Page 1 of 3

War of the Worlds (Spielberg/Cruise version) review

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:39 am
by Loredoctor
Watched it two days ago; want to see it at least two more times. What can I say? I LOVED it. Visually, it was spectacular: the effects were flawless. The tripods were truly terrifying. The aliens (I actually now think that they are Martians - there is a hint in the movie) have a great design and seem alien. The movie is very tense and scary at points:
Spoiler
The way the Martians manufacture the Red Weed - my god, how disturbing. As well, the attack of the tripods is terrifying - turning people into ash
Cruise played a great loser - so no criticisms of his acting ability.

The film, much to my surprise was quite accurate to the novel.
Spoiler
However, why was Robbins cast as Ogilvy? Due to the character it should have been the artilleryman or Parson Nathaniel - probably the parson.
I liked the fact that the movie captured the spirit, if not the whole theme, of the novel.

Direction-wise, Spielberg avoids making the movie a spectacle or with too many cliches. Nice nods to 9/11, which adds power to the movie
Spoiler
Note the hill sequence: Lucas and many other directors would have shot 'over the hill'.
Overall, 5 stars!

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:09 am
by Lord Mhoram
LM,

My father and I want to see this. Good review.

However:
Cruise played a great loser - so no criticisms of his acting ability.
:wink: Is this some kind of jab at Mr. Cruise? LOL

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:58 am
by Loredoctor
That was unintentional lol.

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:53 am
by danlo
In one preview there's a ship under attack that reminds me of Thunderchild--I couldn't bear it if T-child was left out. In the last clip I saw there was a bubbling red-hell coming straight up to Cruise's door--that completely blew me away! 8O

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 6:49 am
by Loredoctor
There is no Thunderchild :( That is my main criticism of the movie, though the Ferry sequence is nothing short of spectacular.

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 12:24 am
by Brinn
Very good movie! Not as good as Batman Begins IMHO but a great movie nonetheless. Very tense. Not one for the whole family.

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 3:30 am
by safetyjedi
Must go see it this weekend, I'll let you know what i think.

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 6:45 pm
by CovenantJr
danlo wrote:In one preview there's a ship under attack that reminds me of Thunderchild--I couldn't bear it if T-child was left out.
The Thunderchild song is my favourite from the musical :P

Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 2:04 am
by pat5150
It was better than I expected. Granted, I did not have very high expectations pertaining to this movie, but it still was enjoyable. As most have pointed out, some aspects are good and others aren't. The ending is a little too easy, to say the least.

But all in all, it is an entertaining movie. Nothing you'll rush to buy the dvd for, nothing you'll be talking about in a decade, nothing that will leave a mark in the cinema history, just a good, entertaining 2 hours. . .

No more, no less!;-)

Patrick
www.fantasyhotlist.blogspot.com

Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 3:18 am
by Worm of Despite
Brinn wrote:Very good movie! Not as good as Batman Begins IMHO but a great movie nonetheless. Very tense. Not one for the whole family.
True. War of the Worlds was a great piece of entertainment. My only gripe is that the ending didn't feel right to me. Maybe that's how it is in the book, but, like someone once said: shouldn't have to read the book.

I guess the focus wasn't defeating the aliens, though; rather, just one dude's survival and motifs of becoming a family protector when he was the opposite at the beginning. On the whole, a great flick, and I'll probably get it for DVD. Still, I think Batman Begins gets the crown for summer moviegoing, currently.

Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:00 pm
by theDespiser
Brinn wrote:Very good movie! Not as good as Batman Begins IMHO

yeah, i just saw that and it was AWESOME....i liked it better than the first one(tim burton) but thats still a good movie...definately gonna go see it again

Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 9:00 am
by Loredoctor
Lord Foul wrote:True. War of the Worlds was a great piece of entertainment. My only gripe is that the ending didn't feel right to me. Maybe that's how it is in the book, but, like someone once said: shouldn't have to read the book.

I guess the focus wasn't defeating the aliens, though; rather, just one dude's survival and motifs of becoming a family protector when he was the opposite at the beginning.
That's how it ends in the novel. And to be honest, it's a perfect ending; given the focus of the movie, to have the military work out the weakness of the aliens would be foolish, or for Cruise to save the day. Instead of a massive explosion we get a subtle and suitable ending - bacteria wiping them out.

Have to add, I saw the movie a second time last night. Loved it.

Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:15 pm
by Loredoctor

Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:10 pm
by safetyjedi
I thought it was a great film. Dakota Fanning was fabulous! What a talented little lady. I really liked how they kept true to the novel with some noted exceptions. Just a great piece of entertainment.

On a side note, after the movie we went to Starbuck's and the barista was going on about how much he hated the film. I asked him why and he said he didn't like the story at all. I then stated that the movie basically followed the novel's basic story. I asked him if he ever read the book and he said no, but he liked other films based on "Orson Wells books" such as the Time Machine. I said "I'm sure you meant H. G. Wells, right?" He then asked me "Who's that?" I walked out laughing. :lol:

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:41 am
by Usivius
:haha:
...brilliant....

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 2:34 am
by Fist and Faith
I enjoyed the movie a lot, and will definitely go see it again before it leaves the big screen.

My problem with the story, which I guess is common to both movies and the book, is that the aliens didn't know about earth's micro-organisms. Duh. Such an obvious thing. Is it possible that there are NONE on their home planet, and either none on any other planet they ever visited or none that ever harmed them? They had this incredible technology at least many thousands of years ago, had studied the earth enough to have known way back then that there was, or would be, the kind of blood that they could use the way they needed, but they didn't know about micro-organisms?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 8:35 pm
by Loredoctor
In the book, the answer to the problem is that the Martians had conquered viruses and bacteria. They had therefore become complacent, and had entirely forgotten the existence of disease. In the movie, there are a couple of hints the aliens are from Mars, so presumably, they may be from the same society Wells envisioned.

I should also add a rebuttal to the emp criticism. People have been saying it is an error when there were people using cameras to record the lightning or the rise of the tripods given the emp blast. Not so. It says in the newscast early on that the effects are temporary, and second, emp will only affect systems running a current.

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 3:51 am
by Fist and Faith
Loremaster wrote:In the book, the answer to the problem is that the Martians had conquered viruses and bacteria. They had therefore become complacent, and had entirely forgotten the existence of disease. In the movie, there are a couple of hints the aliens are from Mars, so presumably, they may be from the same society Wells envisioned.
Ah, thanks. I imagine the aliens in Independence Day were in a similar situation. Messing with their ships' programs was probably punishable by something extremely nasty, so nobody tried. And they probably forgot how to spot and fight computer viruses.

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:54 am
by Loredoctor
Nice analogy, FF!

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 5:54 am
by ChoChiyo
You may view my thoughts on War of the Worlds here.

I don't have the will or strength to type them out again.

:)