechanic replaced the solanoid on the starter that would imply that all the solanoids in the cars were fried when the aliens did whatever they did to fry them. How come all the solanoids on the shelf weren't fried as well?

**How is it that thousands upon thousands of pesky humans can stall out on the roads and freeways and yet somehow conveniently leave a mini-van sized swath open to Tom Cruise's minivan?

**We all know the aliens in the original story and this story die from earth bacteria. What the **** does that have to do with the shields on their tripods that enable them to block any military attacks against them?

**Why is it out of the few hundred people on the ferry that went into the drink when the alien tipped it over, Tom Cruise and his two kids are the only ones who thought to swim to shore while every one else just bobbed in the water and screamed?

**How is it that Alien ships could be buried under the earth for a million years and none of them were every discovered by any man made drilling operations (mining, water/sewer, excavation, etc....)

**And speaking a million years, why didn't the aliens come here a million years ago? Would have been a lot less resistance, the dinosaurs after all had been dead for 5 million years before that and we wouldn't be around for several many thousands.

**How come aliens who have been around for over a million years and have the technology to transverse space, have to resort to house to house searches for humans? Surely they have some sort of heat/bio sensors to find lifeforms.

**Little did the military know that their missles and weaponary would be so useless against the alien invaders. They should have realized that all they had to do was use an old rusty axe like Tom Cruise to whack the appendages right off the arms of the tripods.

cathuria
07-03-2005, 06:36 AM
I have to come down on the side that this was a truly wretched film. The alien war machines made for some terrific scenes, to be sure, but most of those were rip-offs or direct homages to George Pal's great film of almost a half century ago.
Yes, there are some gross logic holes, but I would have been willing to overlook those (even the hyper-advanced aliens who were running around stark naked and slurping up water from broken pipes), if only Spielberg had actually given me a movie about the "War of the Worlds" as promised.
But the movie I actually was forced to watch was all about this horrid family of dysfunctional dweebs who whined and screamed at each other and treated each other like dirt for two hours while an alien invasion went on in the background.
I was never as fond of Spielberg as most folks seem to be -- but now I think I hate him.

cresshead
07-03-2005, 07:54 AM
the alien ships stored underground were a dramtic device to entertain the audience....you were expecting a meteor dropping to earth [from other film] and making a hole...not a small hole in a road about 24 inches in diameter...made the emergence of the tripod from the gournd setting the viewer off balance as it set about destroying the city...worked for me..loved it!

sound design is great...

yep there were some holes in the script/plot but "i've" yet to make a better film so what do i know!....still learning!

hrgiger
07-03-2005, 10:19 AM
But the movie I actually was forced to watch was all about this horrid family of dysfunctional dweebs who whined and screamed at each other and treated each other like dirt for two hours while an alien invasion went on in the background.


Welcome to humankind.

coremi
07-03-2005, 10:36 AM
i don't think this is a good movie for Spielberg, something he is proud of, great VFX thou, and great sound.

Matt
07-03-2005, 11:56 AM
I liked it myself, but I really went for the CG scenes. I didn't think the actors did too bad a job either (let's not forgot Independance Day! Hmmm, actually, lets!)

The opening sequence when the tripod came out the ground was awesome, and when it let the horn sound out - truly disturbing.

Thought the 'heat ray' effect was pretty devastating too!

Wasn't too convinced with the 'basket of humans' they carried around for a snack though!!! Nor the fact they happened on finding the only working car!

Plane crash / wall of missing people - bit too 9/11 for my liking.

I too did think - why didn't they just take the planet when they buried the tripods? That was a bit dumb for a race of aliens 'with minds immeasurably superior to ours'!

Would have been nice to have built on the original, introduce some new twists, improve on the story, instead, it was pretty much like for like with better special effects.

All in all, I enjoyed it.

badllarma
07-03-2005, 12:02 PM
Watched it this afternoon and I was nearly sick at the ending, other than that, it is good visual entertainment.

Spoiler warning.................




NO WAY should he have lived as a charater I was well past caring about him by then anyway. Please tell me why every US director HAS to have a happy ending :rolleyes:

I watched the making of Layer Cake the other week and the studio did not like how it ended for the US market but UK audience test loved it so the orginal ending stayed in, thank god!

just my 2 pence worth anyway :)

Phaxmohdem
07-03-2005, 12:36 PM
Did anybody else want to reach through the screen and strangle those two **** kids just to get it over with?

Lottmedia
07-03-2005, 12:44 PM
People keep mentioning the good effects scenes but no one has mentioned the HORRIBLE CG when the first tripod comes up. All the cracks in the street and buildings was terrible. Something I would expect from a newbie, not a professional. My wife said "whoa, there's some cg." CG aliens and tripods, yes, but this is the kind of thing that Spielberg can do mych better practical (what, they would't give him the budget?), it looked like tv budget work.

Aside from that the story was just bad, too many plot holes and the ending just jumps kinda jumps up and bam, the end. Would have really helped to have more time for the the germ thing sink in (to the characters). It's like they ran out of film. I know we all knew the ending comming, but that's no reason to shorthand it, there are plenty of people out there wh didn't know the story (my wife)

Overall it was just unfufilling to watch. There was some eyecandy but it didn't sadisfy.

J-Rod

cresshead
07-03-2005, 03:21 PM
related DVD, has anyone seen this yet?
H.G. Wells' The War of the Worlds ...........

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0009PW4D2/qid=1120425148/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-9077795-7920910?v=glance&s=dvd


there's some really different reviews on it.....

also there's a movie called "invasion" apparently coming out on dvd very soon that's based on war of the worlds....does anyone have a link to a trailer or it's full title as i can't find any info on it other than what's mentioned on a review of the pendragon film review.....

cheers

steve g

Jaffro
07-03-2005, 03:51 PM
hrgiger, your list is a classic. great laff! pesky humans! haha love it. grandma's probably nitting jumpers to stop the kind aliens from getting colds.

The horn thing was alright the first time. But it was just overdone i thought. And having seen the tripod and joined it up with the one's in Half life 2, the noise just overdone it for me (surely its the same noise that those flying whale's make in hl2?). Did anyone else notice that?


>Matt] Thought the 'heat ray' effect was pretty devastating too!

Yea i thought there were some fairly disturbing stuff for kids, i noticed this after the father behind me went and took his little girl to the loo, im sure she could'nt have been older than 9!

What i would've liked to've seen is the girl get driven away in the car, something really tragic to actually make you feel for the characters, mr cruise to've broken down and gone nuts run to the tripod things and got taken into the cage. then spent the remainder finding out a bit about what the **** they were actually trying to do?! (what were those vein like things anyway? the film asked the question but didnt answer it.) and for those after a happy ending the son could've gone on some crazy mad mission to save his dad via the army - instead of him surviving a massive fireball and getting to grandma faster than anyone.

Im going to have to see it again, just to make sure i wasnt in a bad mood the first time i watched it :D haha

Kuzey
07-03-2005, 06:39 PM
Sorry...I won't be watching a tom what the **** is he on film :p

Ps. the best part was the water squirt in the face scene...we should have more of that!!

:D

Kuzey

Kuzey
07-03-2005, 06:42 PM
Mmmm...when did h.e.l.l become a dirty word?

But it looks better that way :D :D

Kuzey

Lottmedia
07-03-2005, 10:14 PM
does anyone remember the War of the Worlds TV series? Completely forgot about it untill talking about this movie with someone. I think mid 90s, kinda a pre stargate, x-files sorta thing. Don't remember much about it, I think it was a cover-up the invasion but they're still here sorta plot. But now they can look like us (original) Such a cheep, over used, no FX TV cop-out concept. Anyway, though that last list was missing it.

J-Rod

colkai
07-04-2005, 02:56 AM
also there's a movie called "invasion" apparently coming out on dvd very soon that's based on war of the worlds....does anyone have a link to a trailer or it's full title as i can't find any info on it other than what's mentioned on a review of the pendragon film review.....

cheers

steve g

Head on over to the eve of the war web site (http://forums.eveofthewar.com/). Lots of info there, as for Pendragons picture...chuckle...the 'fx' have to be seen to be believed!
http://robk.proboards13.com/index.cgi?board=pendragon&action=display&thread=1119364060

War Of The Worlds online is also another WOTW forum
http://robk.proboards13.com/index.cgi

Covers all things WOTW-y ;) Including the upcoming CGI version by Jeff Wayne, yup, he of the concept album, which I bought when it first came out :)

majorbox
07-04-2005, 03:08 AM
worlds worst ending ever. at the very least his son should have died.

why in the heck did steven decide to follow the character arc of a deadbeat dad and his mission to get his kids back to his ex wife in time? there's got to be a better character to explore the world that is "the war of the worlds" with.

i like some points about the film, the scene with the mini van, that's how i'd imagin it would be.

But I didn't like the fact that he had a mini van, so no cars work, but this one mini van, and apparently the army uses wind up hummmers and tanks, because they were un affected as well.

i was expecting a lot more from this film.

starbase1
07-04-2005, 05:16 AM
Not seen the film, but did see Speilberg wittering on about it, on a 30 minute advert disguised thinly as a program.
:(

Why on Earth (if you will forgive the expression) call it 'War of the Worlds'??!!! :confused:

Let's see, the aliens are not from Mars, they don't come to Woking, (a town worthy of destruction by Martians, trust me), is there ANYTHING that makes it W.O.W. apart from the occasional 3 legged machine?!?!

The thing is (apparently) mainly concerned with single parent relationships, and has '9/11 resonances'. Yes, exactly like H.G. Wells. :mad:

Why not cut to the chase, and give it a title of it's own?

I say call it, 'Kramer versus Dalek', so the potential audience has some kind of warning what to expect...

Nick

kyuzo
07-04-2005, 06:15 AM
Overall it was good, but there were some huge plot-holes, and the happy ending where everyone survives and has a group hug pretty much ruined it for me. I went straight home and listened to Jeff Wayne's musical version, with the unbeatable Richard Burton narration.

I couldn't help but laugh out loud at a couple of points too (which earned me stern looks from others in the audience...) - when the burning train whizzes past was anyone else remembering the burning cows at the start of Mars Attacks...?

Derek

jeffb
07-04-2005, 07:23 AM
does anyone remember the War of the Worlds TV series? Completely forgot about it untill talking about this movie with someone. I think mid 90s, kinda a pre stargate, x-files sorta thing. Don't remember much about it, I think it was a cover-up the invasion but they're still here sorta plot. ...

Are you referrring to the series "V". Was a pretty low-budget "invasion of the body snathers"-like series. If I remeber correctly.

Seems I heard a movie is in the works for that too.

cholo
07-04-2005, 10:23 AM
I myself thought the flm was quite entertaining. However, I can't get over a couple of things either. First, most animals on this planet have limbs in numbers divisible by 2 for obvious reasons, so it makes no sense to make aliens have 3 limbs. Second, I think itelligent aliens would have foreseen bacteria as a possible hazard to an invasion, ****, even the astronauts who went to the moon were quarantined after they came back. And even if they didn't, I don't think they would have sent every soldier down to earth and not leave some backup in orbit to orchestrate the whole invasion. And even if all of the above were true, there's always the fluke, the one alien that seems immune to the infection. This happens in outbreaks among humans too and this is why we have survived every badass illness out there for thousands of years. And how come human soldiers are always talking, smoking, whining, you name it while aliens are more like lab rats that don't really interact much with eachother when they appear on screen. They don't seem to have much cultural behaviour in them and they don't really seem curious about the species they are trying to eradicate. I know humans would behave quite differently if we invaded another planet. There would be hostages, some soldiers would torture aliens. Some would feel sympathetic for them... I don't know. I doesn't feel like they put much thought into the film before rolling it.

colkai
07-04-2005, 11:02 AM
I myself thought the flm was quite entertaining. However, I can't get over a couple of things either. First, most animals on this planet have limbs in numbers divisible by 2 for obvious reasons, so it makes no sense to make aliens have 3 limbs.
Err, but the aliens, are...err...ummm...Alien - so why should they have the same structure as us.
gotta love humans - if life ain't a biped from the same sort of planet as ours, it isn't alien. I reckon there could still be gas creatures living deep within Jupiters atmosphere, just because we can't go there doesn't mean any life can't exist. Not all aliens are humans with bumpy heads. ;)

Second, I think itelligent aliens would have foreseen bacteria as a possible hazard to an invasion
Depends how long since they encountered disease. Look at us with out anti-bactieral this and sterilised that.. Trying so hard to eradicate microbes, so say we succeed, 200 years down the line, the first person with a slight cold would create an epidemic, so not too far of a stretch for the aliens to not even consider bacteria as a possible threat.

Paul_Boland
07-04-2005, 12:31 PM
I haven't seen the movie yet but I'm a bit worried...
Why?
I have yet to see one film with Tom Cruise in it that is good. Every movie he has been in has been terrible, he is just not a good actor at all. Will WotW's change that...?

tischbein3
07-04-2005, 01:19 PM
They don't seem to have much cultural behaviour in them and they don't really seem curious about the species they are trying to eradicate.

Because those aliens do have good manners....

they don't play with food.



(sorry but I couldn't resist)

kjl
07-04-2005, 01:39 PM
blah blah spoiler warning blah blah

I thought the movie up until the basement scene was pretty amazing. Unrelentingly intense, pretty amazing images (and I don't mean the CG per se, but the general vision of what it would be like if millions of people from the cities fled the cities from alien invaders).

I thought the effects were incredible. Looks like long hours of painful matchmove and roto.... Aside from a few bad shots, I thought the effects were pretty much great... giant plastic human-eating sphincter notwithstanding.

The basement scene itself was pretty intense, but that's pretty much where the movie lost me - the aliens are apparently stupid and can't hear anything, and the scene went on way, way too long, and from that point on everything was pretty dumb.

Plot holes all over the thing, and I really hate the old sci-fi idea that these aliens came from outer space to drink our blood.

The whole idea of the book (as you can see in the first movie) is that the aliens were completely invulnerable to anything the humans could do - I thought it was a cop-out that Cruise blew a tripod up with the grenade, and the scene at the end when the army gets to kill a tripod that is about to fall over and die anyways was just really dumb*. In the first movie, they made the point better that the humans were unable to hurt the aliens by having the hero be more involved in the scientists and military, so you saw the futility of both the attempts of the scientists to find a weakness and even the atomic bomb.
* - As a side note, I don't really mind in movies when people get thrown back by shotgun blasts despite the physical inaccuracies, but for some reason it really bothers me when I see giant hulking war machines weighing thousands of tons have huge knockback reactions to a little RPG. It really screws up the feeling of weight and scale.

The germs: I already knew the ending, as the 50's movie was a favorite of mine when I was a little kid, and despite that, it was still really abrupt. I wish they had done something to make it tie into the movie a little better. Again with comparisons to the original movie (sorry ;)), but in the original movie the hero and the humans pretty much are resigned to their ineffectiveness and to their upcoming death of humanity and begin to pray in the church when the first tripod (ship) goes down, which sort of kind of ties into the voiceover at the end (something about the "tiniest creatures which god in his wisdom put on our Earth"), and if you're a religious sort, you might choose to believe that god personally killed the aliens indirectly that way. All of which I think worked better than the new movie.

The brother surviving is super lame, especially after Spielberg has the "courage" to have the hero kill an innocent man to save his family.

starbase1
07-04-2005, 02:18 PM
Hi Colkai,
Surprisingly there are some quite well developed ideas on Xenobiology. The rough idea is that if things have evolved many times independently here, they are very likely to be found universally. Things that only evolve once are VERy unlikely to evolve again elsewhere.

Therefore left right symetry is likely to be very common,also such things as eyes, sexual reproduction, segmented body structures etc.

Such human features as breasts, and most particularly a breathing system that cross an eating system evolved once and are very very unlikely to be found on alien life. Star Trek script writers should also note that cornish pasties stick to the forehead have NEVER evolved.

Nick

Kuzey
07-04-2005, 05:57 PM
does anyone remember the War of the Worlds TV series? Completely forgot about it untill talking about this movie with someone. I think mid 90s, kinda a pre stargate, x-files sorta thing. Don't remember much about it, I think it was a cover-up the invasion but they're still here sorta plot. But now they can look like us (original) Such a cheep, over used, no FX TV cop-out concept. Anyway, though that last list was missing it.

J-Rod

Was it Dark Skies :

http://dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=4383

http://www.action-tv.org.uk/guides/darkskies.htm

Kuzey

kjl
07-05-2005, 01:03 AM
The rough idea is that if things have evolved many times independently here, they are very likely to be found universally.
<snip>
Therefore left right symetry is likely to be very common,also such things as eyes, sexual reproduction, segmented body structures etc.


Has left-right symmetry evolved many times independently here, or just once, a long, long time ago, with an organism at the top of the evolutionary tree of all the animals that currently have left-right symmetry? i.e. it's not that humans, mice, lizards, and turtles all independently evolved left-right symmetry - it's more that some random flatworm or other very basic organism developed it a bajillion years ago and eventually evolved into us, mice, lizards, turtles, etc.. Ditto for eyes, sexual reproduction, segmented body structures. You could possibly make the case that if the very first successful organism had three way symmetry that pretty much all of its evolutionary descendents would end up with three way symmetry (though I would agree that three-way symmetry would be extremely unlikely to develop first).

I think you could definitely say that independent, parallel evolution happened with, say, the opposable thumb, which has independently evolved a number of times, so they say... (us, koalas, pandas... sort of, opposums, some primate feet)

colkai
07-05-2005, 02:38 AM
Star Trek script writers should also note that cornish pasties stick to the forehead have NEVER evolved.
Nick
Hehe, yeah, but handy to have if the catering truck doesn't turn up :p

The thing about the Jupiter idea actually came from a book I read as a kid, which took a much wider stance on alien life. After Star Trek everyone seems to think aliens need to at least look like us or be of a similar design. I figure, when you look at some of the wierd and wonderful creations mother nature has come up with, then the possiblities "out there" are endless.
There may even be lifeforms which are not carbon based like us. I guess, when you look back over human history, we are great at saying what cannot exist / is impossible, until the impossible happens.
30mph ? surely not, the human body could never withstand it. ;)
Travel to the moon - never happen.
Life on other planets? ...watch this space :p
Then again, I am, and always will be, a bit of a dreamer. :D

hrgiger
07-05-2005, 03:54 AM
As far as the symmetry thing, are we talking biological or mechanical engineering? Because I thought the aliens themselves were symmetrical in structure, it was just their tripods that were asymmetrical?

And as far as having three legs vs. two or four well you could really make the case that a third leg adds stability to a two legged original design.

art
07-05-2005, 08:00 AM
I found this book an interesting read:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465073158/qid=1120571314/sr=1-11/ref=sr_1_11/102-0896555-4308900?v=glance&s=books

It discusses what aliens might actually be like, many times giving examples of truly alien forms of life on our Earth. It has more scientific approach so it does not spend much time on "grays" etc., but not too scientific so it is very easy and fun to read. It discusses the plausibility of three legged (eyed, etc) creatures and and yes, it has chapter on alien sex too.

Sande
07-05-2005, 12:57 PM
I liked the basic idea of the movie - to just focus on one family during the disaster. I even liked some of the effects. But to me the movie as a whole was bit of a disappointment...

The movie sometimes didn't seem to know where to go - to be action or to be drama. Now it was a weak compromise of both. It all could have even worked with a good casting and a better script, which leads to:

There is no sense putting Tom Cruise in that kind of role. He wasn't too bad, but the part would have needed a way better and convincing actor than Cruise... Or the script should have been written to better suit actor like Cruise.

This movie could have been so much better...

cholo
07-05-2005, 02:32 PM
...
There may even be lifeforms which are not carbon based like us. I guess, when you look back over human history, we are great at saying what cannot exist / is impossible, until the impossible happens...

Watch The Andromeda Strain?

hrgiger
07-05-2005, 02:36 PM
There is no sense putting Tom Cruise in that kind of role. He wasn't too bad, but the part would have needed a way better and convincing actor than Cruise... Or the script should have been written to better suit actor like Cruise.



It's a debatable point. But it's a moot one too since it had little to do with proper casting and more to do with who is Steven Spielburg's good buddy. If it hadn't been Cruise, it would have likely been Tom Hanks and I certainly couldn't see him in that role.

Gui Lo
07-05-2005, 09:14 PM
I think I would have preferred Hanks.

It is unfortunate that the movie focussed on Cruises ralationships with the family rather than the alien invasion. I was hoping for a movie that showed what happens to the ordinary people rather than the main players. I didn't really get a sense of this.

I guess I wanted a few scenes of the president/prime minister going nuts and army generals trying to deploy troops and then seeing the Cruise family dilema mixed up in this.

IMHO Spielburg could have set the drama among any cataclysmic event, volcanoe erruption, ship sinking, Bosnia or iraq.

Gui Lo

ACLOBO
07-05-2005, 10:16 PM
One scene that really bothered me was the whole Alien tentacle probe scene. IT was way too long and was way to reminiscent of the Velociraptor scene in Jurasic Park where teh kids are hiding from the raptors in the kitchen. WHile I don't mind paying homage to past movies, that scene was too similar in execution to the "raptor" scene.

I would also have liked to have known what the purpose of the weeds was.... But since it was all alien, I guess it would be all guesswork until after scientists could study it.

-Adrian

tischbein3
07-05-2005, 10:35 PM
I would also have liked to have known what the purpose of the weeds was.... But since it was all alien, I guess it would be all guesswork until after scientists could study it.

-Adrian

In the original book it was the vegetation wich gave mars its red appeareance and if it was brought to earth either intentional or by accident this was never really cleared out.

Putting it into present and away from UK are imo the biggest faults spielbergo could have made and destroyed much more than it helped.

j_j
07-05-2005, 10:46 PM
Add this to your list hr
(Spoiler Coming) After they went to the new husbands house and hid in the basement overnight, when they came out it was ground zero of an airplane crash and everything within 10 square miles is destoyed except for there minivan?

T-Light
07-05-2005, 11:10 PM
After the first few minutes of atypical 'Top Gun' Cruise style typecasting
"Your'e the best I've got, nobody else can move 40 crates in an hour" and a piece of driving through rush hour traffic that's best left to 'Worlds wildest Police Videos", Cruise actually settled into the role of a pretty reasonable human being.

The film had a few holes and it was a little sentimental in places, but I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed it. Girlfriend wants to go with my Mom to see it again this week. as I'll be driving, I'll be joining them.

Good Movie. I agree with Cresshead, If you haven't seen it, go now, you need to see and HEAR this on the big screen, don't wait for the DVD.

cresshead
07-06-2005, 02:49 AM
[read in a cynical tone of voice] :D

by the looks of the ticket sales from the film & to make a hi profile
movie which gets repeat visitors to the cinema..you need to follow these ground rules in creating your "blockbuster":

1.create lots of plot holes [as it annoys loads of people and gets them talking about the movie [free promotion!]
2.ut in a happy ending all neatly tied up.
3.base it in the USA
4.give the main role to someone you hate and think is a poor actor
5.place it in present day
6.DO not explain everything to the viewer
7.do not faithfully follow the book if it comes from a book idea.
8.end it really quick..seeing as you can't use the ending in the trailer anyway!
9.pay homage to previous films you directed
10.make it about a family in the middle of the disaster [typical disaster movie]
11.do not show a point of view of the governement...ever!....we've got enough to hate with the aliens!
12.spend a good deal oif the budget on the sound design...it's worth it!..even at the expense of the cgi dept.
13.do not make the film focussed for 3d/cgi artists to watch!...go for your everyday "bingo head" who works in a factory/office ad hates their job and just "wishes" that we were invaded and their boss was one of the first to "get it".......................

have fun! ;)

ACLOBO
07-06-2005, 03:30 AM
the more I think about it the more I dislike the movie. It was not worth full price in my opinion and would make an OK rental. The only reason I liked it at all was due to my affection for the original and the short lived series - which was based more on the original movie - with some free license taken - of course.

-Adrian

Brian Arndt
07-07-2005, 09:02 AM
few things that really bugged me:

1. all the soldiers burned up in a big fireball on the hill including his son, who, somehow survived at the end and made it safely to his mom and didnt have the hardships his father did. And they never told how he survived.

2. when they were all trapped in that cage on the ship and cruise blew it up with grenades they all fell a few storys to the ground yet NO ONE was hurt from hitting the ground hard in a metal cage. Also, i thought their was other alien ships nearby . .wouldnt they have seen the ship blow up and come to its aid and killed all the humans?

3. loooong loooong drama/suspense middle part which was ok but then the ending was like 10 minutes long and very rushed.

4. they built up the whole thing of her parents hating cruise and so forth the the end they see him . . my guess is the next scene they blame him for everything and for scaring their granddaughter mentally and kick him out of their nicely clean and not demolished (although the entire city around them is) home.

ok thats just some of em :) Otherwise it was a good watch.

Earl
07-07-2005, 10:08 AM
I thought the movie was great. At no point was I bored or wanting to know what time it was, and since I watch a movie to be entertained, it did the job well. There were naturally things in the movie that I would have done differently if I had been in charge (not showing the son at the end being the biggest) but you can't please everyone and so I'm cool with those choices (after all, it's not my movie and it wasn't made to please me specifically).

Something that didn't work for me: at the beginning when all electronics were unusable, there was a fully functional camcorder recording the emergence of the ship. Eh, that thing shouldn't have been working.

Big Jay
07-07-2005, 10:43 PM
great movie. Speilberg and tom means it was a popcorn movie to me. I thought it was entertaining. Worth seeing on the big screen and getting as a DVD to see how they did it since they had such a short deadline on it.

_______SPOILERS________________

The thing that really stood out to me was the train on fire. The fire looked like stock fire footage decals stuck to the train. It didn't flow/leave a flaming trail or generate much smoke for all the fire on the train. I guess time ran out for adding more smoke and particle effects to blend it all together more.

The biggest plot hole is the son. They blast the hill he was on and then collect people and immediately start planting. The combination means he should of died in one of the two ways. Storywise they should of had a hummer there or him dressed in military gear or somthing to hint that he escaped with the remains of the military.

Also what is with Spielberg and his naked ETs. With a million years of evolution you'd think they would know to wear some clothing and a sidearm incase any pesky humans hid down there. Be funny if they brought a camera with them to take souvinere shots.

If you go to watch it you have to see it on the big screen. The FX are worth seeing it there.

james_dmi
07-08-2005, 06:53 AM
What I liked about the film:

• Director kept the point of view locked into the perspective of a single character. This was also done in the book and keeps the tension and drama directed towards the personal fear that the invasion would create. This was a huge failing in the old film which was more of a disaster / emergency response film with absolutely no connection to the fears of the people.
• The invading machines had legs like the book and actually looked and sounded scary, unlike the old film
• There was no love interest / screaming hysterical woman to get the cave man protective instincts into play, again just like the book.
• The tense atmosphere generated throughout the film.
• Not another stupid action hero film.
• The sound!


What I didn’t like about the film:

• Set in modem day America rather then Victorian England. I know that this has to be done for a film to get funding (rather then the sort of budget that the other production set true to the book got)
• The removal of the religious angle from the story although again this would probably insult to many powerful lobbies in America and would be another funding issue
• The removal of one of the last scenes from the book where the main character decides to end it all and marches towards the Fighting Machines (only to discover they are dead) Without this powerful bit of drama the films ending seams flat. At least they kept it true and didn’t have some ridicules victory of man overcoming adversity
• The look of the aliens. I know that they probably did not come from mars but there is no reason why they couldn’t have looked like the Martians from the book. They sounded a lot more scary then the ones I saw in the film
• To many sub plots, scenes and visuals taken from the old film which were terrible i.e. suckers on the end of the fingers of the alien and the arm dropping out of the machine at the end just crap!
• Some powerful images left out to get its low rating (again studio politics)
• The addition of his kids. Again to get the cave man instincts going (why can Hollywood understand we don’t need this to feel connected to a character) The Pianist which is a fantastic film and in many ways draws parallels to this story fully connects you emotionally to the main character without the need to pull cheep tricks with paternal instincts.


Other criticisms about this film I don’t understand:

• People asking why the fighting machines made noises. They did in the book and this is a film based on the book
• People complaining that not everything was explained. I like films that leave a bit up to the imagination. And explaining everything would have killed the tension of the film.
• The names on walls being a reference to 9/11 which its not. You can see this same sort of thing in old second world war footage or from the tsunami. It’s the only way that people can try and find loved ones when all other forms of communications are down. Also the kids thinking that the attack could be the work of terrorists this is surly a natural response of a child growing up in a country where the only attack had been from terrorists. Its just realistic.
• People saying that the basket scene portrayed Tom Cruise as a hero. I just can’t see that: He throws a grenade from an army equipment belt that he comes across out of frustration at his impotency. He gets captured (not on purpose) and deposited in the basket. Up till this point he had no reason to suspect that his daughter was alive so this is not a rescue attempt. He then fails to do anything when another man is grabbed by the tentacle. Then when the tentacle comes down again he flattens himself against the basket trying not to get picked. He then holds on to the side trying not to get pulled in and only when he realises that he has no chance, and sees the grenades still lying there, does he form his plan. This is perhaps brave but not unrealistic for the character seeing as what he has been through and his immediate prospects for survival.


SFX:
I thought the CGI work was great but I was not so impressed with the compositing work.

Overall:

As a fan of the book, overall I liked it and I think that Steven Spielberg did the best he could given the constraints of the films length and the political constraints the studio will have put on him. The film captures the flavour of the book far better then the original (in my opinion) terrible movie and series did.

Chris S. (Fez)
07-08-2005, 07:42 AM
"People saying that the basket scene portrayed Tom Cruise as a hero. I just can’t see that: He throws a grenade from an army equipment belt that he comes across out of frustration at his impotency. He gets captured (not on purpose) and deposited in the basket. Up till this point he had no reason to suspect that his daughter was alive so this is not a rescue attempt. He then fails to do anything when another man is grabbed by the tentacle. Then when the tentacle comes down again he flattens himself against the basket trying not to get picked. He then holds on to the side trying not to get pulled in and only when he realises that he has no chance, and sees the grenades still lying there, does he form his plan. This is perhaps brave but not unrealistic for the character seeing as what he has been through and his immediate prospects for survival."

I thought it was pretty clear that he threw the grenade so that the tripod would take him too, so he could be with his daughter.

Kuzey
07-08-2005, 07:34 PM
I thought it was pretty clear that he threw the grenade so that the tripod would take him too, so he could be with his daughter.

Why would they want to capture people and not just destroy everything in sight...that doesn't make sense to me.

Kuzey

Mylenium
07-09-2005, 02:52 AM
I just watched it yesterday and thought it was so-so. Surely it was better than your average flick, but by no means was it as great as hyped by the mass media. Some effects were extremely cheesy (the outside of the hide-out was discernible as being a studio set even by people with bad sight - the lighting was just plain crap) and the acting was poor for the most part. The aliens themselves looked ridiculous and absolutely not threatening if it weren't for their machinery.

Mylenium

coremi
07-09-2005, 04:41 AM
"Why would they want to capture people and not just destroy everything in sight...that doesn't make sense to me."


They were using humans to creat that red blood vines and i think also to feed from our blood, just a speculation. Anyway it was not to remember as a Spielberg masterpiece, they kept the Holywood desire alive, let's make a movie simple but with great special effects so average guy will like it and don't have a lot to think to undestand. Like other 98% of hollywood movies. Also i don't like showing all the time in all movies the American Flag all over again, i though Spielberg was smarter but they got him too.

james_dmi
07-10-2005, 05:28 AM
coremi "Why would they want to capture people and not just destroy everything in sight...that doesn't make sense to me."

In the book the Martians live of the blood of other animals (i.e. humans) and its made pretty clear that the reason they have come to earth is to graze on the people not destroy that outright.

I guess watching this film without having read the book will leave a lot of holes in the story. Perhaps it should have been split into two parts like the book to allow time for these things. If you haven’t yet read the book go to http://www.bartleby.com/1002/ and loose yourself, it’s a fantastic read!

Another reason I didn’t see the tom cruise character as a hero: Heroes don’t kill a man who has his back turned to increase the chances of their own survival! At lest not the traditional Hollywood heroes. I guess I went to this movie expecting all the macho hero crap and was pleasantly surprised that the only possible heroics was a man saving daughter and even then more by accident then design.

Kuzey
07-10-2005, 05:12 PM
coremi "Why would they want to capture people and not just destroy everything in sight...that doesn't make sense to me."

In the book the Martians live of the blood of other animals (i.e. humans) and its made pretty clear that the reason they have come to earth is to graze on the people not destroy that outright.


That makes sense, but considering the difference in time when the book was written and the film made, you'd think these aliens would have improved technology. Well..maybe something like producing some kind of gas that would knock out humans but not kill them, so then they could pick them up and farm them, so they have a constant supply of blood. Or maybe they could make their own synthetic human blood etc. etc.

But I sure will get that book!!

Kuzey

Chris S. (Fez)
07-11-2005, 02:03 AM
Why would they want to capture people and not just destroy everything in sight...that doesn't make sense to me.

Kuzey

In the scene where Tim Robbins is freaking out, he says something like "they are using us like fertilizer, sprinkling our blood all over the red vines!"

-NG-
07-11-2005, 08:17 AM
I Loved it, although the basement scene just take to long.

I geuss the foghorn(wich whas awesome) whas the sign for lunchbreak for the alliens.

ooooooo(foghorn)oooooo....lunchtime over guys! back to work. :p

Safe Harbor
07-11-2005, 12:20 PM
I hated it. I left the movie feeling cheated out of my hard-earned $9. With all the hype and how cool the trailers looked, I thought I'd at least be entertained, even by a remake of a series from a movie of a book... Instead, I was bored with the plot (or lack thereof), dimayed at the huge mac-truck-sized holes in the storyline, and the ending just left me totally disgusted.

Overall I was so disappointed. I know Hollywood makes some major doozies, but this one takes the cake. :sleeping:

Now - Batman Begins? THAT was a GOOD movie.

Jim_C
07-11-2005, 07:29 PM
Just saw it.. thought it sucked.