War of the Worlds

[Phantom]

I was surfing through Cinescape when I came upon this (http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Movies&action=page&type_id=&cat_id=270338&obj_id=42320)

I'm actually kinda interested to see what Spielberg would do with the movie.

[CMJ]

I saw this a few weeks ago, when it wasn't his next project. I'm interested in any Spielberg flick.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I just hope it will be better than the last Wells film update. Both the Island of Dr Moreau and The Time Machine were horrible films. Still Spielberg will help it, still not sure if it can match George Pal's film which was amazing film.

[Zasz Grimm]

I don't think they're should be a remake. The original was awesome.

And the radio transmission in the thirties made people think it was real, that we were loosing the world.

That's solid enough, let it be.

[JMK]

You know they aren't going to do that! Not when there's money to be made!

[Phantom]

You know they aren't going to do that! Not when there's money to be made!

No kidding, because they don't have enough money as it is. lol.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Resurfacing this old thread since the teaser is out, here

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/waroftheworlds/large.html

It is a good teaser, showing nothing and only using the opening monologue from the novel. With Spielberg involved I think this could be a very good movie, especially if they follow the book more since the novel is very different from the original movie.

[Shawn]

They're probably going to wind up showing too much of the aliens. :\ I liked how you basically never saw them (except for a hand at the end) in the original. I'm a little bit interested in it, but I don't have very high hopes.

Am I the only one who thought Signs took more than a little influence from War of the Worlds?

[Jedi Master Carr]

Just about everything has ripped off War of the Worlds from ID4 to Signs. From what I read this one is going to be more like the novel. In the book it focused more on a family trying to escape the path of the alien warships. In this one Cruise is playing that part. There is a scientist in the film and he is played by Tim Robbins. Honestly, I am not worried when it comes to Spielberg he rarely makes a bad movie.

[Darth McBain]

The trailer looks pretty good. With Spielberg, this looks to be a pretty good movie. I'm hoping it doesn't suffer too much from Cruise (sorry, I'm just not a big fan of his). I wonder if they'll follow the book in how the aliens are defeated. I haven't read it in a long time, but if I recall correctly, the way the aliens are defeated is somewhat of a letdown. Though it works in the book, it may not work too well in a movie.

[Jedi Master Carr]

It was a virus like in 50's film. Not sure how they will approach it in this movie.

[Gav Mortis]

I'm looking forward to this. When I was about eight, my dad handed me the audio story on a series of large records and I sat there for hours, listening. I was totally enthralled by the story, and terrified. While the film was good, it simply didn't have the same impact on me all those years ago but I have high hopes for this. Only thing is that I have the same fear as Shawn in that I feel they're going to show to much of the aliens instead of keeping exposure to a bear minimum but we'll see. If Spielberg respects his source material enough, who knows?

[Figrin D'an]

While the first film was good in many ways, I wouldn't mind seeing a version that is a little more faithful to Well's original story. I'm interested to see what Spielberg can do with this.

The story's conclusion must remain the same, however. It was a commentary by Wells on how the world's evolution could backlash against man's push for techological advancement. A central theme in his stories was man/technology vs. nature/natural law, and the final defeat of the aliens is one of the more bold ways he highlighted this. To change it would fly in the face of everything Wells wrote about.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah I can see that, might want to change it slightly end a little different from the original film. Sure Spielberg will come up with some unique way of doing Wells ending.

[Darth McBain]

Dug this up again... On the website http://www.waroftheworlds.com/ they have the new TV spot. It's pretty short, but not too bad looking.

[LightKnight]

I had a chance to be an extra in the post invasion, but not a big fan of Cruise's ,so I passed on it.

[Jedi Master Carr]

It looks it might be good that trailer really didn't show anything maybe they are just teasing us right now.

[Darth McBain]

Originally posted by LightKnight
I had a chance to be an extra in the post invasion, but not a big fan of Cruise's ,so I passed on it.

I agree - Cruise just rubs me the wrong way for some reason. I'm hoping that this will be more of a Spielberg film than a Cruise ego-fest, but who knows. Still, it looks like it could be decent - I doubt I'll actually go to this one in the theaters, but it looks like a good rental.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Originally posted by LightKnight
I had a chance to be an extra in the post invasion, but not a big fan of Cruise's ,so I passed on it.

YOU HAD A CHANCE TO BE AN EXTRA AND YOU PASSED ON IT?

I have no more words.

[LightKnight]

Originally posted by Lilaena De'Ville
YOU HAD A CHANCE TO BE AN EXTRA AND YOU PASSED ON IT?

I have no more words. :lol :D

They were doing some filming in Lexington, VA?? (outside VMI) and a former agent asked if I wanted to be a survivor or military personnel. I couldn’t tell you if they actually filmed there or not, just they had planned on it.

Don’t get me wrong I would have loved to have been in a Stephen Splieberg film. I just could not have handle being around a bunch of Star struck extras, going gaga over Mr. Cruise. I could see all the extra’s getting all crazy and worried if they would actually being in the same scene as him.

Now don’t get me wrong T.C is a big star and I’m not but, he isn’t good looking, suave nor a good actor so I just don’t get his appeal. So rather subject myself to the torture I would have had to endure, I passed.

[LightKnight]

Originally posted by Darth McBain
I agree - Cruise just rubs me the wrong way for some reason. I'm hoping that this will be more of a Spielberg film than a Cruise ego-fest, but who knows. Still, it looks like it could be decent - I doubt I'll actually go to this one in the theaters, but it looks like a good rental. You took the words outta my mouth :thumbup

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Man I'd be thrilled to be an extra in *any* movie (no pr0n please). But I have no hook-ups.

[Rutabaga]

Tom Cruise doesn't do much for me one way or the other, but it's a Spielberg movie, so that gets my attention. Plus, this is one of the few movies out there where I'm okay with seeing some kind of remake. Don't get me wrong, I adore the George Pal version (seeing the wires holding the Martian ships up just adds to the charm), but it wasn't the same story as the original novel, so I'm game for seeing if they do tell a story that's closer to what Welles wrote.

The short ad shown during the Super Bowl looked nifty, although my first thought was, well, people are definitely going to compare this movie to ID4. Which isn't fair at all, since War of the Worlds itself came long before ID4, and as was mentioned earlier in the thread, it was an obvious inspiration for some of the events in ID4.

I just wonder what the Martians are gonna look like. :cool

[Peter McCoy]

What!? You mean you've never seen a Martian!? How weird are you!?!?!?! :p

I can't wait for this film. I basically agree with everything positive thats been said so far - and I like Tom Cruise. An unusual choice for this film, but a very good actor in my opinion. I'm looking forward to this one.

[Shawn]

Originally posted by Jinn Fizz
I just wonder what the Martians are gonna look like. :cool I sincerely hope we don't find out.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well if they show them they need to wait till towards the end like in the original film. I think the addience caught a glimse of one half way through the film but you really only saw them at the end.

[Yog]

So who is going to see this? Its opening this weekend. I am so hyped up to see this. I believe its the best blockbuster movie of the summer.

The reviews at RT are rave:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/war_of_the_worlds/


-snip- from Harry Knowles War of the Worlds review:

"The main thing about this film is that this is absolutely amongst the very best Steven Spielberg films ever made. I am absolutely shook to the core by the film. This is a film with hardcore vintage sci-fi imagery given a power and weight that was inconceivable in its relevance to today. The film succeeds at the absolutely same level as Welles and Pal did. Perfect creations for the times they were made… and I believe it will resonate dramatically with today’s audiences.

This is the very best film I’ve seen this year."

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=20580

[Rutabaga]

I don't tend to put a lot of stock in whatever Harry Knowles says :).

I'm probably still going to go see the movie, but I'm not all that hyped about it. As a matter of fact, I've been losing some interest in it because of Tom Cruise's asinine behavior lately. He's been acting like such an idiot lately that I've grown tired of him. But I will probably still see the movie because it's a Spielberg movie and hopefully it will be worth seeing. I can't help but think, though, that the grosses might take a hit to some extent because of Tom Cruise, though...people who feel about him the way I do right now might very well stay away from the movie because of it. It will be interesting to see.

About the Martians...the trailer for the movie I've seen before ROTS the last couple times I've gone shows a glimpse of an outline of a Martian as it searches for Cruise and Dakota Fanning. That outline looks uncomfortably like the aliens in Independence Day :\ .

[Lilaena De'Ville]

It opens TOMORROW here, and we may be seeing it on Friday, if not before.

I am hating the New & Improved! Tom Cruise, but he still makes great movies. Remember - he's ACTING in the movie. But if he jumps up on a couch I may laugh inappropriately. :lol

[Darth McBain]

I'm not gonna see it. I was mildly interested at first, but I never liked Tom Cruise, so right there I subtracted a star... Lately he hasn't been doing anything to make me like him any more - quite the opposite in fact - the guy's gone completely wacko in my book. The movie will probably be pretty good, but I still don't have much interest - maybe later as a rental...

[Jedi Master Carr]

I probably will go see it but I agree Tom Cruise idiotic behavior is hurting this movie, it could make less money because of his antics. I wish now Spielberg had casted somebody else.

[Cat Terrist]

If you dont like Cruise as a person, fine. But I'll go see this because Tom Cruise the Actor is bloody marvellous. If you cant seperate the two and see this appears to not just to be a good movie - it seems it could be a great one - i feel sorry that you will miss out. I'll be there, no doubt. I dont like what Cruise stands for but I'm fully gay for how good he is on screen.

No motorracing this weekend, I'm going to see a few movies instead

[Cirrsseeto Quez]

I'll catch this as a rental. Something about it totally underwhelms me.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Originally posted by Cat Terrist
If you dont like Cruise as a person, fine. But I'll go see this because Tom Cruise the Actor is bloody marvellous. If you cant seperate the two and see this appears to not just to be a good movie - it seems it could be a great one - i feel sorry that you will miss out. I'll be there, no doubt. I dont like what Cruise stands for but I'm fully gay for how good he is on screen.

No motorracing this weekend, I'm going to see a few movies instead

Well that wouldn't be the reason, I wouldn't see it, I am very sick of him but I can watch the movie. However, the American people might not be as merciful, there was a poll on CNN that said 61% won't see it because of him. Of course, this is a net poll so who knows how accurate it is but the point is I don't think he is helping the movie, mainly because of he is talking about himself and Holmes, I haven't heard him pushing the film at all so far. To me that is wrong and gives the movie an ugly buzz.

[Rutabaga]

I'll still be going to see it because I'm a Spielberg fan and have been for 30 years now. The Spielberg name is enough to get my butt in the seat. I'll just have to keep pretending that isn't Tom Cruise up there on the screen, just some movie character who looks like him but isn't running around jumping on couches, spouting Scientology nonsense, stuff like that :).

The tomatometer at RT is phenomenal right now, so at least it's not just Harry Knowles who's raving :).

Hey, speaking of raving and Tom Cruise going all nutty, has anyone seen this yet? Gotta love it :).



http://movies.collegehumor.com/media/movies/tom_cruise_kills_oprah.mov

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Oh My GOD THAT was HILARIOUS!

[Cirrsseeto Quez]

Originally posted by Jinn Fizz
http://movies.collegehumor.com/media/movies/tom_cruise_kills_oprah.mov

:cool

[Liam Jinn]

That is one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time :)

[Figrin D'an]

I'm hopeful it will be a good movie. It's not going to be the best film of the summer, though. I don't really give a rat's behind if it's Tom Cruise or Tom Green playing the main protagonist, as long as the film is well done. Yeah, Cruise has become the poster boy for the male mid-life crisis over the past few months, but as long as his performance in the film is good, what he does in his free time doesn't matter.


The film's boxoffice take will be hurt by Cruise's antics though. Speilberg is, reportedly, quite frustrated with him, to the point of requiring that all reporters at WotW premiers must agree to not ask questions about Cruise's recent behavior or risk be booted from the Q&A sessions. I can't say I blame him.

I'm going to try to see it over the holiday weekend.

[Tear]

Not to sound retarded or horrible uninformed (which i am...the uninformed part anyway..)

What are all the antics Tom cruise has been pulling? Last few months ive been too busy at school to watch tv or read much news so im missing out on anything not word of mouth.

Although i heard one thing that Cruise took a day off work and cost Spielberg millions because he hired a whole buncha extras one day. But other then that i havent heard much..

I thought Cruise was good in Collateral

[Yog]

*takes a deep breath*

Ok, about Tom Cruise. I admit he acts eccentric in front of the media and got bizarre political and philosophical views of the world being a member of the Church of Scientology. Does this make him a raving lunatic or a horrible person? No.

Do I even care? No.

Mr Cruise could color his hair purple, dress up in pyjamas with pink elephants and have a polka concert in the middle of Times Square. I would not give a wampas eyebrow about it. As far as Im concerned, celebrity gossip, paparazzi magazines and slander press does not interest me in the slightest. I dont care about Donald Trumphs haircut, Nicole Kidmans new dress or Sean Connerys Rolex.

I also dont care that Tom Cruise got married or who he got married to. Mr Cruise can believe whatever he wants about medical drugs. I find it an outlandish view and disagree totally, but thats his opinion. The journalist asked fully knowing what his stand was on it. When you raise the subject, you get the subject. Tom is also entitled to react however he wants to fake waterspraying microphone wielding "journalists". That WAS a jerk thing to do, and Channel 4 appologized for it.

Bottom line for me, thats not news.

In the end, only one thing matters. What he does on the silver screen. He is a decent actor and the movies he participates in turns out be worthwile to watch. But most important of all, he was, is and continues to be the biggest box office draw in Hollywood. His track record is simply <a href=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?id=tomcruise.htm>unprecedented</a>. Every single project he touched for the last 20 years turned profitable or a smash hit. He got more +100M movies than any other actor. Not one movie for the last 5 years dipped under 100, and neither will this.

[Eluna Thals]

Originally posted by Master Yoghurt
Ok, about Tom Cruise. I admit he acts eccentric in front of the media and got bizarre political and philosophical views of the world being a member of the Church of Scientology. Does this make him a raving lunatic or a horrible person? No.

Yes it does. Not that it particuarly matters in his movies, but yes he is a crazy and generally despicable individual. Being in the CoS country club pretty much qualifies you for any ne'er do well category aimed at you, from cultist at best to con-man and extortionist at worst.


Not one movie for the last 5 years dipped under 100, and neither will this.

Yeah, but 100 million is the new 50 million.

[Yog]

Poll at Box Office Mojo asking when the users are going to see War of the Worlds:

58.1% Opening Week
24.4% Sometime in Theaters
10.6% On DVD
5.3% Never
1.6% On TV


Variety and LA times chime in with glowing reviews:


A generation later, Steven Spielberg has made the anti-"Close Encounters" in "War of the Worlds," a gritty, intense and supremely accomplished sci-fier about some distinctly unbenign alien invaders. Latest adaptation of H.G. Wells' endlessly malleable and resonant 1898 novel preys upon the insecurities of a modern audience that's more fearful and skittish than was the case when the director made his optimistic early-career smashes about outer space visitors. Relentless mix of breath-sapping scares, awesome spectacle, Tom Cruise and a massive marketing push look to deliver the biggest B.O. haul Spielberg has enjoyed in quite a few years.

http://www.variety.com/VE1117927497.html


Now, half a century later, with awards and profits beyond counting behind him, Spielberg has kept faith with the boy he was. With "War of the Worlds" he has made what is arguably one of the best 1950s science fiction films ever, and that is not a backhanded compliment.

http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/reviews/cl-et-world29jun29,0,4382960.story?coll=cl-mreview

[Yog]

Originally posted by Eluna Thals
Yes it does. Not that it particuarly matters in his movies, but yes he is a crazy and generally despicable individual. Being in the CoS country club pretty much qualifies you for any ne'er do well category aimed at you, from cultist at best to con-man and extortionist at worst.

Well, I wont pretend to be an expert on the CoS or psychologist/psychiatrist. It just appears to me everyone seems to make fun of Toms behavior and brands him as "crazy" because of that.


Yeah, but 100 million is the new 50 million.

Sure, there are actors out there who had a few movies in a row which grossed bigger than that. But very few can claim anything remotely to Toms consistancy. None in fact.


I'll catch this as a rental. Something about it totally underwhelms me

I think you would be missing up on a great sci fi popcorn flick. I personally look forward to a once in a long while chance to see extraterestrials who can actually be described as "wicked scary" (New York Times words) as they spread terror, incenerating buildings and vaporize people. It seems like the movie ID4 should have been. Not a cheesy silly comedy.

I am not sure why you would be underwhelmed. You seemed to like Signs?

[Sanis Prent]

Signs and WotW are two completely different movie styles.

[Daiquiri]

Sure, there are actors out there who had a few movies in a row which grossed bigger than that. But very few can claim anything remotely to Toms consistancy. None in fact.

No one? Mel Gibson? Tom Hanks? Harrison Ford?

For me its not TC's antics per se...its more the 'whole thing'. Even from the time I saw Risky Business, I didnt care for him. Is he a good actor - yes, he is. Is he a draw for me? No. I'll have to be hearing in reviews and by word of mouth that this film is outstanding before I pay $6.50 to get in the door.

[CMJ]

Originally posted by Daiquiri Van-Derveld
No one? Mel Gibson? Tom Hanks? Harrison Ford?


Actually not lately. The only dependable BO draw the last few years has been Cruise.

[Yog]

Mel Gibson? Tom Hanks? Harrison Ford?

Lets review those actors box office. Let me first say, I think they are all great actors who I respect greatly, and they had some tremendous careers if you look at the <a href=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/?view=Actor&sort=sumgross&p=.htm>all time list</a> :)

<a href=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=harrisonford.htm>Harrison Ford</a>
He accumulated a stunning total of $3,044.7M and is #2 on the all time list. Most of that money comes from the original Star Wars movies and Indy movies. If you adjust for inflation, he does a knock out on everyone. Thats utterly mindboggling. However, aside from those 6 movies and some moderate hits scattered over the years, there have been plenty of disappoinments and flops. Jimmy Hollywood is maybe the worst one, 30M budget 3M gross. Lately, he seems to settle for lukewarm ~30M hauls. Not what I would call a reliable box office draw.

<a href=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=melgibson.htm>Mel Gibson</a>
Mel Gibson got a wider range of hits than Harrison, but again, quite a few turkeys and bombs. The Million Dollar Hotel ($59,989), The Singing Detective ($337,174), Paparazzi ($15,714,234). The controversy of Passion saved him from spiralling further down. He used to be a fairly big box office draw before, but not so dependable nowadays. Has great box office potential when he is involved in the right movie.

<a href=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=tomhanks.htm>Tom Hanks</a>
Ok, NOW were talking box office draw. He got a stunning track record. The years 92-95 and 98-02 he was in a class of his own. Probably the most talented actor of the 4. When people go to see a Hanks movie, they go to see Hanks.. period. However, the last 2 years have not been the best for him. Voice acting in Polar Express is the saving grace. Other than that we got Lady Killers ($39,799,191) and The Terminal ($77,872,883). Not a good trend. A falling star maybe, although I hope not.

[CMJ]

I have a few free passes to AMC Theatres. I can't use them during the "Special Engagement" time period(usually the first 10 days). I'd thought about holding out till then(did for BB).

But...it's Spielberg. I'm going today. ;)

[Yog]

Be sure to give us your review! :cool

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I just watched the internet exclusive trailer on the war of the worlds website - man this movie is going to ROCK.

Say what you will about Tom Cruise's not-so-private life, but the man makes GOOD movies. And, like CMJ - it's SPIELBERG.

We're supposed to see it tomorrow, but we might catch an early show tonight. Maybe. ^_^;

[Jedi Master Carr]

How about Will Smith? He has been very consistent, can't remember the last film he had that made less than 100 million.
Well Ebert didn't like it here
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050628/REVIEWS/50606007/1023

I have to agree with him after reading his review about the aliens that is the lamest entrance for aliens it just doesn't make any sense to me. Why would they wait thousands of years to launch an invasion? Heck they could have took Humanity when it was a lot weaker and second how could anything survive under the earth for that long. Also the ending sounds bad from the criticis but I haven't read any spoilers on that Also it looks that Star Wars and Batman will both end up with better RT scores than WOTW not sure what that means. Still, I might go see it depending on WOM. Also Yoghurt it is funny you bring up ID4, but I bet you WOTW gets no where near the box office total of it, because ID4, even if you want to bash was loved by audiences because it was light, fun, feel good etc. WOTW doesn't seem to fit those at all, it is a lot darker.

[CMJ]

All I gotta say is this...

Two hours balls to the wall people.

[Mu Satach]

LOL!

[Yog]

All I gotta say is this...

Two hours balls to the wall people

Hear! Hear! :D


How about Will Smith?

Even <a href=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=willsmith.htm>Will Smith</a> had some dips. The Legend of Bagger Vance ($30,919,168), Ali ($58,203,105) Jersey Girl ($25,268,157). But yeah, he is one of the more solid box office draws in the later years.


because ID4, even if you want to bash was loved by audiences because it was light, fun, feel good etc. WOTW doesn't seem to fit those at all, it is a lot darker

But this is the primary reason why I am excited by this movie. There are no cute ET or friendly Close Encounter Aliens. There is brutal realism. Not an action comedy aka MiB. The aliens are pure evil.. they drink human blood for crying out loud. Its carnage all the way through. It could easily been R-rated. Thats why I want to see this movie. Having my pants scared off by geniunly scary aliens, not comedy spoof latex rubber creatures or <a href=http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0116996/Ss/0116996/1-1.jpg?path=gallery&path_key=0116996>these guys</a>. And a Spielberg Movie at that, I know its not going to be another The Day After Tomorrow or Armageddon.

ID4 had its moments, and overall an entertaining movie, but bottom line, its shallow and not what I expected to see at all. The trailers lured me and many others to see appocalyptic destruction. There were no hints of whacky action comedy. One had the impression this was very sinister stuff. We wanted to see the The White House and skyscrapers blown up by ridiculously huge flying saucers. And we got that. But then what?

The movie spiralled quickly downward from there. We get to see Will Smith as the cowboy John Wayne type going to save the world on his own once again, as seen for quadrillionth time in various high budget B and C movies (when talking to CMJ about this, I even got the association to the hero role of Bruce Willis in the spectacular crappy Armageddon. Who in their right minds would entrust the worlds fate to these guys?). We get to see him get "briefed" in area 51, knocking out a crashed alien pilot and sending a computer virus to the mothership (who would have guessed aliens used macintosh?)... right. It just got absolutely ridiculous -sigh-

So yeah, ID4 is an entertaining movie. But from what I read, in production values and convincingly portraying an alien invasion, it does not even reach WotW to the toenails.

[CMJ]

I guess I should post a bit more. I'll say some spoiler free stuff for now(until another person sees it or I get specific questions).

Is it one of Steven's best? No, but the man's canon is unreal. Heck I'm not sure it's in his top half.

Is it a lot of fun? Not in the traditional "fun" sense....but it's a ride. One long, dark, thrilling ride. It starts about 15 minutes in and goes hard core for the next 100 minutes.

The entrance of the aliens is unreal. The sound in the movie rattled the seats.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Originally posted by Master Yoghurt
Hear! Hear! :D



Even <a href=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=willsmith.htm>Will Smith</a> had some dips. The Legend of Bagger Vance ($30,919,168), Ali ($58,203,105) Jersey Girl ($25,268,157). But yeah, he is one of the more solid box office draws in the later years.



But this is the primary reason why I am excited by this movie. There are no cute ET or friendly Close Encounter Aliens. There is brutal realism. Not an action comedy aka MiB. The aliens are pure evil.. they drink human blood for crying out loud. Its carnage all the way through. It could easily been R-rated. Thats why I want to see this movie. Having my pants scared off by geniunly scary aliens, not comedy spoof latex rubber creatures or <a href=http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0116996/Ss/0116996/1-1.jpg?path=gallery&path_key=0116996>these guys</a>. And a Spielberg Movie at that, I know its not going to be another The Day After Tomorrow or Armageddon.

ID4 had its moments, and overall an entertaining movie, but bottom line, its shallow and not what I expected to see at all. The trailers lured me and many others to see appocalyptic destruction. There were no hints of whacky action comedy. One had the impression this was very sinister stuff. We wanted to see the The White House and skyscrapers blown up by ridiculously huge flying saucers. And we got that. But then what?

The movie spiralled quickly downward from there. We get to see Will Smith as the cowboy John Wayne type going to save the world on his own once again, as seen for quadrillionth time in various high budget B and C movies (when talking to CMJ about this, I even got the association to the hero role of Bruce Willis in the spectacular crappy Armageddon. Who in their right minds would entrust the worlds fate to these guys?). We get to see him get "briefed" in area 51, knocking out a crashed alien pilot and sending a computer virus to the mothership (who would have guessed aliens used macintosh?)... right. It just got absolutely ridiculous -sigh-

So yeah, ID4 is an entertaining movie. But from what I read, in production values and convincingly portraying an alien invasion, it does not even reach WotW to the toenails.


Well ID4 was just a popcorn film that is all I ever saw it as, it is a fun movie when you look at that way. I never though it would be dark and sinister, as for the end, honestly they should have done a trilogy with it to explain the alien destruction better. It isn't like the original WOTW where some unseen force saves the day, (aka human viruses) so it is a little hard to swallow how easy the heroes in ID4 were able to win.
Still, I am uneasy by WOTW the original film is one my favorite sci-fi movies of all time, it is a classic, IMO, and has one of the greatest scenes in the sci-fi movie when those guy waving the white flag gets annillated and then later a general gets it trying to retreat his troops. I am not sure if any remake can capture that first film as well.

[CMJ]

People are complaining about the ending...but they kept WELLS'S ending! I hate people sometimes. >D

[Jedi Master Carr]

You see I can't even comment on that since I haven't seen it so it is the same as the book?

[CMJ]

Yes. But alot of people(even critics) seem to think it's a cop out. :rolleyes

[Yog]

You see.. that stuff intrigues me. I never even read the novel, and if it is faithful to Wells, I sure would not mind having a master director as Spielberg introducing me to it :)

[CMJ]

Faithful to the tone, themes, and spirit anyways. Not like it was set in 1898 England or anything. ;)

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by CMJ
Faithful to the tone, themes, and spirit anyways. Not like it was set in 1898 England or anything. ;)


If it does this, and maintains Wells' original ending, then I will likely be pleased with the film. Had Spielberg messed with the ending, I would have likely boycotted the film, as it would have destroyed the entire message of the story.

[Cirrsseeto Quez]

My first taste of WotW was hearing the original radio broadcast on some backwoods radio station when I was on a fishing trip a few years back.

That was fun.

[Phantom]

Let me just start off by saying OMFG, the film was nothing less then incredible. I loved it. It was an "on the edge of your seat" type film, or at least I thought it was. Like CMJ said, it was two hours of balls to the wall.

Cruise actually did a great job in it, and I'm not a huge fan of his or some of his pervious movies. The special effects were IMO top notch. Spielberg did an excellent job.


that is the lamest entrance for aliens it just doesn't make any sense to me. Why would they wait thousands of years to launch an invasion? Heck they could have took Humanity when it was a lot weaker.

It was actually quite cool. Though the ships were buried long before humanity ever showed up.


second how could anything survive under the earth for that long. Also the ending sounds bad from the criticis but I haven't read any spoilers on that.

The aliens themselves were not buried underground, just their ships. And the ending worked very well, though it was a bit anti-climactic, but it kept with the ending in the book.

All in all I would say it was a great movie, well worth the money.

[CMJ]

Images ...

The river of bodies, the aftermath of the plane crash, the meadow of red vines, the lone tripod on the waterfront...

I could go on and on....

[Yog]

War of the Worlds, a Steven Spielberg film starring Tom Cruise, has opened to an estimated $34.606 million, worldwide, in its first day. The film took in $21.256 million domestic in 3,908 theaters, representing the largest opening day in the history of Paramount Pictures as well as the largest opening day for a Tom Cruise movie.

The film also made an estimated $13.350 million internationally from 46 territories; the film has yet to open in 10 markets, including the U.K., France, Belgium, and Korea.

The domestic debut is the 7th biggest for a Wednesday, ahead of 2001's Jurassic Park III ($19 million) and behind 2003's The Matrix Revolutions ($24.3 million).

Rob Friedman, Vice Chairman of the Paramount Pictures Motion Pictures Group, said, "We're ecstatic; this is just the beginning of a long and successful run at box offices around the globe. We've got a dream team of Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg and they've both delivered yet again."

Batman Begins opened to $15.1 million on Wednesday, June 15th, and has climbed to $130 million. Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith claimed the top opening day in box office history in May with $50 million. The third and final prequel stands at $360.1 million so far.

http://comingsoon.net/news/waroftheworldsnews.php?id=10218

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well it is half what Spiderman 2 got last year which says a lot, the opening looks similar to what Batman got only 6 million more.

[Yog]

Well, similar.. its 41% more than BB did on opening day. Currently, it seems it will do quite a bit better than Batman does.

[Jedi Master Carr]

True I guess Jurassic Park 3 is a better comparison although that film had horrible legs. Right now it looks like Batman Begins will do 175-200, so 40% above that? So somewhere from 225-270. It won't make it to 300, I think it is too dark of a film and the anti-cruise sentiment will hurt it, in that regard.

[Yog]

Yeah, I doubt it will make 300. 225-270M sounds about right. Its hard to make accurate predictions based on a wednesday opening.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well that prediction was what I was thinking before Wed anyway, I couldn't see it getting much past 270 and below 225 would be a shock to me. Of course it will do great overseas so it will at least make 700 WW.

[Yog]

Yes, overseas audience tend to like movies in the catastrophe genre better than in the US. As an example of that, I took a look at the online ticket sales here in Oslo. And there were sellouts all yesterday. That was for example not the case with ROTS, which actually had a somewhat disappointing gross here.

One open question is how frontloaded and what kind of legs this will have. I guess we will have a first indication of that tomorrow looking at the drop.

[CMJ]

I re-read the book today. Actually I skimmed the book as a teen, so this was probably my first real reading. It was a fairly faithful adaptation in many ways.

[Rutabaga]

$21 million for the opening day is good, admittedly better than I thought it would be. And it will do very good business over the long holiday weekend, it should be over $100 million easily by the end of Monday. And I guess this means that there really isn't going to be any kind of Tom Cruise backlash, at least to not any great extent. Although I do know plenty of people who are planning to go with the same attitude I'm going with...going because of the Spielberg name, not for anything else, it just so happens Tom Cruise is in the movie.

One thing I do have to point out as being interesting, though, is how the tomatometer fell off at Rotten Tomatoes. I'd heard some grumbles about how print media was kept out of screenings until the last minute so that the first reviews were all AICN-type reviews, which gave it the 100% tomatometer reading in the beginning. Once the print media reviews hit, the tomatometer fell off, badly enough that the movie lost its "Certified Fresh" label. It's at 72%, which is still quite a decent number, no argument there, but it's not the 92-100% it got in the very beginning.

[CMJ]

There really weren't reviews of any kind until about 3 days ago. The reviews are about even actually as far as websites to major publications. It's running about 70% positive in each.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Originally posted by CMJ
I re-read the book today. Actually I skimmed the book as a teen, so this was probably my first real reading. It was a fairly faithful adaptation in many ways.

In all ways? I ask because in the book, Wells is trying to show the evils of imperialism, I think that is even the central theme of the novel. Of course you could adjust that to other political issues of today.

[CMJ]

The book was obviously taking a swipe at Imperialism(in addition to many other things). The film didn't as overtly, but there is a line of dialogue that says something along the lines of "Occupation forces never win".

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I think I choked my husband's arm to death during the movie.

At his ex-wife's house, in the basement...when the fire burst through the window... I almost jumped out of my seat. And when Rachel opened her eyes to see the alien eyeball thing looking at her a woman a few rows up literally screamed.

I think it was a pretty good movie. I'm right with you CMJ on the imagery - a lot of it was really powerful stuff. I'm such a baby, I cried during the waterfront scene when all the people were trying to get on the boat and the ferry was trying to get away from the tripods coming. :cry

And Dakota Fanning - she was great. Really good. Best supporting actress nomination!

[Tear]

I saw it tonight. It was very good and I recommend if you want to see it but your thinking of waiting until it comes out on video to rent.

Dont wait. Spend the little extra money to see it in the theaters. The whole experiance is awesome, especially on the big screen.

Very good movie.

[Hera]

I really liked the first 40 mins or so and sat quite riveted, even holding my breath, in my chair. Cruise did a terrific job of being completely shellshocked in those first dramatic scenes.

But then it kind of lost me. I dont know what happened, but it gave me that "head scratching" feeling. I felt the end was rushed, the explanation kind of tacked on.

Dakota Fanning without argument looks terrified out of her mind, but she seemed to screech endlessly, which bugged the heck outta me. Surely give the kid more to do, she's quite brilliant.

The special effects were fabulous. Definitely worth experiencing on the big screen.

[CMJ]

The ending is deus ex machine, but it was just as sudden in the novel. The narration is straight out the second to last chapter.

BTW - did anyone catch the forshadowing of the ending early on when Rachel(Dakota Fanning) has a splinter, and does the little spiel about how her body will push it out by itself given time.

Brilliant!

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Yeah I caught that, CMJ. :D

As far as Dakota screeching endlessly - well what do you think a ten year old would do in that situation? Good grief, I'd be screaming my head off. I thought it was pretty realistic.

[Hera]

Of course she'd be screaming and freaked out, but really, it got to be annoying after a while. There's being realistic and there's being repetitive. I found it repetitive toward the end.


I didn't pick up on the ### thing.

[Tod Marr]

Just got back now. I loved it. I'm putting myself up for a flaming here, but I enjoyed it more than RotS. I'm not saying either of them (or Batman, for that matter) were better, just that I enjoyed this more. Mainly because the entire experience was new to me, whereas I'd seen 5 other Star Wars movies previously. I'm definitely going to see this two more times.

I loved how the aliens looked like the ones from Independence Day!

I have a sudden urge to play the X-COM games :)

[CMJ]

While I don't agree with it a 100%, this was a helluva read.

http://www.moviecitynews.com/reviews/war_ofthe_worlds_stuart.html

[Yog]

War of the Worlds dominated the North American box office on Friday capturing an estimated $23M in its third day of release. That represented a powerful 59% jump from Thursday's tally. The Paramount/DreamWorks film's cume after three days stands at $58.7M. War posted the second best debut weekend Friday of the year behind Star Wars Episode III's opening weekend Friday of $33.8M. The holiday weekend should result in continued strong sales on Saturday and Sunday and even the Monday holiday is expected to have some fireworks inside of theater auditoriums. For the four-day extended session, War of the Worlds might find itself in the vicinity of $80-85M. That could leave a six-day score of $110-120M.

Source: Box Office Guru

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by Tod Marr
I have a sudden urge to play the X-COM games :)

Oh God I love X-COM

[Tod Marr]

I've got UFO: Aftermath, its like an updated version with better graphics and stuff. Though I admit it's not as good as the original.

[JMK]

Got around to seeing it yesterday. There were some things in it that prevented me from loving it, instead I just enjoyed it somewhat.

Did anyone else see the microphone hanging down in a shot from a scene inside his house? Unless it's a nod to the original movie that was inexcusable.

[CMJ]

That might've been a theater error. I remember seeing Thirteen Days in a theater and seeing a boom mike. Then I saw it it a few months later at a different theater and it wasn't in the shot anymore. Sometimes booms are at edges of prints and they're cropped out by the projectionist. I read about the practice a couple years back.

[Rutabaga]

Well, I saw the movie today, and overall, I wasn't impressed.

The first 2/3 of the movie was decent entertainment, with some stuff that I liked...the emergence of the first tripod (loved the sound they made too, reminded me of the T-Rex roar in Jurassic Park), the ferry being attacked by the tripods (scariest Spielberg moment since the T-Rex attack on the jeep in JP), the train roaring through the crossing while it was on fire, stuff like that.

But once they reached the farmhouse where Tim Robbins was...oh, dear God. That entire sequence completely destroyed whatever momentum the movie had up to that point, and the rest of it was just terrible. I became completely disconnected from the movie and didn't care what happened to anyone, I was just waiting for the Martians to catch the common cold and die so that I could go home.

And that ending, not the germy ending, but the one where Cruise reaches Boston...oh brother, that might have been acceptable at the end of something like ET or Close Encounters, but not in this movie. It was cheap and dumb.

I also can't help but echo some of the criticisms of the movie I've heard. First of all, while the tripods were neat, they did look like one good push could have knocked them over. And second, how could the tripods have gone completely undiscovered over the years despite all the digging, excavation, exploration, etc?

The fact that Tom Cruise has been acting like a complete goober lately had nothing to do with my reaction to the movie. Believe me, I was hoping to have a good time today, and I'm sorry to say, this movie just didn't work for me at all, once that final third unspooled. Most disappointed I've been in a Spielberg movie since Hook :(.

[JMK]

You're not alone, the more I think about the movie, the less I like it. You're right on though, it was good and suspenseful for the first 2/3 of the movie, then...splat. Some great images, but like you said, some things just destroyed your opinion of the movie, as it did mine.

[CMJ]

I'm just the opposite, the more I think about the film, the more I like it. ;)

The farmhouse sequence while not STRAIGHT out of the book, was lifted largely from the source. Ogilvy was a compilation of 3 characters from the novel. I don't know, it worked for me.

And as for the end - the happy reunion. Also, heavily influenced by the novel where the Narrator finds everyone close to him alive and well.

[Droo]

Originally posted by JMK
You're not alone, the more I think about the movie, the less I like it. You're right on though, it was good and suspenseful for the first 2/3 of the movie, then...splat. Some great images, but like you said, some things just destroyed your opinion of the movie, as it did mine.

I feel the same way. There was something about it that, ultimately, I found wholly underwhelming. The first two thirds were incredible with regards to tension and my favourite bits were the surreal moments; like the falling clothes, the river of bodies, and the burning train - they were wonderfully chilling and striking images.

I am appreciative of acknowledging the ending of Well's story and maybe I didn't enjoy the movie as much because I basically know the story inside out anyway. That's a possibilty.

And I found the performances from Cruise and particularly, Dakota Fanning, excellent.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

It wasn't as good the second time for me, because I already knew what was coming, and so I wasn't as emotionally invested into the movie as I had been the first time. Everything felt so real the first time I saw it, it was like "this would be what it would really be like."

The second time through I spent most of the 'jump' or scariest moments listening to the crowd reaction in the theatre. We had, unfortunately, one man who laughed inappropriately when most people were gasping in horror.

My husband just spent most of the movie wanting to smack Ray's kids upside the head for being stupid and not listening. :p

I still like the movie. I think it will go down as one of the best.

[Hera]

I doubt I would ever sit through it again, even as a movie rental. The last half just left me so underwhelmed (to coin someone elses word, which so aptly fits my feeling of it)

I am totally with your husband, Lil :p

[Jedieb]

I finally saw it this afternoon. I loved that the film was faithful to the spirit and plot of Well's novel. I read the novel as a kid and I loved it. There's a great hardcover on Orson's radio play that even has a DVD of the original broadcast. That's a great place to start if you want to learn about that historic broadcast. I went into the film wondering if they were going to change the ending. But when I saw that opening shot of microbes and bacteria swimming around in a rain drop I knew Spielberg was going to stay true to the novel. Now THAT'S foreshadowing! Cruise was excellent. In just a few shots Spielberg was able to let you know everything you needed to know about Cruise's character. Watching some other man drive away in a new SUV with your ex-wife carrying his child is gut wrenching. This was pretty much an "everyman" story. The exact opposite of ID4. (Which I liked.) You don't see the President and the eccentric scientist battle the invading force, you see the "war" from the perspective of an everyday man and his family. I was also impressed with how Spielberg was able to get one thrill after another without relying on FX. Ony Spielberg can have someone shake a branch outside a window and have an entire theater on the edge of its seat.

There's also some important social commentary in the film. Namely, only a Red Sox fan would abandon his father and sister in a time of crisis just so he could get a better view of human slaughter! Really, wouldn't the film have ended much better if the only thing left of Robbie was a bloodied Red Sox hat? I think so. Why Ray bent over backword to save his pathetic turncoat of a son is beyond me. I would have left him to die and saved my Little Princess the second the first pedestrian went ash in front of me.
:smokin

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Actually I think it would have been slightly better if Robbie had died, but we can't have everything.

And I completely agree with the 'everyman' accessment - I really liked that it was focused on 'real' people, not the scientists that are trying to save the day, or the leaders of the countries that are under attack, or the slapped together team of 'specialists' who are all social misfits, yet entrusted with the fate of humanity.

[Baralai Lotus]

I loved the whole movie and thought it was wonderful. It had me sitting on the edge of my seat and even gasping for breath at times, and I thought the guy who played Robbie was cute. . .I need to find out more about him. The tripods were awesome, vaporizing and stuff, that was cool. I greatly enjoyed it, and the surreal moments were very nice.

As for my favorite part, I loved it when Rachel was asking Ray to sing her lullaby's and he didn't know the ones she wanted. So he sang her a song that was special to him, very touching.

And the distance between Ray and his kids was perfect, I actually hated Ray for not being involved in their lives for a little while. Excellent movie, great acting, wonderful cinematics and highly deserving a spot in my movie collection.

[Liam Jinn]

I just saw the movie earlier today, and I honestly, I liked it. There was a bit too much time spent in the basement with Tim Robbins, and those red vines didn't have much of an explination, they just kinda appeared, not really explained. Other than that I really didn't have much problems with the movie. It's something that should be viewed in a theater though, makes the experience that much better.

[JMK]

Yeah, if you plan to see this movie at all, see it in the theater, unless you have a serious home theater system. Some shots in the movie are not meant to be seen on a 27" screen.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I finally saw it today, I liked it but thought the original was vastly superior First I just had a major problem with the how they came. If those ships were there a million years I think we would have found them by now besides two things, (a) what civilization plans an invasion a million years in advanced? (b) why use old weapons when new ones would have worked better. That was my major problem with the movie, besides I like the original concept of the ships and death rays better (I still love the noise those death rays made). I just thought it was silly to change how the aliens invaded. If the movie had them come the same way as the book and original film I think I would have liked it better. Maybe I will have to think about it some more but right now I say it was a 3 out of 4 movie. Defintely great special effects and some very good sequences, I have to say that.

[JMK]

Yeah, the method of invasion was pretty dumb. Cool to watch, but dumb. My biggest problem, and this applies to the original as well, is if the aliens were watching and studying earth for sooooo long (a million years in the movie version) then there's no chance in hell that they would have completely glossed over the fact that earth's tiny microbes would be their undoing. They would have accounted for that. But I guess the story has to end somehow.

[CMJ]

Originally posted by JMK
Yeah, the method of invasion was pretty dumb. Cool to watch, but dumb. My biggest problem, and this applies to the original as well, is if the aliens were watching and studying earth for sooooo long (a million years in the movie version) then there's no chance in hell that they would have completely glossed over the fact that earth's tiny microbes would be their undoing. They would have accounted for that. But I guess the story has to end somehow.

Yeah, which is why even today a superflu could kill potentially a billion or more people. And we HAVE built in defenses against influenza.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Originally posted by JMK
Yeah, the method of invasion was pretty dumb. Cool to watch, but dumb. My biggest problem, and this applies to the original as well, is if the aliens were watching and studying earth for sooooo long (a million years in the movie version) then there's no chance in hell that they would have completely glossed over the fact that earth's tiny microbes would be their undoing. They would have accounted for that. But I guess the story has to end somehow.

You would have to take that up with H.G Wells he is the one who came up with that ending. That was pretty typical of his books though irony, Most of his major sci-fi works had a very ironic ending.

[JMK]

I realize that much, but I just never agreed with it. Yeah yeah, it's a classic blah blah blah, that just never made sense to me.

[Liam Jinn]

You know, the more I think about it, the more sense it makes. Why not conquer as many planets as you can, without letting them know it? (saying Earth isn't the only planet under attack at the moment) Maybe this is happening everywhere in the known galaxy. Why would you conquer planets early while the civilation knows nothing and could give you nothing from a victory? Why not wait until they pose a threat?

[Lilaena De'Ville]

And people had a problem with the ending of Signs. Sheesh. Allergic to water, or catch a cold and die? Which is worse, really? ;)

My opinion was that they planted the ships 'early in the evolution of the planet' (if we say the theory of evolution is true in this movie), before it was suitable even for them. Then they came back to take it, a bazillion years later, because they live forever and it just seemed like a year or so to them. I mean, really, who knows. It's a movie. :mischief

[Jedi Master Carr]

I just prefer the original, I actually had no problem with the ending since the original movie was the same way.