War of the Worlds starring Tom Cruise

avaunt · Jun 25, 2005

As "Leon" he created one of the iconic characters of all time, imnsho. One of my friends once got married, and as we walked out on his bucks night, his future mum-in-law, and his mother stopped us at the door. ( both in their late fifties, mind you ) M-I-L says, deadpan, " Anything interfers with tomorrow, boys, and we are sending Leon after you all ". We were stunned, then delighted !. Pretty cool old women, the both of them. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

earth_bound_misfit · Jun 26, 2005

Diesel motors start real easy with a push. Earlier trucks and things didn't even need a key! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ----------------------------------------------------------------- Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?Go here to see how: SDC Eye saver </div>

avaunt · Jun 26, 2005

Sure, the earlier ones did start with a crank. However, you would find in a bit difficult with the injected diesel motors, with their realitively short piston movement. Thats why we used to pre-heat the manifold and inlet with a bit of burning newspaper. Besides, the Hyster weighed about 5 tonne, and it was a gravel drive in a scrapyard. Sort of difficult to push it <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

commander_keen · Jun 27, 2005

The point is stories are adapted to fit 'modern' versions all the time. We're not the only culture that does it. Personally, I think the whole thing would look very silly if we tried to do a period piece. It just wouldnt work today w/all the knowledge that we picked up around. A movie's supposed to suspend your disbelief, afterall. BTW, about the alien technology that was mentioned. These beings didnt come from mars in this adaption; they traveled from light years away to reach us, so we'd have to assume that they have technology so vast and powerful that we cannot comprehend it. I understand what Spieldberg's trying to do here. My only complaint is Tom Cruise. He just only knows how to play himself and not the character. BTW, has anyone read Footfall? That, IMO, is the greatest alien-invasion book ever.

JonClarke · Jun 27, 2005

I would disagree that a a version set in the original time frame and world picture would not work. I think it would work very well. Suspension of disbelief is required, that is the nature of good story telling. People know that magic does not exist either, but that does not make the Harry Potter films or Lord of the Rings any less popular. If the story is going to be retold in the contemporary world then the aliens shouldn't come from mars. But that riases the question of how far can the story be changed and still be legitimately be called "War of the Worlds"? I would much prefer people to make their own original copies then subevrt old ones. I think it is more artistically honest as well. Of course retelling a classic tale can work very effectively. In a different genre we have the recent "Bride and Prejudice", which was marvellous. But of course we have plenty of Pride and Prejudice versions in the original context to compare and enjoy. We don't have any "War of the Worlds" in the original context. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

poodown · Jun 28, 2005

well i havent read any of the replies to this again from laziness but im just going to comment hopefully not saying something thats going to sound foolish. I love war of the worlds the cds (if anyone wants me send them to them just PM me with your e-mail or something) they are great! and i now all they words and stuf they are the best for going away ....and also i love tom cruise! he is gorgeous so when you put two and two together i reckon it will be brilliant! =) im excited! *thumbs up*

tom_hobbes · Jun 28, 2005

Here's a trailer for the 'alternative' War Of The Worlds. More authentic undoubtedly, but like humanity in Well's novel, this film is horribly doomed without the intervention of some as yet unimaginable stroke of luck. Entertainingly awful. http://static.howstuffworks.com/quicktime/wowhires.mov <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

spacefire · Jun 28, 2005

comes out tomorrow. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

JonClarke · Jun 28, 2005

That is of course the whole point, humanity would be doomed in the face of such an invasion. in Well's novel there are no more than 50 martians and they destroy britain in a few days. Were they not struck down by bacteria the world would have followed. By "entertainingly awful" do you mean awful in the disaster movie or the "attack of the killer tomatoes" sense? Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

tom_hobbes · Jun 28, 2005

Watch the trailer. All will become clear regarding the precise wording above. But yes, think killer tomatoes... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

Skylark · Jun 29, 2005

Just returned from seeing the film. They did stray from the novel, for some reason they had the aliens buried underground and the 'pilots' beaming down with the lightning. Oh, well. We had to expect Hollywoodization of the story. Tom Cruise was passable; but the character 'Ray' was a jerk which suits Cruise's acting ability well enough for him not to scew it up too bad. (sorry Poodown). The special effects were loud and gooey. Overall I'd give it 2 out of 4 stars. (When are movie watchers going to jump on the Dakota Fanning bandwagon with me? That young lady has the chops of someone three times her age! She was the best part of the movie, period)

londo_mollari · Jun 29, 2005

I thought it was good as well. Why didn't they stray from original even more and show some more fights between humans and aliens, I wonder?

arit · Jun 30, 2005

SPOILERS Hi, I saw it last night. All in all it wasn't bad, but I got quite annoyed about the "buried underground" part. I mean: These machines had been buried since before civilization, in the hundreds, or maybe thousands, not very deep. So, 1. How come we never found one, while searching for oil or something? 2. This means teh aliens had already been here. This completely contradicts the weakness to bacteria. They have been here, burying thousands of machines, but they didn;t get sick then only now??? 3. WHy the need to change the concept? Why did they change to 'buried', instead of 'falling' from the sky? One of the best parts of the book was the 'unscrewing of the lid", which we don't get now. 4. No thunderchild. 5. No vicar. 6. Oglvy doesn't talk about underground cities at all... Regards arit <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "We will either find a way, or make one!" - Hannibal </div>

flynn · Jul 1, 2005

Quite good, I still stand by my claim that a period version would of been far better. Spoilers... I think they should of killed Robby. Fanning is great. Cruise is okay. A widebody jet coming down that close to your house isn't likely to leave you alive even if you are in the basement. Cruise getting sucked up an Alien Butt! <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> Thunderchild + Crab robots missing. The lightning delivering the Aliens is just dumb. The tripods looked great and the weopary on those things looked and sounded very cool. I thought Oglvy was saving them so he'd have something to eat, see him sharpening that machete? The very best thing about the film was the King kong trailer at the beginning. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - Chuck Palahniuk. </div>

spacefire · Jul 2, 2005

lepas of logic aside, I thought it was really good movie. Worth seeing in theaters IMO. Some of the special effects were not as impressive as I was expecting-the planea and helicopters attacking the tripods looked kind of fake, but overall the 'whoa!' factor was pretty good. Crowd scenes were excellent and the drama felt real. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

jindivik · Jul 2, 2005

*spoliers* ive always had a fear of aliens, and even though it is a low age rating, this film scared the bejeebus out of me the sound the tripods make is going to be echoing around my head for days, and adding that to the strange sounds of the Jeff Wayne musical & ULLAHHHH...doesn't help <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> really good film though, the only thing i really found bad with it was they revealed them too early in the film, spectacular and everything but the buildup could have been a bit better...perhaps a probe sent down the hole or something could have made the anticipation greater escuse my bad use of English but it's 3AM (i only just got back from the cinema) and i need sleep <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

flynn · Jul 3, 2005

The sound effects alone deserve to be heard at the cinema. Unless you've got a really good sound system I'm affraid your TV will just not do it justice. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - Chuck Palahniuk. </div>

tom_hobbes · Jul 3, 2005

I agree. Schindler’s List aside this film had some of the most nightmarish scenes (in sound and visuals) I have ever experienced at the cinema. Although there are far more graphic science fiction or horror films, mired in mess and nastiness, visually Spielberg humanises the victims so that we can imagine ourselves helpless among them. Perhaps because the holocaust has always haunted Spielberg’s imagination, he finds those quietly devastating moments amid the sound and the fury, from the dust of the dead all over Cruise at the beginning, like ashes from the incinerators, the mountain of bodies in the river witnessed by a lone child, the believably shabby violence during the car theft to most devastating of all the empty clothes falling out of the night sky in their hundreds... By far the biggest problem for me is the searing emptiness of the script which travelled too far toward the shallow, inarticulate everyman. He can’t even communicate to his own children who he is or what he’s doing without near human extinction to bring them closer to him. The effect is to deny us an essential component of the story experience. It’s own protagonist is virtually mute. Instead of anchoring the scope of the drama to everything we know and care about, everything we stand to lose as our cultures are cleansed, we’re left adrift without cultural reference points, curiously numb. Perhaps rightly so. The scriptwriter and Spielberg signal quite heavily how quickly we will go from caring about our friends and neighbours to caring exclusively about our family and ourselves. The binding glue of society itself comes undone when we are afraid. After all should we meet an enemy who truly frightens us, the first thing to go will be our civilised values, the next - civilisation itself. Depending upon how you view it, both the writer and director then disarm this insight or reinforce it with terrible irony because the American Cinema Audience (A mythical beast I <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

jindivik · Jul 3, 2005

something REALLY WRONG i found with the film......the lightning shorted out the circuits in every electrical device in the city, am i right?....well when the first machine is coming out of the ground, you see a man recording it with a video camera, he gets vapourised then you see other various people meeting the same fate through the LCD screen, how could it be working if everything else got fried? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

spacefire · Jul 3, 2005

well maybe the camera was hidden behind his computer. The circuits boards might have protected it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

stefsaber · Jul 3, 2005

So is the movie any good?

tom_hobbes · Jul 3, 2005

You're right. Those cameras should have been fried! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

flynn · Jul 3, 2005

Bloody lucky that when everyone ground to a halt on the freeway they left a nice channel for him to drive through too. + the film is well worth watching. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - Chuck Palahniuk. </div>

spacefire · Jul 3, 2005

this one IS worth the money to see in in theaters. I even bought overpriced raisins and a Fanta from the movie theater!!! when I heard of it, I never thought I'd say this, but...GO WATCH IT PUNY HUMANS! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

aaron38 · Jul 3, 2005

WARNING!!! Spoilers follow. Please don't read my post if you haven't yet seen the film. For me the film had two glaringly huge plot holes that just pulled me right out of the atmosphere of the film. 1. The working camcorder. 2. The death by bacteria. The camcorder was so sloppy and unnecessary to blatently violate the rules of the film. And for the bacteria, I can't accept that a patiently, carefully planned invasion wouldn't involve air and water samples. Don't we vaccinate our troops? They have starships and don't do the same? But my largest by far disapointment was that the film had set up a HUGE political statment and didn't have the gutts to follow through. Tim Robbin's line "occupations always fail" is sophmoric in comparison. The aliens are shielded, unstoppable and eating people. Now we hear that a few have been stopped in Japan somehow. Now what is Japan? Home of the Kamakazee. Moving on, we've got Tom being eaten with some hand grenades. He's saved, but the grenades are injested and the aliens are dead. So now we're all set up, ready for the ending that can only be made if you've got a pair of grapefruit sized cajones swinging down at your knees.... You have to get bombs inside the shields. They eat people, they need to eat bombs. They need to eat human bombs!! That's right, the world is saved by SUICIDE BOMBERS! Swarms of them marching off to save their families and their plannet the only way they can. How are we getting our butts handed to us in Iraq? And what beats the aliens? Suicide bombers! Now THAT'S a political statement.

War of the Worlds starring Tom Cruise

avaunt

Guest

earth_bound_misfit

Guest

avaunt

Guest

commander_keen

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

poodown

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

spacefire

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

Skylark

Guest

londo_mollari

Guest

arit

Guest

flynn

Guest

spacefire

Guest

jindivik

Guest

flynn

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

jindivik

Guest

spacefire

Guest

stefsaber

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

flynn

Guest

spacefire

Guest

aaron38

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page