Rate Spielberg's War of the Worlds

[Abraxas]

I wondered that, but, again I kept quiet. But, thinking along those lines,

In that case, why were the bodies washing up down the river when the girl took a whiz, if, at that point, the pods were dicentegrating people.

::cough cough:: inconsistencies.

As for not a lot of bodies in the plane - the martians ray wasn't all encompassing, as shown by the early scene where people are running and not every last one was vaporised. So, they sweep the ray across the plane and get most of the people, but a few get a very short ride to the ground.

As for the bodies in the river, those were the corpses of the folks that had been sucked dry - which they show happeneing not too much later - so no inconsistancy , just a hint of things to come.

 

[Taelorn76]

Wife and I left the movie... Looked at each other and both thought it sucked. Over-hyped. The whole hiding in the cellar was drawn out way too much. I didn't need to wait 5 minutes for them to hide from the snake sensor. You would think advanced alien technology would rely on more than just a big endoscope to find your prey.

I am glad I am not the only one that felt that way, my freinds were both trying to defend it saying "they couldn't just sweep the room once", and "it adds drama to it makes it more suspenseful". I think you could have cut 2 to 3 miniutes from that scene and still gotten the same effect.

 

[Taelorn76]

As for not a lot of bodies in the plane - the martians ray wasn't all encompassing, as shown by the early scene where people are running and not every last one was vaporised. So, they sweep the ray across the plane and get most of the people, but a few get a very short ride to the ground.

I am more of the mind that the plane was affected by an EMP blast. If it was the plane would not just drop straight down it would coast and nose dive for a time. Plus it it was at max altitude and max speed it could still cover several ground miles before crashing. At least thats how I reason it. But it's been many years since physics class.
Think of a triangle.

 

[spider_minion]

I gave it a 6. The movie was certainly relentless and shocking, but it felt kinda empty. The ending was unsatisfying to say the least, and I didn't get the feeling there was anything more going on then the action from scene to scene. The movie seemed too emotionally-overblown as well. Of course, the special effects were amazing - particularly the striders and the red weed-covered earth. Overall, I felt kinda neutral . . . certainly a well-made movie, but not one that really resonated with me.

I always thought that a modern remake of War of the Worlds would have to take the form of a mock news report. At least initially, it would all be told from the view of the cameramen, like we were sitting at home watching the end of the world on TV.

And one question is bothering me. The aliens eat humans for food, right? What did they eat on Mars?

 

[Abraxas]

In the book they drained humans for their blood, in this movie it looked like they used people as fertilizer for the red weed, not as a direct food source.

 

[Templeton580]

*

 

[DonTadow]

I thought it was pretty great, but not completely fulfilling (not sure why). Gave it a 7.

It occurs to me (reading this thread) that at least 6 out of 10 gamers view movies as onscreen RPG sessions. If the characters in the movie do not act in a "logical" manner befitting their own PC, they pan the movie because the characters were "stupid."

This sort of thing tends to vacillate between amusing, annoying and pitiful.

So it goes.

The scene of the tripod emerging onto the hilltop, looking down at the crowded ferry, was awesome.

I think 6 out of 10 "gamers" just want the movie to make sense aka be logical. I think its silly to watch, read, play or do anything that goes against its own mythos. If a setting creates its own myth or story, it should at least abide by it. That's the problem with the movie, it doesnt. It says one thing at one point, and a couple scenes later it vacates that point by having something that contradicts it. It's mindboggling.

Are you asking that we not think about logical story's when seeing the movie? Just stare at the destruction and like how the humans win overall?

 

[Templeton580]

*

 

[DonTadow]

Yeah, pretty much.

I usually reserve my logical/analytical thinking for, say, a particularly engrossing book, or a so-called "thinking man's" movie (i.e. a movie that requires thought), or for figuring out the details of something I'm working on.

I don't look to a Spielberg flick for deep thoughts or, Eris forfend, "sense," any more than I look for it on network TV.

But for two hours of reasonably entertaining film? Yes. And that's what I got.

We agree up to a point. I had no expectations going into the movie. The thing that upset me is, the first third of the movie tricked me and made me thinking I was watching an intelligent film. So As i watched for 20 minutes I prepared for what i thought was something logical, intelligent and action packed ala "I Robot". What I got was an hour and 40 minutes of fluff and popcorn. THe movie set me up for something big early on and it let me down. It's not fair to come off the first 20 minutes as the next blade runner and then start sinking into Mars Attacks.

 

[Morrus]

something logical, intelligent and action packed ala "I Robot".

Wow. We certainly disagree when it comes to our opinions on movies! I Robot may have been action packed, but I've always considered it a long, long way from logical or intelligent!

Not that WotW was much better, of course. It was, in my opinion, better - but not much better.