War of the worlds

[iron25]

Originally Posted by Mal

I'm not alone

You most definitely are not

Originally Posted by DarthYoda

well I thought it was great. a Very good retelling of the story.

Unfortunately there's no 'scratching head' smiley so this one will have to do
A good retelling of the story Are you sure you didn't fall asleep whilst watching it Story...what story

I know 'liking' a film is about opinion but is it me or are recent 'blockbusters' getting to be rather boring and definitely over-rated The only big 'blockbuster' that I have enjoyed recently is Sin City, it was far from brilliant but at least it was enjoyable despite being about 25 minutes too long but other than that film I can't remember any recent films that have been any good. Batman Begins was just as bad and over-rated.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by iron25

You most definitely are not



Unfortunately there's no 'scratching head' smiley so this one will have to do
A good retelling of the story Are you sure you didn't fall asleep whilst watching it Story...what story

I know 'liking' a film is about opinion but is it me or are recent 'blockbusters' getting to be rather boring and definitely over-rated The only big 'blockbuster' that I have enjoyed recently is Sin City, it was far from brilliant but at least it was enjoyable despite being about 25 minutes too long but other than that film I can't remember any recent films that have been any good. Batman Begins was just as bad and over-rated.

good retelling in terms of aliens attaking the earth and then us trying to beat them only for them to be defeated by a cold.

well Hollywood summer blockbusters recently seem to be all about the action and cast and not about the script and/or storyline.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by iron25

All I can say to anyone yet to see this film is don't bother, save your money or rent the original film. I can understand why there weren't any advanced screenings to the critics because this film is truly atrocious & totally living on the hype. The film doesn't explain anything and the storyline is simply about a family moving from one place to another to escape the danger The special effects weren't particulary special and with the poor storyline and abrupt ending it was a poor showing from Steven Spielberg. My rating is 'must do better'.

I thought the original was concisely, Mars send marshians and machines to earth to exterminate us and take over the planet.

Lots of running around, the horror, what shall we do, where shall we go.

Marshians are killed by earthly bacteria/viruses.

Just how exactly does the new hollywood version differ so greatly from all the other versions????

[TheBlueRaja]

I would argue that in the original there really was a sense that - this is it - the end of the world, weve lost - never stood a chance and right at the end they all congregate in a church to sing together in what they belive would be their last words IIRC.

The new version didnt evoke that same sense of doom, but i still enjoyed it though.

[Mal]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I thought the original was concisely, Mars send marshians and machines to earth to exterminate us and take over the planet.

Strangely, they didn't mention a plane and the machines were buried in the ground, everywhere, under cities where people would notice the burial, if it was done recently. The pilots flew in later by lighting.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Lots of running around, the horror, what shall we do, where shall we go.

Marshians are killed by earthly bacteria/viruses.

Just how exactly does the new hollywood version differ so greatly from all the other versions????

The ending was abrupt. One minute he was running about, blowing a tripod up and then, as if by a miracle, they all die. There was no build up, they just died. It's pretty hard to explain. Maybe it's the story that it's based on, that I have a problem with, but this film just ends.

Just because it's based on the same story that a previous film was based on, doesn't mean that this version doesn't have flaws.

I have asked this in my earlier post, but can someone explain what happened to Robbie to me?

Originally Posted by iron25

You most definitely are not



Unfortunately there's no 'scratching head' smiley so this one will have to do
A good retelling of the story Are you sure you didn't fall asleep whilst watching it Story...what story

I know 'liking' a film is about opinion but is it me or are recent 'blockbusters' getting to be rather boring and definitely over-rated The only big 'blockbuster' that I have enjoyed recently is Sin City, it was far from brilliant but at least it was enjoyable despite being about 25 minutes too long but other than that film I can't remember any recent films that have been any good. Batman Begins was just as bad and over-rated.

"Theres just no pleasing some people" said Brian. The peasant replies " thats just what jesus said sir" .


I enjoyed it mindless pap but enjoyed it never the less

[ntluser]

Though I enjoyed seeing War Of The Worlds I was disappointed that they didn't really use music to build up the atmosphere.

There was a lot of focus on the personal relationships, character development etc and maybe not enough on the action.

You could have filmed it without any humans present and the Tripods would still have died. Can't help feeling that if Arnold Schwarzenegger had been the lead there would have been a lot more resistance to the invaders and a lot more dramatic music.

[iron25]

Have you seen the tv adverts for the film where they advertise it as 'one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made' and 'action packed' Action packed, I can't remember there being much action I don't call a few buildings being blown up much action. Like most of these quotes they use, they obviously haven't used the entire quote so here are the quotes in full:

'If this film had a better storyline, better special effects and a better ending, it might possibly rate as one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made'.

'I was expecting it to be more action packed, instead it wasn't and I almost fell asleep watching it'.

Believe me, these are real quotes but unfortunately I threw out the magazines at the weekend and today is the day that the dustmen come. Damn

When I watched the film it wasn't at the cinema so I saw it on the small screen so I was not seduced by the big picture & sound and perhaps that is why I felt the film was extremely poor. I say this because I remember thinking that Independence Day was really good when I saw it at the cinema but when I watched on TV I realised that it wasn't that good.

[Lord Nikon]

the SFX weren't to blame, the fact was that they didn't bring forward enough of a story and the ending was somewhat anticlimactic.

It's like all too many computer games...... dazzle them with effects and they won't notice the lack of substance.

[MovedGoalPosts]

I must admit to being dissapointed. Maybe I'm getting jaded and blase by all the big computerised effects. Maybe too, knowing these effects are computer generated rather than involving actors actually flinging themselves aroudn anything other than a blue scree, also takes any sense of realism out of it.

It was I suppose an alternative take on it to show less about the futile fightback against the invaders, and more the human impact. For me there seemed to be a major chunk missing between emerging from the basement (with no real explaination of what all the red stuff really was), and him suddenly being able to stroll into Boston (and why was Boston almost intact when everywhere else was decimated?).

[aliferste]

Originally Posted by iron25

........or rent the original film. .

The original film was not an accurate telling of the story iether! For a start it was american, they had the usuall male hero with his female hysterical companion........oh and was he not a scientist as well!!

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by aliferste

The original film was not an accurate telling of the story iether! For a start it was american, they had the usuall male hero with his female hysterical companion........oh and was he not a scientist as well!!

All true, in fact it's looking more and more likely that the Pendragon version will be the most accurate. Although from what I hear both the acting and special effetcs are pretty poor. I also suspect it won't get released over here, so you had better get importing if you want to see it (as I have - just waiting for it to show up).

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

All true, in fact it's looking more and more likely that the Pendragon version will be the most accurate. Although from what I hear both the acting and special effetcs are pretty poor. I also suspect it won't get released over here, so you had better get importing if you want to see it (as I have - just waiting for it to show up).

I have seen the Pendragon version and yes it appears to stick to the book but it looks even more low budget than some episodes of Doctor Who from the 70's.

I honestly was laughing at some of the acting and effects.

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by DarthYoda

I have seen the Pendragon version and yes it appears to stick to the book but it looks even more low budget than some episodes of Doctor Who from the 70's.

I honestly was laughing at some of the acting and effects.

At the end of the day I can always read my copy of the book

My 1st edition print of the book

Of the tv/film versions - I enjoyed the '53 and Resurrection TV series the most.

[aliferste]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

All true, in fact it's looking more and more likely that the Pendragon version will be the most accurate. Although from what I hear both the acting and special effetcs are pretty poor. I also suspect it won't get released over here, so you had better get importing if you want to see it (as I have - just waiting for it to show up).

I have the pendragon version!

It does stick to th ebook but the acting, special effects and all round general feel of the film is terrible. Honestly, I love cheesy sci fi but it really was quite poor.

Worth watching though just to see the lead actors moustache