War of the Worlds starring Tom Cruise

[Leovinus]

<i>Child starlet Dakota Fanning runs through a leaf-strewn street while filming one of the final scenes of Steven Spielberg's 'War of the Worlds,' starring Tom Cruise, Tuesday, Nov. 30, 2004, in Brooklyn borough of New York. The film is based on the classic H. G. Wells novel of the same name. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens) </i><br /><br />Now I had hoped that a remake of this movie would not star Tom Cruise and that it would take place in the 1890s true to HG Wells' book. It looks like both hopes are dashed. First, it obviously stars Tom Cruise. Second, the trash can in that photo looks rather modern. So I'm totally bummed about this movie. It's going to be another Tom Cruise ham job with undoubtedly tons of CGI effects like Star Wars and probably have Cruise save the world instead of bacteria. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Leovinus]

<i>Tom Cruise pauses in a leaf-strewn street while filming one of the final scenes of Steven Spielberg's 'War of the Worlds,' Tuessday, Nov. 30, 2004, in Brooklyn borough of New York. The film is based on the classic H. G. Wells novel of the same name. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens) </i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Leovinus]

<i>Director Stephen Spielberg, right, pauses with an unidentified man on the steps of a Brooklyn brownstone building during film for 'The War of the Worlds,' Tuesday, Nov. 30, 2004, in New York. The film is based on the 1898 H. G. Wells legendary science fiction classic in which aliens invade the world. The film is scheduled to be released in summer, 2005. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens) </i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Leovinus]

<i>A stylist, right, grooms actress Miranda Otto's hair on the set of Steven Spielberg's 'War of the Worlds,' Tuesday, Nov. 30, 2004, in the brownstone section of Brooklyn in New York. The film is based on the classic H. G. Wells novel of the same name. Otto is from Brisane, Australia. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens) </i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Leovinus]

<i>Tom Cruise, left, embraces a man wearing tattered clothing while filming one of the final scenes of Steven Spielberg's 'War of the Worlds,' Tuessday, Nov. 30, 2004, in Brooklyn borough of New York. The film is based on the classic H. G. Wells novel of the same name. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens) </i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

I agree.<br /><br />War of the Worlds will be another ripoff of a time-honored classic. The &%$#@!s... :/ Is nothing sacred? Do they have to rip out the heart of good science fiction and stomp on it. There, of course, will be a huge marketing buildup. It will culminate on opening day with the release of War of the Worlds keychains and screen-printed enema bags. :/<br /><br />No. I am not amused one bit.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[flynn]

I despair. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[Aetius]

One word sums it up: Travesty.

 

[airconvent]

why is everyone so upset about the movie?<br />if you want the pure original, you should not even be watching the movies adaptation , whether set in 1890 or 2004. the fact is HG wells had a wild imagination but many things that exist today did not exist then, so he could not possibly have imagined they can exist today. had he lived now, the story would have been different. the adaptation updates the movies (hence "adaptation", not "dramatisation") with a good mix of special effects , visuals and perhaps the human spirit that are deserving of an interpretation for this century. since no one has actually seen the film yet, its pretty amazing how people can say the show is lame or screwed up. I prefer to see it first before deciding. you all should to. "innocent until proven guilty?"<br /><br />For the purists, there's always the earlier versions to ride on. Although not based in 1890, the last one in 1950s (or is it 60s), was not too bad either....although the effects and feel may be dated now...<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong>To Boldly Go Where No Man Has Gone Before...</strong></p><p><strong>Live Long and Prosper</strong></p> </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">..why is everyone so upset about the movie?...</font><br /><br />Some classics are nigh near untouchable when it comes to fully communicating their story on the "Silver Screen." Hollywood tends to... "Hollywoodize" them to death. Even relatively decent storylines get lost in the pursuit of the WOW value of special effects. "Lord of the Rings" is one of the few classics that seems to have made it through the process relatively unscathed. However, think what it would have been like if they had tried to condense it into one film.. They took the right approach.<br /><br />"War of the Worlds" is a premier classic that launched an entire genre of books and movies. If they "Hollywoodize" it, I think they will end up mortally wounding it and it will die a slow, gurgling death as it coughs up blood on a back shelf at the local video store.<br /><br />All I ask is that they stay well within the spirit and storyline of the original. As it is, the scenes depicted in the thread don't give me much hope that is being done. The 1800's added a certain flair and nostalgia to the book as evidenced by the original movie. I don't want that taken away.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[rogers_buck]

I wonder if it would be possible to get a court order to forbid them from using the name?<br /><br />I really shudder to think what this is going to be like, but most of all I will miss what it won't be like.<br /><br />No victorian england culture shock akin to what it had unleashed on less advanced societies around the globe. No mortally wounded tripod falling into the river and turning it to boiling. No Thunderchild ramming headlong into a martian while taking fire. No red weeds. No mournfull call of the last martian. Sigh.<br /><br />I can guess the formula:<br />$$$ = ET+Independance day+Top Gun<br /><br />The good news is that with such low expectations, we can only be impressed.

 

[Leovinus]

I'm going to wait for it to come out on video and then not rent it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[avaunt]

I'm going to wait for it to come out on video and then not rent it. <br /><br /><br />lol. Masterly wit.<br /><br />Anything other than the original story, transposed to a screen play with minimn interference, is going to suck.<br /><br />The problem with American scriptwriters, is they think everyone else is as stupid as people from texas are (depicted as being.)<br />You all ought to bite the bullet and open your eyes, only New Zealanders can make movies like this. There is another coming, The Cronicles of Narnia, wait till you see it. Just hand it all over to us, and the quality of your entertainment with ramp up orders of magnitude.<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Cruise is expressive of the worthlessness of American culture, in a way that surpasses refinement.

 

[crowing]

Hmmmm,I have to admit that I don't like tom cruise much either,why couldn't they have got tom hanks or somebody like him instead.<br /><br />At least spielberg is still in charge,and it's one of those films I'll have to go and see in the cinema,even if the reviews say it was crap,but I really do hope that I'll like it!<br />Even if it isn't set back in the 1890's,that would have been great too,imagine the special effects of the martian crafts set against 1890's era,but nevertheless it could still be good in modern times,and I wonder what the ending will be!!<br />

 

[tuckerfan]

Well, someone <i>is</i> going to be making a period piece version of War of the Worlds! And it's due out before Cruise's version. http://www.pendragonpictures.com/WOTWKEY.html

 

[Leovinus]

Now THAT is worth seeing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[flynn]

I hope it gets a decent release.<br /><br />Heres a pic from the Big Budget version. Kinda interesting.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[jcdenton]

Interesting, yet creepy...<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Regardless of nationality it is all Hollywood. I look forward to the adapatation of that gem of a story, Lion, the witch and the wardrobe but won't be surprised if it sucks big time.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[avaunt]

Well, the New Zealand director isn't quite in the position of power that Jackson had, on LoTR. He IS however, a very accomplished man, directed Shreik, had a large hand in the script of shriek too.<br /><br />And I think you are going to be pleasently suprised. Kiwis can do anything, mate.

 

[5stone10]

I don't have a problem with either Cruise or Spielberg, I just hope they don't employ Martians since our knowledge of Mars has improved greatly since the 50s.<br /><br />I like what Speilberg has done recently - 'The Terminal', 'Minority Report', 'Catch Me If You Can', and he did a 'true-to-script' treatment of 'A.I.' after Kubrick died.<br /><br />Anybody that has a problem with Cruise should watch 'Eyes Wide Shut' or 'Magnolia'. He was also good in 'Minority Report'.

 

[flynn]

I don't know, I'm such a fan of the original book and 1950s 'B' movies I'd be disapointed if the film didn't employ Martians. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[avaunt]

Hahahahaha.<br /><br />Zooom, right over his head, Flynn.<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[crowing]

That was a fantastic book as a kid,I so much wanted my wardrobe to be the same!<br /><br /><br /><br />PS If the KIWIS are making it,lets hope they can do it better than playing cricket!!!<br />I suppose the lord of the rings was a "reasonable attempt"!!!<br /><br />LOL Avaunt!!!<br />

 

[Leovinus]

And who's to say that a living thing can't thrive on carbon dioxide instead oxygen. In fact, I think plants do it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>