Skip to comments.
Spielberg and Cruise to do WAR OF THE WORLDS
Variety / Cinescape ^
| PATRICK SAURIOL
Posted on 03/24/2004 2:59:32 AM PST by maquiladora
Mars will invade Earth once again, but this time it will be documented by Steven Spielberg. The INDIANA JONES director will helm a new remake of H.G. Wells classic science fiction invasion story THE WAR OF THE WORLDS, with it looking very likely that Tom Cruise will star in the film.
Cruise's production company had first started working on a revised WAR movie two years ago. With Spielberg now onboard as director, the project will become a joint DreamWorks/Paramount co-production. Cruise and longtime business partner Paula Wagner will produce the movie, with Spielberg and DreamWorks execs Walter Parkes and Laurie MacDonald also likely to have a role.
Screenwriter David Koepp (SECRET WINDOW) is rewriting the latest draft turned in by Josh Friedman (SAHARA). According to the first reports from '02, the film is supposedly set in 1890s England just as Wells' novel is.
The two other major productions of WAR OF THE WORLDS were Orson Welles' October 1938 radio broadcast (which was believed to be authentic by some listeners) and George Pal's 1953 movie.
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: movies; spielberg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
To: maquiladora
The two other major productions of WAR OF THE WORLDS were Orson Welles' October 1938 radio broadcast (which was believed to be authentic by some listeners) and George Pal's 1953 movie. This ignores the movie Independence Day which was also just a remake of the story, or, more correctly, a remake of the 1953 film.
Don't believe me? In a remarkable case of homage to the original movie, an atomic bomb was dropped on the aliens by a B-2. In the 1953 version, an atomic bomb was dropped by a Northrop YB-49 Flying wing, the Jack Northrup designed ancestor of the B-2
Of course, being a politically correct modern remake, the extensive praying at the end of the original that took place in churches and cathedrals was replaced by prayers lead by a Jewish guy, and the destruction of the aliens was accomplished not by viruses "that God, in His wisdom, had created" but by a man-made computer virus
2
posted on
03/24/2004 3:13:29 AM PST
by
jscd3
To: maquiladora
According to the first reports from '02, the film is supposedly set in 1890s England just as Wells' novel is. Excellent. Setting it modern day would have just been Independence Day II. Here's to creaky, metal Victorian tripods!
But Tom Cruise as an Englishman??? Ay yay yay. About as convincing as his high society Park Avenue doctor in Eyes Wide Shut.
3
posted on
03/24/2004 3:16:48 AM PST
by
Jhensy
To: maquiladora
What a great childhood movie this was! Scary as heck...let's hope this new version won't muck it up with noisy and unnecessary special effects.
Tom Cruise and Jennifer Garner (Alias), could make it a fabulous remake.
4
posted on
03/24/2004 3:20:57 AM PST
by
YaYa123
(@The Kerrys Care About All The Little People...who cook, clean and schlep for them.com)
To: YaYa123
What a great childhood movie this was! Scary as heck When I saw the LA City Hall go down my folks said I went nuts.
5
posted on
03/24/2004 3:28:48 AM PST
by
Mike Darancette
(General - Alien Army of the Right (AAOTR))
To: YaYa123
I think it's a mistake to recreate it in the 1890's...if Jules Verne had written the story in 2004, it would have been set in 2004 or the near future. I'm afraid it will come off like "The League of Extaordinary Gentlemen" did to most people...though I liked what it was trying to acheive!
6
posted on
03/24/2004 3:31:46 AM PST
by
mdmathis6
(The Democrats must be defeated in 2004...." MDMATHIS6, The Anti-Democrat")
To: Jhensy
I thought the Cruise/Spielberg combination in Minority Report was just fine.
I agree about the worries of him playing an English journalist though, I'd prefer to see a British actor in that role. Perhaps he won't be playing the lead?
This movie has great potential though, it could be magnificant, I'm really looking forward to it now. Of course it can only happen now because George Lucas has slammed the brakes on Indiana Jones IV after he rejected the script.
To: mdmathis6
Well I'm glad to see it being filmed in the era it was written for. It means theres no need to update or adapt the storyline to fit modern times. With Spielberg at the helm I strongly doubt it will resemble anything that tragedy of a movie you mentioned.
I have a very good feeling about it.
To: maquiladora
I'm interested. We still pull out the 1953 version on occasion and watch it. It's still good.
9
posted on
03/24/2004 3:35:21 AM PST
by
aardvark1
(Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action.)
To: aardvark1
Have you heard Orson Welles' radio version?
It's available on the special edition of Citizen Kane. Expertly done and some parts are still convincing which is amazing given the time period.
To: All
David Koepp, the screenwriter for this has also written the likes of:
* Jurassic Park (1993)
* Carlito's Way (1993)
* Mission: Impossible (1996)
* Spider-Man (2002)
That's not a bad track record.
To: maquiladora
"War of the Worlds" in 53 was great (I was 12 at the time), "Independence Day" was ok, but being much older, "WOTW" still was the movie for me until......
"MARS ATTACKS"!!!!
12
posted on
03/24/2004 3:50:25 AM PST
by
Lokibob
(All typos and spelling errors are mine and copyrighted!!!!)
To: maquiladora
a remake of war of the world. wow. hollywood sure is original. can't wait to plop $9 to see another remake of a remake of a remake of a.....
13
posted on
03/24/2004 3:58:34 AM PST
by
Bommer
(John Kerry = War Criminal!)
To: jscd3
LOL. I caught the end of the movie on AMC about a week ago and I was thinking the same PC ending they'd have to have if the '53 film was ever re-made.
14
posted on
03/24/2004 4:07:01 AM PST
by
rabidralph
(Fear the Turtle next season.)
To: maquiladora
I don't think they have to change the story line...just keep it contemporary! The walking towers and all that can be kept the same!
15
posted on
03/24/2004 4:07:05 AM PST
by
mdmathis6
(The Democrats must be defeated in 2004...." MDMATHIS6, The Anti-Democrat")
To: Bommer
It's only been made as a movie once, and that was over half a century ago. Besides, that was a 1950's version of the story.
This is the first time the original story will be adapted for the screen.
And before you slam remakes any further, it's worth mentioning that a little film called Ben Hur which came out in 1959 and is regarded as one of the great films of all time is a remake of a 1925 remake of a 1907 film adapted from a book.
To: maquiladora
I want to see a remake of "Deliverence" with Alec Baldwin reprising the Ned Beatty part.
To: jscd3
Interesting. I saw the movie again on regular TV last night. People may have their doubts but I though it was/is a great flick.
18
posted on
03/24/2004 4:25:23 AM PST
by
Caipirabob
(Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
To: Bluntpoint
I want to see a remake of "Deliverence" with Alec Baldwin reprising the Ned Beatty part....AAhhh, Yeah!...LOL!... :))
19
posted on
03/24/2004 4:50:51 AM PST
by
skinkinthegrass
(Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
To: maquiladora
*sigh* Another cherished childhood memory about to be trashed...
I hope that's not so. But I sure don't trust Hollyweird.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson