H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds - Silicon Valley FReep-in for FReepers, FRiends, and FRamlies (Vanity)

Pendragon Pictures ^ | 3/1/05 | null and void

[null and void]

KEWL!

[auzerais]

Sorry, but I'll be out of state on the 30th. But I'll keep an eye out for the movie [if it's still in theaters shen I get back].

[null and void]

If it makes it to the theaters, I still can't find any theater that will be showing it.

[null and void]

bump (in the night)

[null and void]

Massive Pendragon Pictures War of the Worlds Announcements
By Anthony Pearson Mar 25, 2005, 21:41 GMT

I just recieved an email from Pendragon Pictures revealing loads of needed information we have all been waiting for about there War of the Worlds film. Including words from the director about the push back release, test screening, new movie books, and poster confirmation.

The Principals of Pendragon Pictures announce the push back of the theatrical release date of H.G. WELLS' THE WAR OF THE WORLDS from March 30th, 2005 to late April with the exact date yet to be announced.

"The push back is due entirely to production," states director Timothy Hines. "I've worked for seven year on this film and as the release deadline approached I was faced with a very simple choice, rush the picture or push the release date back and do the movie right." Hines is unapologetic about the push back. "This was absolutely the right thing to do. My picture, H.G. WELLS' THE WAR OF THE WORLDS is an epic with thousands of special effects. It would have been absurd to cut scenes or rush effects when the movie was so close to completion. The thousands of fan letters that pour in every week reflect that this decision is correct and in the end it was the only way to go. Nobody remembers that some episodes of STAR WARS have been up to a year late, that Francis Ford Coppola, Kubrick and many other directors have routinely missed deadliness to get their picture right. H.G. WELLS' THE WAR OF THE WORLDS is all we hoped it would be and more."

A few private test screenings have brought overwhelmingly positive responses. Test audiences have reacted with strong emotions ranging from tears to triumphant. "I'm not surprised at the powerful reaction to the movie from our test groups," says Hines. "We did the book. Wells was a powerful writer. THE WAR OF THE WORLDS is a tragic story. It's a horror story. I didn't play the battles between the human artillery and the giant three-legged fighting machines triumphantly. This is humanity losing its planet to an invading force. Well, for a time anyway. That people have shown they are moved by the movie says we got it right."

The exact April theatrical release date of H.G. WELLS' THE WAR OF THE WORLDS will be announced shortly, though the DVD release is locked. The picture is presold for DVD into 60,000 retail stores in the U.S. and Canada and will hit the shelves June 15th, 2005. Worldwide DVD presales are in progress.

[null and void]

Just got the DVD will let you know how it looks when I'm done watching it...

[martin_fierro]

	Silicon Valley
Send FReepmail if you want on/off SVP list
Silicon Valley Slang
The List of Ping Lists

[Hoplite]

Most of the web reviews of the Pendragon effort I've read have been, how to put it... unkind in the extreme.

[Dashing Dasher]

You have no self control!


;-)

[null and void]

I can see why.

[null and void]

I have a little.

Very little...

[null and void]

In 25,000 words or less it stank.

And still I'm glad I bought a copy.

It is a pretty good screen adaptation of Wells' work. As true to the book as any movie I've seen.

The special effects are are very poor. Motion is jerky in many ordinary scenes, people running/walking things, that could almost as easily be done live action.

The assorted Martian machines are nicely done, and usually well fit into the scenes. The Fighting Machines didn't look as I expected from my understanding of Wells' descriptions, but are reasonable adaptations.

Matte work was awful! Poor color/resolution/motion match between foreground action and background. Carriage scenes were no better than 1950's TV car scenes.

Speaking of color, WTF??? There are lots of weird color schemes!

Early in the film the writer is showing his wife Mars, it's broad daylight full color on the ground, with a dark band full of stars high in the sky! Later in daylight scenes it's gray and colorless, I would have bought this lighting for the evening walk scene.

Seemingly at random some scenes are sepia toned, some with the green suppressed, almost a sepia effect, but just wrong looking.

The red weed was so-so.

There never were enough people crowding out of London, I think I have more people living on my block! This was very evident when following Miss and Mrs. Elphinstone and the writer's brother. The Channel was supposed to nearly be black with shipping. I only recall three warships, and the paddle steamer, which had plenty of open deckspace.

I was especially disappointed in the Thunderchild's battle. None of the boats or Martians had anything even remotely resembling realistic wakes. Crucial details of Wells' vivid description of the attack were utterly missing. Since this was one of my favorite scenes in the book, I found this annoying.

For all that, it's much better than the 1953 George Pal adaptation. Wells' genius manages to shine through the substandard effects.

And I did cry at the end. (So I'm a softy at heart. You gotta problem wid dat?)

[null and void]

Also it's 180 minutes long! I think it could have been condensed down to 2 hours, and perhaps even 90 minutes without losing too much.

[Ladysmith]

Yes, it could have easily been cut down by removing a ton of people walking everywhere and half of the ridiculous "emotional" expressions and reactions.

Even if you try to watch it as an artsy-fartsy movie with the acting, coloring, etc., it's really bad.

There was a note on a some site that Jeff Wayne is planning a movie from his musical but it probably won't be out until 2007. But, you know who probably could make a faithful and fantastic version of this movie - Peter Jackson.

[null and void]

But, you know who probably could make a faithful and fantastic version of this movie - Peter Jackson.

Good Lord, YES!

From your keyboard to God's eyes!

[BibChr]

Thanks for the ping.

You puzzle me, though. You knock the movie pretty hard, but then say it's "much better" than Pal's version -- which I've always liked.

I don't think I ever read Wells' story. What I tried of him lost me; but that would have been decades ago.

How is it better than the '53 version, which was fun, had some nice (for the time) eye candy, was suspenseful -- and had Gene Barry?

Dan

[null and void]

Don't get me wrong, I like the '53 version too. As a stand alone movie it's fine, one of the best of the 1950's science fiction genre.

Where it fails, in my opinion, is in being a good representation of the original story.

Where we differ is in that I have read the book several times and listened to it on tape scores of times. The current Timothy Hines production cleaves closely to the original.

One major difference is the time period. Pal set it in post WWII America, Hines in the original pre WWI England. As a consequence, the Martians have an overwhelming technological advantage. Wells foresaw mechanized armor, chemical warfare, energy weapons, interplanetary travel, the effects on invasive species (pre Kudzu!) and much more. Hines better captures the feel of "Bows and arrows against the lightning".

In an imaginary world, had both these versions been released on the same day in 1953, this would be THE definitive version. Unfortunately, the special effects wouldn't be noticeably different.

I've derived considerable pleasure from listening to The War of the Worlds on tape, Brilliance Corp has an economical version that makes wonderful listening on commutes or trips. It might be worth getting it, before seeing either the Hines or Spielberg versions of the tale.

[BibChr]

Thanks.

Now, do you mean Wells' broadcast? That I have heard and enjoyed.

Dan

[null and void]

No. The full book on tape, word for word, unabridged.
The version I have is read by Bill Weideman and is about 6 hours long.

It's bundled with The Time Machine, good for another 3 hours listening, but not a favorite of mine.

It's sold as a Bookcasette Classic Collection, titled 'The Time Machine and War of the Worlds' by H. G. Wells, ISBN 1-56100-589-4.

[null and void]

My 12 yo son is watching it with me right now. He's singularly unimpressed with the graphics. We're maybe 10 minutes in. "Why is it daylight when their looking at the stars???"

He keeps telling me "You could have done a better job." Geeeeee thanks, kid...