'War of the Worlds' - Good or Bad

[[BIG] Ranger]

Saw WotW last night...

Actually I was pleasantly surprised...

Despite being an American remake (no disrespect) the USMC didn't come in at the end and kick ass - and then invade the enemy planet to 'free' them!



Tom Cruise gave a good, sturdy performance and didn't come across as a Bruce Willis style action hero.

I think the US critics slammed this movie because of the down-beat ending (despite it being the ending that H.G. Wells intended).

US audiences probably wanted something more up-beat with America kicking some alien ass (...did they have asses?) at the end.

SO what did you think?

7/10

[Civic]

10/10

[Monoman]

I thought it was a good update. Have you guys seen the original movie that came out in 1953? The old movie has some funny scenes. The scene with the atomic bomb.

[SiP]

***CRITICAL MOVIE CONTENT BELOW - DON'T READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU HAVE YET TO SEE THE FILM AND WISH NOT TO HAVE ANYTHING REVEILLED***

Upon finishing my first viewing of this movie, I was happily content with the movie. That sort of ending was a nice change of pace from the expected sort of ending that a movie of this nature is generally associated with (i.e. some genius combative plan that is spur of the moment to save humanity such as in Independence Day and the like). However, when it comes to science fiction films, I am a brutal critic of technicalities and adherence to simple logic or lack there of.

First off, didn't it seem a little odd that this alien race chose to use machines that had lain dormant since before the existence of humanity to conquer Earth? Surely, over such a great extend of time, this alien race would have felt the impact of further technological evolution resulting in the creation of far more superior weaponry.

Second, why did that house and all its inhabitants not get completely annihilated immediately following that scene when Ray axe-hacks that snake-like eye tentacle in the basement? It was this scene that really topped off the cake of never-ending situations where simple probability should have ruled out the potential survival of "nine-lives Ray."

Also, why did the machines lose their protective energy fields when the effects of lack of environmental immunity start to take effect on the alien life forms? Are we to believe that their machines are biologically weak as well? I sure hope not.

Finally, what really did the most damage to the film for me was the aliens' lack of consideration for the most pivotal element of the invasion - the biological composition of Earth. How is it that such an advanced race of beings simply chose to overlook such a critical factor as its biological compatibility to the biological nature of Earth?

However, on strictly a superficial level of critique, the movie was quite good - especially the part played by Dakota Fanning. I think here character's part was convincing enough to make up for all the technical mishaps.

8/10

[Monoman]

Yea, the idea that the aliens didn't consider the environment is the same flaw that is in the movie Signs. In Signs, how can the aliens die when water touches them when there is water in the air?

[Dark uk]

All good points InSiPidus, I'd give this 8.5/10.

[TychPsych]

[quote="InSiPidus"]

"First off, didn't it seem a little odd that this alien race chose to use machines that had lain dormant since before the existence of humanity to conquer Earth? Surely, over such a great extend of time, this alien race would have felt the impact of further technological evolution resulting in the creation of far more superior weaponry."

Well, the aliens probably figured that we hadn't advanced enough so they didn't need to use their new technology. They whooped us anyway.

"Second, why did that house and all its inhabitants not get completely annihilated immediately following that scene when Ray axe-hacks that snake-like eye tentacle in the basement? It was this scene that really topped off the cake of never-ending situations where simple probability should have ruled out the potential survival of "nine-lives Ray."


Well, you noticed that the aliens were gathering the humans. Maybe the aliens wanted more humans alive to fertilize their crops or whatever they do with them.


"Also, why did the machines lose their protective energy fields when the effects of lack of environmental immunity start to take effect on the alien life forms? Are we to believe that their machines are biologically weak as well? I sure hope not."

That I really didn't understand...


"Finally, what really did the most damage to the film for me was the aliens' lack of consideration for the most pivotal element of the invasion - the biological composition of Earth. How is it that such an advanced race of beings simply chose to overlook such a critical factor as its biological compatibility to the biological nature of Earth?"

Well, you can't blame the movie for that. That was an important part of the book that couldn't be left out of the movie.. so... it is H.G. Wells' fault.

[[BIG] Ranger]

Just some quick ideas on the issues raised...

I was thinking that that maybe the aliens 'seeded' the earth - like a farmer does with a field - so that when the planet developed they could return to gather in thier crop (ie 'us'!)...

As to making the seeminly elemental mistake about the 'biohazard' of earth...

Not so far-fetched.

Take teh arogance of teh Nazis during WWII - what primarily brought them down in thier invation of Russia?

The weather!

Elemental mistake in an otherwise brilliantly planned invasion.

Finally, as to the machine loosing power - well, you would really have to ask H. G. Wells!

[TychPsych]

I know this isn't important but, how did the reporter guy go deaf? I didn't quite catch that. I know somehow his camera saved his life but...

[TychPsych]

Nevermind about the reporter guy. I saw it again today with a friend and I figured out something very puzzling.

Why did the shields go down when the aliens got sick?

Because the shields are not always on.

When Ray and Rachel are in the basement and the second camera thing comes down, Rachel runs outside. After a few things happen, Rachel gets captured. Ray then throws a grenade at the tripod, and it explodes before it gets close. But, then it walks over and picks up Ray, still holding grenades. If the shield had been up, it would have detonated. Also, if the shields were always up, the tripods wouldn't be able to get close to anything without it blowing up because you saw the birds were able to land on the tripod, meaning if the shields were up they wouldn't be able to do that, neither could humans. So, I think that the aliens inside put up shields when they saw threats. When the aliens got sick, they were too disoriented to put up the shields.

Quote: InSiPidus
"Are we to believe that their machines are biologically weak as well? I sure hope not"

Well, the tripods in Boston were all white, just like the red weed tuber things, meaning that they were killed by germs. And why shouldn't it be organic material? What else do they have on Mars? Rocks might be a bit less flexible than they wanted.

[BBs|DeStrOyEr]

9/10. It's a very good film

[TychPsych]

Oh yeah and I give this movie a 10/10

I loved it.

[Selix]

Personally, I'd have to give it a 7/10.

There was little detail put into the movie. Yeah yeah, it had l337 gr4f1x.

It would have been cooler if we would have figured some more out about the aliens....about their history or something. The movie structure was really, REALLY simple...infact maybe too simple.

Meet the broken family, aliens come, aliens kill, aliens lose, family gets back together, Happily Ever After.

We, in the movie, never figured out how we won. Atleast, they didn't show us finding out.


I didn't think it was all that great of a movie. Structure was low, detail was medeocre (sp), and other specifics that I don't have the time to list (Will list later.)

[Monoman]

The movie's story followed what H.G. Wells originally wrote. The family aspect was added but the way the aliens came and died were from the original story. If they would of changed that, it would of no longer been the "War of the Worlds." Also, they did say how we won, how the aliens were defeated.

[Dark uk]

It would have been cooler if we would have figured some more out about the aliens....about their history or something. The movie structure was really, REALLY simple...infact maybe too simple.

Meet the broken family, aliens come, aliens kill, aliens lose, family gets back together, Happily Ever After.

Like mono said its a remake of the book but Spielberg wanted to do something alittle differnt with this movie. I'm sure you would have enjoyed it more if it had all been about the army coming in and whooping their asses but he want it to be more of a surivial/horror movie following this irrisponcible dad as he as he trys to keep his family alive.

Crap I wont be able to explain all this properly so I wont even try but I did watch a little Documentry on it which was rather interesting and made me apperiacte the movie more. Also there is a hidden message behind the film sort of like 'Animal Farm' if you know about that movie. I think this movie might have been about commi's or something I can't remember but H.G. Wells was pissed about something when it wrote it anyway.

We, in the movie, never figured out how we won. Atleast, they didn't show us finding out.

Maybe you left too early? the last 2mins told you how we won.

I didn't think it was all that great of a movie. Structure was low, detail was medeocre (sp), and other specifics that I don't have the time to list (Will list later.)

You'r thinking of this movie as just another sci-fi. This film is told from very first person view from tom cruise, we know what he knows and we see what he sees. Its all about following him during this invasion so we won't know the history or what is happening in other places. Alot of the detail is left to us to pick up on and hopefully you did.

(I hope aleast one paragraph made sense, I'm very tired..)