Posted on 07/10/2005 8:47:31 PM PDT by SmithL
IF THERE IS a theme to Steven Spielberg's new alien-invasion movie, "War of the Worlds," it is not that the human spirit has the courage that justifies human survival. Or that American know-how and grit can defeat invaders, even when the situation seems impossible. No, it is more like: If aliens invade, don't fight back. Run.
No need for self-defense. Mother Nature will take care of the non- indigenous occupiers.
While set in the Northeast, Spielberg's alien war seems very much like what would happen if aliens invaded Hollywood. There would be no praying, no talk of God, no homeowners defending their homes, no posses defending their communities, no 90210 teens enlisting to defend their country.
In Spielberg's world, as the invaders appeared, movie moguls would be finding a quick way out of town, while extolling their children to run faster. (Those aerobics classes should be good for something.)
Consider the rare civilians who have guns in the movie: Tom Cruise's character, Ray Ferrier, has a gun.
There is also a rifle-toting ex-paramedic played by Tim Robbins. Even though he, unlike the countless other civilians who are butchered while trying to evade the alien killing machines, chooses to do battle, he is revealed as "a bug-eyed maniac," says Chronicle reviewer Mick LaSalle, or "a fruitcake who fancies himself a member of the 'resistance,' " says the Washington Post's Michael O'Sullivan. You know he's a nut because he has a gun, a big gun. Mentally unstable, he, of course, invites his own demise.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Speilberg -- welcome to fantasy land and Utopia. I wonder if he would make a movie about how the world ridded itself of islamo-fascists and Muslim dictatorships -- and ended all wars!!!!??????
Yeah, I know, in your dreams....
Starting with Cruise on down, I'm glad I haven't gone to see this movie. Sounds as if it ranks right down there with 'Day After Tomorrow'.
The movie showed the US Military fighting and dying to protect civilians doing what they had to do - flee.
Was the movie a slanted a little to the left, sure.
But c'mon, just because the whole population didn't stand there and get vaporized doesn't mean that running was the hidden message.
Speilberg is a no talent hack. He may have money, but he is still a sad soul.
Thanks for the counter-balancing reports.
There are plenty of other facts that the author missed in her political rant...
1.) The roles of the soldiers in the film were filled by actual U.S. military soldiers. They were also portrayed as heroic, valient, and polite to the civilian population at large.
2.) The reason why the lead character spent his time running instead of fighting is that he was trying to keep his little girl safe. One of the largests points the movie made to me was that this character was redeeming himself to his children in the face of danger and evil.
3.) The Tim Robbins character became a raving lunatic after the aliens operated overhead, digging in the dirt below his basement, and yelling so loudly as to be heard by the aliens. He was not this noble fighter with a gun as the author suggests. 4.) Also, although Independence Day was a more patriotic film, this one focused on the fact that no one had communication with the central government. I also think it was trying to be different than Independence Day, so as not to be labled a copycat.
In summary, I think it was a well-made summer action movie, and this author's political rant notwithstanding, not a leftist movie. Certainly one of Spielberg's best movies. Not at all lame like that piece of crap A.I....
My son saw it and said it was terrible!! The previews show all the good parts. The rest is a lot of screaming by the little girl.
The theme of running showed in the clips I saw when I went to see Batman Begins.
That was a good movie (Batman).
And, it looks like they didn't screw up the Dukes (not a big favorite of mine but after what Hollywood did to Starsky and Hutch, I was imagining the worst for the Duke Boys).
Speilberg is going nuts, these days....this lines up with exactly what the scriptures teach us...Psalm 37, I think is one of those teachings!!!
I'll stick with Mars Attacks!
I did not see WOTW as an "anti-war" film. It showed the military in a good light. And I saw the Cruise character trying to keep his son from fighting as a "family" thing and not an anti-war message.
Obviously Rays actions involving the paramedic gave the message that sometimes violence is the answer.
maybe there's a good reason it dropped from #1 after its first week ?
The 1953 WOTW was far better -- much more interesting.
So it seems that they all want to swear off of WAR. Hey great idea! The problem is that it would take a great deal of such things as Honor and Virtue, more than Hollywood and the Socialist have in order to do it with Honor and the Virtues that are needed. Instead they have chosen to rewrite history and denounce God! I don't think their gonna make it!
"And I agree in this article that the Cruise character was not very heroic towards the general population, only his daughter."
Whereas, in cataclysms past (or even a freaking grease fire in the kitchen), parents don't instinctively, immediately, run to their children, and do everything they can to bring them out of the situation safely?
"Not very heroic toward the general population..."
Sorry, I just find that wierd. There was so much chaos and adrenalin spilling, and flat-out fleeing...what was he to do, tell his kids to "wait here," while he goes and finds someone else to save? You must have seen a different version than I did.
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.