War of the Worlds

[marywebgirl]

The Onion seemed to like it overall. Damn it.

[hobocamp]

Wrong Wells.

Actually, it's Orson Welles. Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

Anyway, I heard a week or so ago that Spielberg wanted the theater audience to have the same reaction that the radio audience had to Welles' version (people actually believed it and some even jumped off bridges, so the legend goes). So he wants people to pay for a movie ticket and then kill themselves in the theater because they think the film is real?

[jynni]

I just read the spoiler for this and I must say, if I didn't know the ending was from the book, I'd think it was a complete and total cop out. To use one of my fav Syndrome quotes - Lame, lame, lame, lame, LAME!

Dakota Fanning seems to be getting really good reviews for this. I can't help it - I like her.

[Deleted]

Roger Ebert gave WotW only 2 stars. He was not impressed.

Here's a snippet:

"War of the Worlds" is a big, clunky movie containing some sensational sights but lacking the zest and joyous energy we expect from Steven Spielberg. It proceeds with the lead-footed deliberation of its 1950s predecessors to give us an alien invasion that is malevolent, destructive and, from the alien point of view, pointless.

Roger Ebert's review of WotW

I also found this interesting on the same page - how Ebert ranked other Spielberg films. Gives you an idea for comparison:

Ebert rates Spielberg
Of the 21.25 Spielberg movies Roger Ebert has reviewed (the .25 being Spielberg's quarter of "Twilight Zone -- The Movie," which also featured segments by Jon Landis, Joe Dante and George Miller), his average rating has been 3.270588 stars. Count 'em:

"War of the Worlds" (2005) - 2
"The Terminal" (2004) - 3.5
"Catch Me If You Can" (2002) - 3
"Minority Report" (2002) - 4
"A.I. Artificial Intelligence" (2001) - 3
"Saving Private Ryan" (1998) -4
"Amistad" (1997) - 3
"The Lost World: Jurassic Park" (1997) - 2
"Schindler's List" (1993) - 4
"Jurassic Park" (1993) - 3
"Hook" (1991) - 2
"Always" (1989) - 2
"Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" (1989) - 3.5
"Empire of the Sun" (1987) - 2.5
"The Color Purple" (1985) - 4
"Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" (1984) - 4
"E.T. -- The Extra-Terrestrial" (1982) - 4
"Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981) - 4
"Close Encounters of the Third Kind: The Special Edition" (1977) - 4
"Jaws" (1975) - 4
"The Sugarland Express" (1974) 2.5

"Kick the Can" from "Twilight Zone -- The Movie" (1983) - 1.5

[Deleted]

Hey, I didn't think it was so bad. I kinda liked it. Tom Cruise did a decent job acting in it, and the chemistry with him and the actors playing his children was pretty realistic. It's not the best movie ever, but I do think it plays better in the theater. I don't think you'd get the full effect watching it at home. That said, the other moviegoers at the showing I went to luckily had good movie manners. (So often at these blockbuster type movies, they don't.)
I think it'll do decently, but I don't know that it'll be the major box office blockbuster Hollywood is expecting. It wasn't a packed showing (though it was at noon on a weekday).

[Deleted]

hobocamp said:

Wrong Wells.

Anyway, I heard a week or so ago that Spielberg wanted the theater audience to have the same reaction that the radio audience had to Welles' version (people actually believed it and some even jumped off bridges, so the legend goes). So he wants people to pay for a movie ticket and then kill themselves in the theater because they think the film is real?

Seriously, I'd love it if some yahoo did leap up from his seat, yell "These enormous tripods will devour us all!" and then run screaming out of the cinema al la Panicky Guy in the Simpsons.

[queensix]

stargirl said:

Tom Cruise did a decent job acting in it, and the chemistry with him and the actors playing his children was pretty realistic.

He played very well with Dakota Fanning and to be honest, she's the only reason I bought into TC's character. The scenes of panic and destruction at the start were very good. It was very well filmed I have to say. So it impressed me but I thought the ending was just too tidy. Typical Spielberg. I wouldn't go to see it again though.

The screening I went to was almost empty which I thought was a little odd because it was a wet Friday and the cinema is nearly always jammed on a day like that.

[Deleted]

jynni said:

I just read the spoiler for this and I must say, if I didn't know the ending was from the book.

I've never read the book and have yet to see the classic. Which part of the ending are you talking about? Is it about Robbie or the aliens? Coz the alien's story I can shrug about. That Robbie thing was pure suckage.

[Deleted]

I just saw it today. I didn't want to see it on opening weekend. I wanted to wait and see it later this summer but there's not too much to do this weekend.

Anyway, I feel the same way about this movie that I do about practically every big summer blockbuster movie I've seen the past few years. It's really enjoyable when you're in the theatre watching it. Very exciting. I had my hand over my mouth in shock at many of the parts. It was just exciting. Very loud, very scary and very fun. UNTIL Tom meets Tim Robbins. That is where the movie started to fall apart for me. They just spent way too much time in that farmhouse. I wasn't glancing at my watch until that whole part of the movie. The ending sucked. I know it was based on the book but it sucked IMO. Especially, the fact that I don't quite get why Boston wasn't one of their main blow-up spots. I hated how that city was pretty much unscathed and I hated how the grandparent's street was clean as can be and they were all fresh & pretty and no one was even outside. I also didn't understand how the son managed to get there before Tom & Dakota.

I thought Dakota did a good job. Quite a few of the comments on other message boards implied that she spent the whole movie screaming but she screamed an appropriate amount for me. It made sense that a kid her age would be really really freaked out. The boy who played the son bugged the hell out of me. Not the actor so much but the character. I didn't understand his motivation in a lot of the scenes. Like when he wanted to run with the tanks I was a little "huh" about that whole part. Didn't get that. I know he had "hero desires" or whatever but still. I wanted to smack the shit out of him.

Anyway, as I said, it was exciting but the more I thought about it throughout the day the more I found myself saying "Hey, remember that part where they go to blah blah blah? That didn't make any sense" or "Remember when someone said this? That was really stupid"

So it was OK but I don't think it holds up to speculation.

Also, when Tom Cruise runs, he sort of prances around. That bugged me.

[sjankis630]

Thought it was OK. nice effects pretty good acting, but there was some license taken having Cruise & Family get a few perks here and there.
The crowd I saw it with , I think, got tired of it about 2/3 of the way through and the reaction on the way out was kind of subdued, for respect, and meh.