Posted on 06/29/2005 12:59:23 PM PDT by pabianice
Just got back from the new version of "War of the Worlds." In short, this is an epic remake of the nifty 1953 version done by George Pal (later of "The Time Machine" with Rod Taylor, 1960). The FX are spectacular, of course, but the film just doesn't quite pull it off.
The story is shot through the eyes of Ray, Tom Cruise's character, so it lets a lot of action occur off stage. This tactic can do a lot for a story, but in Cruise's case, it doesn't work. His costars, including young Dakaota Fanning, are excellent, but ... we've seen it all before. Cruise looking desperate and put-upon. Fanning running the different shades of panic and dispair. Tim Robbins as a crazy pedophile (ok, this may just be good type-casting). A cast of hundreds of real extras and thousands of CGI people being vaporized -- neat, but again, we've seen it before, especially in the 1953 version.
This latest Spielberg version is just too full of logic and continuity holes to hold together. The alien Tripods have been buried here on Earth for tens or hindreds of thousands of years until they are activated today. WTF? Were the aliens waiting until we could fight back to launch their invasion, instead of easily taking-over 50,000 years ago? The aliens themselves ride lightening/EMP bolts down from space, arriving underground with the baggage of several thousand Gs. Can you say Puree of Alien? As in the 1953 version, the Tripods have protective force fields that deflect anything thrown at them. But when the aliens catch colds and start to die, they also conveniently manage to turn-off their shields so the remaining National Guard troops can take them out with Stingers and small arms fire. The EMP strikes fry all auto and machine electronics but leave cordless phones and video cameras running.
Even though this is a war movie, we get Hollywood's Guns are Bad! rap. When Cruise goes on the lam with his kids he takes his .357 with him, although he hides it from the kids because, you know, guns are 'bad.' When his car is hijacked and his family nearly killed, another character takes his gun and promptly murders a third with it (yes, guns are 'BAD,' even when you are trying to save your kids from being killed).
The aliens' death rays are wonderful eye candy, turning people into (antiseptic) flaming ash while leaving their clothes intact. Another WTF? Very 'green' and all. There are a lot of annoying gripes. A local ferry boat captain in one battle scene is wearing the cap of a US naval officer -- and the eagle is looking left -- something the US Navy changed in 1941. Oops X 2. Couldn't Spielberg do better than that?
As pure popcorn munching, the movie is fun and the tension holds up at a certain visceral level, but the mind is never engaged -- a requirement for the best movies. The major sets are great: a downed 747, horribly empty of bodies because everyone was vaporized in flight by that neat antiseptic death ray which, like the evil Neutron Bomb, kills people while leaving structures intact (apparently the Aliens like our architecture). The scene of the first Tripod breaking through the street and incinerating people is also a wonderful realization of set design. The cast does ok (although Fanning's wonderful horror expression is starting to get overused in movies), but again, with so many CGI people being vaporized, it all starts to glaze over. With the camera on Ray 100% of the time, his costars don't get to do very much. When Ray grabs some hand grenades, you know what he's gonna do: bring-down a Tripod that is trying to turn him into Soylent Red with which to fertilize Alien Kudzu (I am not making this up). It's kinda neat to see mashed humans being sprayed across the landscape like the operation of Lawn Doctor's evil twin, but human blood to fertilize plants from the planet Koosbane? Cummon! When the action finally moves to Boston, Spielberg is too lazy to recreate a view of Boston and we get action in what appears to be downtown Los Angeles. Maybe he just got tired.
My Freeper Rating: Hype: 9/10. Movie: 7/10. Spielberg could have done far better than remake a 52-year-old film that was pretty neat in its day. But then, most movie goers never saw the 1953 version. Their loss.
I think I'll watch "Mars Attacks!" instead. At least the laughs in that one are intentional.
Well, I'm a relic from the '50's and I'm going tonight to see the Spielberg extravaganza. Will let you know tomorrow what we thought.
In the meantime, did you read that Tom thinks "we're not alone?"
It's not a remake of the 1953 film. It's another adaptation of the novel.
Thanks for the review, but your nit-picks are kinda nit-picky. If one goes to a movie about an alien invasion expecting 100% logic, it's gonna have no aliens! Where's the fun in watching Cruise sit around talking about aliens for two hours? :)
I'm going to see action and such. I don't expect logic from Spielberg movies. Private Ryan had some of the most laughable "logic" in any war movie, yet millions love it (I love some parts of it, disliked it overall).
I like Hitchcock's line..."I don't make slices of life I make slices of cake"
If you must ses an action movie, I recommend "Batman Returns." I was surprised at how good it was, and there wasn't that much hype about it. I'll take Christian Bale over Tom Cruise any day as an action hero. Not only is Bale better looking than Cruise(and taller) but - unlike Cruise - he is endearingly publicity-shy.
What do you think John Milius would have done with this film?
Oops. Not "Batman Returns."
"Batman Begins."
Did you know that Milius wrote the 'Wreck of the Indianapolis' speech from Jaws? And had a significant part in developing 1941 as well. They are old friends.
I did enjoy the old movie, but this one sounds like typical New Hollywood. I also have a problem with Tom Cruise as any kind of Action Hero – he reminds me of a Spoiled Wimp Kid.
Christian Bale is cool. He was great in American Psycho (despite the 80s anti-Reagan satire that Freepers hate). I think he finally got over the hump with Batman Begins and will become a major star.
I did know that. He also penned the "Do I feel Lucky" speech from Dirty Harry and directed my favorite movie of all time, Conan the Barbarian. I pray he gets to make Conan the King according to his vision and not some jackass Hollywood execs. I heard that the script is awesome.
Yeah. If movies and novel were perfectly logical, who'd want to see them? They'd be like life--long periods of stuff not very interesting to anyone except the person experiencing it. One of the most basic building blocks of movies--cutting from one point of view to another--isn't logical. People looking for logic in alien invasion movies probably serve vegetables instead of cake at a birthday party.
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.