War of the Worlds--new version

[Hemiola]

I couldn't find a thread for this so I thought I'd start one.

I have to admit that I was skeptical, since I am a huuuuuuge fan of the original filmed version from 1953 (with Gene Barry and Ann Robinson) produced by the legendary George Pal. It was an extraordinary achievement for its time (it won the Best Special Effects Oscar for that year), and it was well-produced in all respects.

Well, surprise! I like the new version even better! For one thing, it is actually more faithful to Wells' original story than the Pal film: the Martians (although they are never identified as such in the new film) get around in giant "tripods", just as Wells described them; they use a "heat ray" to vaporize humans and, just as Wells said, they are bloodsuckers! The new special effects are, of course, up to the finest modern standards, far surpassing the award-winning originals (there is a scene with a train on fire that is mind-boggling!). We even get to see Tim Robbins standing in for Wells' "curate". I wonder why Spielberg didn't make him into a preacher of some sort (could it be that he didn't think the audience knew what a "curate" was? ). Also gone are a lot of the gratuitous religious references from 1953 (the Martians, perhaps, were meant to stand for the "Godless Commies" back then ), replaced by updated references to terrorists (at one point, little Dakota Fanning [who is an amazing little actress, BTW] screams "Is it the terrorists?" ).

Anyway, go see it--you won't regret it.

[idontlikejam]

i saw this at the weekend, i never finished the book, but i gotta say the film was pretty crappy. ok i dont like tom cruise but his character was especially lame and whiny, i mean fuckin hell, get a grip if not for your sake then at least for your kids. and seriously would the girl have been that screamy if the youngest was a boy rather than a girl. it was just not funny and boring and not worth the money i fuckin spent on it to keep my friend happy. watch spaced instead.

[aceivan]

I've not seen it yet but I was wondering if they used tripods. Excellent news. Although I'm not a great Tom Cruise fan I'm really looking forward to this.

I just heard the other day that a CGI version of Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds album is being made and a low budget movie was released on DVD recently. Like buses, just when you're waiting for one, three turn up at the same time!

[urnofosiris]

I am definitely going to see it. Not even my intense dislike for Tom Cruise is going to stop me. The clips I´ve seen so far look awesome and I don´t really recall a Steven Spielberg movie I did not like.

[xita]

I love a disaster movie and really this one did not disappoint. It was big on the destruction and yes they were tripods. I ignored the ass that is Tom Cruise and enjoyed the big ride. I love this story so much, I am going to check out the lower budget one that is now out on DVD.

[justin]

I've just seen this film and I really enjoyed it.

I guess I'm in the minority here since whilst I wouldn't say I was a Tom Cruis fan, I don't hate him either I'd say that he plays the main character in a believable fashion. I think given what he goes through (such as running down a street with people being killed all round him and being covered in their remains) it's understandable that he suffers from a good deal of shock and isn't able to just get a grip.

The burning train was pretty spectacular as it's totally shocking, at least it was to me. The best thing, I think, is the way they build up the tension leading up to the first attack.

[s82 v]

I am a fan of both Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning, not to mention the boy who played the son : p and I loved this movie a lot.

To me, it was really intense, and I was literally on the edge of my seat the whole time. I reccommend it to everyone who's thinking of seeing it. : )