war of the worlds

Grom

well i wasn't going into this with that many expectations as the last few speilberg films have been nothing short of shocking.

The film started off great. not the best of acting but hey it's a popcorn movie.
Then something happened all the fast paced action just dropped off the radar, and it went horrid beyond belief.

May I just say the ending is one of the worst ever.

5/10

dr.barbie

Have heard similar reviews over the last day or so, I dont think it could even possibly live up to the hype that has surrounded it- the whole katie/tom thing has just blown the film away.
still though, i have my tickets bought and im off to see it tomorrow night, fingers crossed i may be pleasantly surprised!

Otacon

Saw it last night and thought it was exactly what I was expecting. Brilliant, that is. The direction is amazing. On par with some of Bergies best work. There are not many TC films that I like, but both Minority Report and this are very good. Spielberg seems to know how to use Cruise. Dakota Fanning is freakishly good in her role. She really and truly has talent to burn. In any movie the pace has to slow down. It can't go full throttle all the time, otherwise, it loses its effect. As for the ending, its a lot like the original book's ending.

People seem to think that this is an action movie. It's not, its a disaster movie, as a friend pointed out before I saw it.

Tbh, I'd recommend people see this.

****

sutty

Otacon wrote:

Saw it last night and thought it was exactly what I was expecting. Brilliant, that is. The direction is amazing. On par with some of Bergies best work. There are not many TC films that I like, but both Minority Report and this are very good. Spielberg seems to know how to use Cruise. Dakota Fanning is freakishly good in her role. She really and truly has talent to burn. In any movie the pace has to slow down. It can't go full throttle all the time, otherwise, it loses its effect. As for the ending, its a lot like the original book's ending.

People seem to think that this is an action movie. It's not, its a disaster movie, as a friend pointed out before I saw it.

Tbh, I'd recommend people see this.

****

Right, I went to see the film last night. I thought it was good. If missing something. However here is what I thought. All Dakota Fanning does through out the movie is scream. ALOT. Which after the first 40min just got on my nervs. The s0n was a pain in the ass. Reble kid with a hard of gold who wants to "Be all that he can be" bah.

Tom Cruse got on my tits through out most of the movie.

Here's what I think they should have done. Had tripod's walking about killing people (which looks class) that is all. Would have made for a much better movie.

There are also a load of other War Of the World movies coming out soon. One of which is set in the 19th century and is a low buget but still I would like to see as it is meant to fully hold through to the Book.

Lex_Diamonds

Saw it, didnt like it. Usual Spielberg story of not going far enough with the material, unless your easily entertained you will be disappointed.

Peteee

Grom wrote:

well i wasn't going into this with that many expectations as the last few speilberg films have been nothing short of shocking.

The film started off great. not the best of acting but hey it's a popcorn movie.
Then something happened all the fast paced action just dropped off the radar, and it went horrid beyond belief.

May I just say the ending is one of the worst ever.

5/10

Well, I went to this film with high expectation (It's a spielberg film) and I wasn't (for the most part) disapointed.

The first hour and 20 minutes are, quite simply, superb.

He builds the atmosphere really well (I liked the whole fractured family bit, thought it was done really well)

The tripod unveiling is done really, really well. A bit disapointed that the people, when they were lasered didnt go 'splat' but still.

The confusion is handled perfectly, people just didn't know what was going on, and thats perfectly embodied in dakota fanning (forget her name!). Liked the whole 'are they terrorists' touch (from europe )

The car bit down the highway, was the highlight for me. One massive continuos tracking shot away, around and in the car. Again highlighting the utter confusion. Simply amazing.

It continues highly paced until they go into the basement.

This is where the film falls down slightly. While it's still tense, its just such a complete change of pace, it's too jarring and sudden imo. The bit with the tripod after that felt out of touch too. Felt a bit tacked on.


The performances were pretty good too.

Whats with all the cruise bashing?

For a summer 'action' blockbuster, there was surprisingly few action scenes in it.

However I liked the ending(ending ending!) and was satisfied, overall with the movie.

****/*****

sutty

Peteee wrote:

For a summer 'action' blockbuster, there was surprisingly few action scenes in it.

However I liked the ending(ending ending!) and was satisfied, overall with the movie.

****/*****

Well to be honest, its meant to be a Horror. Not a Action movie. at least they did keep through to the start and ending's

You where also right about that Tripod bit after the basement. It did feel tacked on. It even left a plot holes for me.

halenger

It was supposed to be horror? Pah. I shouldn't have gone so. (Me and horror just don't mix) I thought it was ok, nothing spectacular but if they were aiming at horror then they did do it fairly well. I was expecting it to be more actiony and felt the ending was a bit of a let off. Dunno if that's how it was done in the book but it felt a little like a cop-out.

sutty

halenger wrote:

It was supposed to be horror? Pah. I shouldn't have gone so. (Me and horror just don't mix) I thought it was ok, nothing spectacular but if they were aiming at horror then they did do it fairly well. I was expecting it to be more actiony and felt the ending was a bit of a let off. Dunno if that's how it was done in the book but it felt a little like a cop-out.

Well the book is a horror. So the move should be too.

Peteee

halenger wrote:

It was supposed to be horror? Pah. I shouldn't have gone so. (Me and horror just don't mix) I thought it was ok, nothing spectacular but if they were aiming at horror then they did do it fairly well. I was expecting it to be more actiony and felt the ending was a bit of a let off. Dunno if that's how it was done in the book but it felt a little like a cop-out.

The ending of the film and the book are the same.

Apparently (havn't read the book) the basement bit is in hte book too. And of course the aliens do die of a cold (or computer virus as it would be in independence day)

Horror? I dunno, i thought it done a pretty good job of the confusion and utter helplessness of what it would be like if aliens invaded.

Grom

No offence but the aliens died from the many micro organisms that inhabit the earth.

Which to me was full of ****e, I mean if they planted those machines if you will there ages before then surely they would have known that they could not live within our atmosphere at said time, I mean they are meant to be more intelligent than us?

That said if it was millions of years ago that they planted those then perhaps the atmosphere was not present, surely though from a spectators point of view intelligent beings observing us for millions of years would have known if they could live with us.

I mean we know we can't ****ing inhabit mars, we don't try for the fun of it.

SoupyNorman

People.....please will ye do as 'Grom' does and use spoilers.

thanks

Lex_Diamonds

Wtf was the story with the big army battle on that hill and not being shown any of it, apart from a few fleeting glimpses?
This is the most ham fisted attempt at "letting your imagination fill in the blanks" that I have ever seen.

Gordon

Indeed Lex.

I thought the film would be more "horrory" but alas it wasn't. The original really freaked me out but this was just a scifi movie with little substance.

I think the end is how the original ended wasn't it?

That bit was a bit disappointing I thought.

heh, and the aliens were wrong for the part too. I wanted to see clever aliens without 1 frickin foot pogoing about the place and looking through garbage for food. I wanted clever, scary, uber-aliens, not pogosticks with arms.

sutty

Well you see the thing about that

is that when the machines where planted. Alot of those colds/bugs/bacteria didn't exist. You have to remember. They where watching man. Not the Micro organisms that developed true man or as an effect of the life-formes on the planet. One of the ideas behing the story is kind of a turn about. The Aliens see man a big, something to be steped on. Man see's Colds/Bugs/Bacteria as something not important and somethign to be killed off. Yet only because man has been on the planet evolving here. We are imune to them. The Alines, beleaved that there technolagy would protect them from anything man had. But in the end. Its not man that kills them

sutty

Gordon wrote:

heh, and the aliens were wrong for the part too. I wanted to see clever aliens without 1 frickin foot pogoing about the place and looking through garbage for food. I wanted clever, scary, uber-aliens, not pogosticks with arms.

LOL aye,

I cant remember how they are meant to look from the book that is, I need to get it again. But they wheren't one legged. Thet had 3 legs. then 3 fingers/toes on each hand/foot. the two front feet also where used as hands. I beleave its where the whole Tripod design came from. Its kind of like something like a Mech, they are made by humans. Thus look like them (two arms, two leggs, a head and a Torso)

Necronomicon

I'll admit the aliens could've looked scarier but it was still intense when they were looking around the basement when Ray, Rachel and that other guy (Tim Robbins??) were hiding!

Juggalo

I found it a very average movie but the effects were brilliant.

dudara

I was praying that the tripods would kill Dakota Fanning in this movie. All she does is scream, and in a very ear-piercing way.

The basement scenes featuring Tim Robbins are not at all necessary and really feel just like space-filler.

I was overall disappointed with this film, but having said that, the atmosphere of destruction is developed superbly at the start of the film.

ObeyGiant

Aw crap. Now we get the exact same backlash we got from "Signs" - "We didn't get to see anything! DId the aliens not realise.." etc.

Guys... I just don't think I can handle much more of this.

ixoy

ObeyGiant wrote:

Aw crap. Now we get the exact same backlash we got from "Signs" - "We didn't get to see anything! DId the aliens not realise.." etc.

Guys... I just don't think I can handle much more of this.

One of the strengths of 'Signs' was not seeing anything for the most part. In fact I felt the movie let itself down when they finally did show the alien because it completely failed to live up to the nasrty eerie image that had been successfully conjured up prior to that. It's a lesson used to great success in 'Alien' and it was a shame that 'Signs' didn't stick with it completely.

...



Oh and why didn't they realize the earth was covered in the water they were allergic to?

Tusky

ixoy wrote:

One of the strengths of 'Signs' was not seeing anything for the most part. In fact I felt the movie let itself down when they finally did show the alien because it completely failed to live up to the nasrty eerie image that had been successfully conjured up prior to that. It's a lesson used to great success in 'Alien' and it was a shame that 'Signs' didn't stick with it completely.

...



Oh and why didn't they realize the earth was covered in the water they were allergic to?

I dont see why its important that the aliens 'look' scary. Its their actions that are scary, they dont necisarily look horrifying themselves.

flogen

I thought it had some great effects, acting from Fanning was good, Cruise couldn't get into the role of a deadbeat dad properly, and the son was the stock character #1003 (angsty teen).
There were far too many stupid cop outs in the whole thing, for example:

cruise finds the only working car in America, his ex-wifes house gets hit by a plane and aliens, with everything being destroyed but still the car survives without a scratch; the son walks into a huge explosion but still manages to make it back to boston unhurt and before the rest; and the family in boston are quietly sitting in their house despite the advance (sick as they may be) of huge alien tripods set on the destruction of humanity

The ending wasn't delivered as well as it should have been (like in the books and even the Jeff Wayne musical), and the Spielberg ending that followed it was completely appauling, really, really sickening.
At one point in the film I thought it was going to get really dark and I was hoping it would, because that's what the story deserves, but then he chickened out and went the crowd pleasing route (just like the use of powder instead of blood on the human victims, nice effect but only one to avoid a high age rating IMO).
Also themes of fear and it's effects on humanity were completely under-used, and that could have added much more gravitas to the whole thing.

and the aliens looked pretty dumb too, far too cute looking, it really didn't match the intimidating machines and methods they were using to destroy humanity, they looked like ET's second cousin

Oh and Tusky, you're right, their looks shouldn't be a big deal, but it can ruin the mood of the whole thing, even by the hand featured in the WOTW poster you'd expect some 20ft high menacing beast of an alien that physically and mentally looks down on everything else, but you don't get that at all.

delly

I honestly thought that when he got back to the gaff in Boston, there was still going to be a final kick ass scene where they get wiped out, but no, its all over. The whole organism thing i felt was a cheap ending as well, i first thought that it was the bird shỈt that killed them. It should have had a more easily understood definition other than Morgan Freeman's voiceover. I still don't get it tbh. At least i got free m&m's in ster century.

BlitzKrieg

original book here:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/warworlds/warw.html


now to answer a few questions

yes spielberg changing the original plot so that the aliens had placed the tripods here sort of created a huge plothole. Originally the aliens arrived by launching the tripods with pilots like shooting stars...this helped inforce the idea that they were conquerers in the same way of britain over india and ireland...and in the same way many british fell ill to diseases found in india but not britain.

a comparison of the endings:

original book:

In South Kensington the streets were clear of dead and of black powder. It was near South Kensington that I first heard the howling. It crept almost imperceptibly upon my senses. It was a sobbing alternation of two notes, "Ulla, ulla, ulla, ulla," keeping on perpetually. When I passed streets that ran northward it grew in volume, and houses and buildings seemed to deaden and cut it off again. It came in a full tide down Exhibition Road. I stopped, staring towards Kensington Gardens, wondering at this strange, remote wailing. It was as if that mighty desert of houses had found a voice for its fear and solitude.

leading to:

As I crossed the bridge, the sound of "Ulla, ulla, ulla, ulla," ceased. It was, as it were, cut off. The silence came like a thunderclap.

The dusky houses about me stood faint and tall and dim; the trees towards the park were growing black. All about me the red weed clambered among the ruins, writhing to get above me in the dimness. Night, the mother of fear and mystery, was coming upon me. But while that voice sounded the solitude, the desolation, had been endurable; by virtue of it London had still seemed alive, and the sense of life about me had upheld me. Then suddenly a change, the passing of something--I knew not what--and then a stillness that could be felt. Nothing but this gaunt quiet.

London about me gazed at me spectrally. The windows in the white houses were like the eye sockets of skulls. About me my imagination found a thousand noiseless enemies moving. Terror seized me, a horror of my temerity. In front of me the road became pitchy black as though it was tarred, and I saw a contorted shape lying across the pathway. I could not bring myself to go on. I turned down St. John's Wood Road, and ran headlong from this unendurable stillness towards Kilburn. I hid from the night and the silence, until long after midnight, in a cabmen's shelter in Harrow Road. But before the dawn my courage returned, and while the stars were still in the sky I turned once more towards Regent's Park. I missed my way among the streets, and presently saw down a long avenue, in the half-light of the early dawn, the curve of Primrose Hill. On the summit, towering up to the fading stars, was a third Martian, erect and motionless like the others.

An insane resolve possessed me. I would die and end it. And I would save myself even the trouble of killing myself. I marched on recklessly towards this Titan, and then, as I drew nearer and the light grew, I saw that a multitude of black birds was circling and clustering about the hood. At that my heart gave a bound, and I began running along the road.

I hurried through the red weed that choked St. Edmund's Terrace (I waded breast-high across a torrent of water that was rushing down from the waterworks towards the Albert Road), and emerged upon the grass before the rising of the sun. Great mounds had been heaped about the crest of the hill, making a huge redoubt of it--it was the final and largest place the Martians had made--and from behind these heaps there rose a thin smoke against the sky. Against the sky line an eager dog ran and disappeared. The thought that had flashed into my mind grew real, grew credible. I felt no fear, only a wild, trembling exultation, as I ran up the hill towards the motionless monster. Out of the hood hung lank shreds of brown, at which the hungry birds pecked and tore.

and so on into the end speech and

finding his wife

but compared to

the still populated Boston with its soldiers and guns finishing the tripod off

the book is much more powerful and not impossible on film, hence my disapointment with the films ending.

not the family all alive bit...but leading up to it

cooperguy

I thought it was a good movie Dakota Fanning was good she screamed for a bit but not the whole time!!! In the basment where

cruise kills the other guy (i forget his name) while dakota sings the song is a good scene. That whole basement part of the story wasnt too bad but it should have been shorter

The effects were excellent. The ending was too quick and it was poor but i suppose it was sticking to the original story and the son

should have died.

The person that said some of the acting was bad is wrong it was all good. It was a great film 8/10.

BlitzKrieg

the son was a crap actor...

irishgeo

what was the idea of the red weed?

KdjaCL

Not a great movie watchable but think everyone to immune to massive disaster movies that even when the cities were getting wrecked it wasnt particulary good.

The ending wasnt bad just rushed and after the overlong RRobbins/Basement scene its like they had only a few minutes to wrap up, wasnt really impressed by the movie.

Red weed

showing that Cruise copped on they couldnt survive on the planet, rather than make him a brainy scientist i thought it was just to show that he did realise what was going on

Best thing about it was the exactness of the Army kits that are used in Battlfied 2

Oh and King Kong trailer on before it looked deadly.


kdjac

zAbbo

Ok, no point using spoilers in a thread on wotw,

the aliens were annihalting everything in sight, more or less destroying what i assume is new york in a matter of minutes, but boston(hour up the road) was more or less untouched.

Very dissapointing film unless you liked independce day, the plot could have offered so much more.

Go if you are a fan of cgi, Batman Begins beats this film easily

Fysh

Up until the basement scene

in which Tom Cruise goes to kill Tim Robbins

the film was going very well for me. Popcorn movie, admittedly, but far darker than I had expected and with some nice touches -

the son's conviction that this is all the work of terrorists, or on being told that the aliens come from somewhere else his asking if they come from Europe

. The problem was that after that scene, in which the film's under-used themes were at least adequately presented (ie when you're afraid for your life how far will you go to protect yourself?), everything went flat. The way the ending was presented to us felt very tacked on, and while I don't object to the idea in the ending (because as someone else has pointed out, it highlights the fact that the aliens made a very human mistake and made assumptions about the environment) - but there was no explanation given, nobody apparently trying to co-ordinate any intelligence about the invading forces. And, even more strangely, in an age of WMDs, there was not a mention of using them or anything like them.

I really liked the first 3/4 of this film, but it totally screwed the pooch at the end and in doing so ruined the whole thing for me. Gah.

0utshined

I enjoyed it but not quite as much as watching the argy-bargy before the film started when a couple were in the wrong seats and were refusing to move! It was what I expected it to be, a movie for the masses.

There were a few things that I didn't like about it, the first thing being at the start

when everything electrical had stopped working. Everything that is except some guy's video camera which he was using at the epicentre of the lightning strike!

It just didn't make sense to me. Another thing that bugged me was that they didn't make enough of the fact that the son was suffering from some type of mental impairment. He must have been, why else would he want to

hook up with the army who were attacking the aliens. Did he miss the bit where everyone around him was getting zapped 2 minutes before hand?

skywalker

delly wrote:

I honestly thought that when he got back to the gaff in Boston, there was still going to be a final kick ass scene where they get wiped out, but no, its all over. The whole organism thing i felt was a cheap ending as well, i first thought that it was the bird shỈt that killed them. It should have had a more easily understood definition other than Morgan Freeman's voiceover. I still don't get it tbh. At least i got free m&m's in ster century.

Ditto

thought they had forgot to put the ending in tbh

fade2black

Very rushed ending alright. I also wish they had've used the original narrator's voice that was used on the teasers and trailers rather than Morgan Freeman. Excellent special effects though, and the sound of the things (like a foghorn) was eerily brilliant.

kaimera

2 1/2 - 3* out of 5.

was not impressed much at all. Effects were good. Acting, not so good.

For the first 30-45 mins I was wishing that girl would ****ING DIE. Sweet ****. Who in all honesty thought it would be a good idea to write a script with a kid as annoying as that?

I didn't fall into the hype about it but I seriously was not impressed.

I will go see the follow on movies which I onoly hope are better.

TerrorFirmer

fade2black wrote:

Excellent special effects though, and the sound of the things (like a foghorn) was eerily brilliant.

I still get the creeps thinking about it. In fact, the more I think about it, that was in many ways the creepiest movie I've ever seen - I've never felt such feelings of utter helplessness and fear from a single movie! That foghorn effect was simply amazing - seriously the most fear instilling sound effect I've ever head to be honest in the context of the entire movie.

Fantastic stuff. Ending tad too rushed, but overall a fantastic watch.

Peteee

EMP only affects electrical things that are already on. Therefore if the camera was off, it will still work.

And before you go saying 'how come the cars that were parked didnt work' Theres always an eletric current running somewhere (alarm?)

As for the no explanation about anything, I dont think tom cruise had the answers, and if he dosent have them, then it dosent exist (note how tom cruise was in every scene, there was no cutting to presidents or the big nuclear attack etc etc)

As for the 'spielberg' ending, admitidly it would have been better if the kid had died, but he didnt exactly get his wife back did he?

Half the world is destroyed, chaos reigns (i thought the car scene was very powerful, with the gun) society has fallen apart, the only reason humanity has survived isn't due to technolgical superiority, but because of luck i suppose, The film ends on an ambiguity, 'where does the world go from here, will the aliens be back with flu shots'

Spielberg, you sentimental b***ard you :rolleyes:

I bloody hate all this sappy spielberg ending bashing. Superficially maybe, but most of his films dont end all that sappily if you dig a bit deeper

BlitzKrieg

but i criticised the film because it failed to get across the half world destroyed chaos riegned element...not because the son lived (ok that sucked but wasnt my main crit)

koneko

The ending was awful. I enjoyed the rest though, in the same way I enjoyed films like Day After Tomorrow. It's not a classic, but it's definitely worth seeing in the cinema (visually it's quite nice and some of it is pretty creepy/disturbing).

meep

bazH wrote:

the aliens were annihalting everything in sight, more or less destroying what i assume is new york in a matter of minutes, but boston(hour up the road) was more or less untouched.

Remember, the alien tripods were buried long before Man was around therefore long before there were any cities. Therefore, it was purely chance that one was buried in New York. (Remember the first signs were in relatively under-populated and geo-politically insignificant Eastern Europe).

Therefore it made sense that the tripods could destroy NY but not touch Boston. They were making their way across the country. This is never explicitly mentioned but is hinted at lots (army columns moving one direction, refugees the other).

yes it's a twee touchy feely ending but plausible , if annoying.

I enjoyed the movie for what it was, excellent effects, excellent sound design, excellent direction, average pacing and poor ending.

In particular, I liked the refreshing view of the invasion/disaster totally from Joe Public's perspective. Usually the hero hooks up with the military/scientist etc. to save the palnet. Here, the helplessness was evident and the heroics were local/focused.

I also appreciated the ambiguity in Ferrier's (Cruise) motivations; why was he so intent on getting to Boston? We'll never know.

Peter

koneko

koneko wrote:

The ending was awful. I enjoyed the rest though, in the same way I enjoyed films like Day After Tomorrow. It's not a classic, but it's definitely worth seeing in the cinema (visually it's quite nice and some of it is pretty creepy/disturbing).

I should clarify. By ending I meant

Oh gee the whole family is back together and everyone is fine. While that was happening I thought it would actually turn out to be a dream and Cruise was actually dead or hallucinating

not the part about the

cold/flu/bacteria, that was fine

djpaul

Have to say I was dissapointed with this movie . Too many reasons to go into, But the 1953 version still does it for me! Can't wait to see Jeff Wayne's
musical version. Due 2008 ? I think. See the CGI animation @ www.thewaroftheworlds.com

ObeyGiant

I enjoyed this a lot. The scale of some of the set-pieces was jaw-droppingly gorgeous, and the entire thing remained extremely faithful to the source material. Abrupt ending aside, I think most of the complaints about this movie are just silly.

Peteee

BlitzKrieg wrote:

but i criticised the film because it failed to get across the half world destroyed chaos riegned element...not because the son lived (ok that sucked but wasnt my main crit)

Then you missed the point of the movie. Everything was told from the cruisers perspective.

Did he know the whole world was destroyed? No, therefore neither do we.

If all the news networks went down, then you wouldnt know either, being in the same situation.

About the chaos reigning, did you not see the car stealing scene??

monkeyfudge

irishgeo wrote:

what was the idea of the red weed?

If I remember correctly the Red Weed was some form of Martian terraforming. The Martians used it to alter the atmosphere to one that would sustain them.

It wasn't actually explained in the film, but it was nice to see it's inclusion.

meglome

I was reading the reviews over at www.imdb.com too and some people are giving it 10 out of 10. They obviously weren't watching the same film as I was.

This film is from a novel so there is a story which the film seems to have lost. As far as I recall in the book the story is told by a narrator.

The special effects are great it this film but that’s its best feature by far. I’ll admit I’m not always a big Tom Cruise fan but when he’s not put in every scene in a movie and forced to act he can be brilliant. This film reminds me so much of Mission Impossible where it starts out following the Mission Impossible story and ends up being about what a big star Tom Cruise is, forget the original story. Dakota Fanning whom I normally regard well was totally annoying for the whole movie, I wanted to run up to the screen and try slap her. Justin Chatwin who plays his son was also ridiculously irritating. I appreciate that not every family is perfect but when the sh*t hits the fan like that you’re not going to be taking the time to be a prima donna, you’d be way too busy being scared stiff. Seriously now could anyone be precious in a situation like that.

This film is an impressive spectacle but have we gone so far that a story and real characters seem to matter so little. It's a 5/6 out 10 film IMHO, worth a watch but extremely irritating in places.

Mitch Connor

why in the name of god did the aliends even bother? i really don't get it.

why do they burry the machines underground and come back a few million years later, why not just take over the planet and save themselves the time and hassle. And what the hell was the deal with these incredably intellegent aliens being frightened of a bike and confused by a mirror. also, regarding the lightning strikes, if the capsules 'rode' the lightening into the machines, where were there no holes in the ground?

BKtje

Regarding the red weed and needing it to survive on earth:

Then how did they survive in the basement? Was it already survivable enough with just a little of that red weed? (i did see a kind of blue shimmering (like event horizon in stargate) through one of the windows in the basement i think. Maybe that did it or something.)


Regarding burying of machines:

Im guessing cos they needed human bio matter as fertiliser so they waited till there were enough humans and then came in to harvest em for fertiliser.

Regarding being so intelligent but not checking out the planet for bugs etc

It said theyw ere watching us and waited etc. Im sure they were watching us and observign us from afar. We can watch the planet surface of mars and observe it but we cant run tests on possible diseases etc without actually being there.

BlitzKrieg

Peteee wrote:

Then you missed the point of the movie. Everything was told from the cruisers perspective.

Did he know the whole world was destroyed? No, therefore neither do we.

If all the news networks went down, then you wouldnt know either, being in the same situation.

About the chaos reigning, did you not see the car stealing scene??

please go to the film review section and read my review...or go back to page 2 and read my comments.


I applauded the film for sticking to the same form of narration as the book (following one person) But i hated the ending because in the book LONDON WAS DEAD! There were no survivors...the military was completely disbanded and all that was great in mankind was gone.

When we come to the ending of this...we still have the military...we still have hundreds of survivors, we still had some form of order...the simple fact that the soldiers finished off the tripod defeated the entire point of the film and book. That's why i felt chaos never seemed to exist in the ending. Yes there was a little in the middle but never in the movie do we see the military fall apart.

monkeyfudge

I felt Speilberg was trying to fit in a bit of Bertrand Russell and 'The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation.'

Both times that a tripod was taken down involved people co-operating instead of screwing each other over like they were earlier in the film.

But I aggree with BlitzKrieg, I really enjoyed this film and only 2 things let it down for me. One being the fact that the human race wasn't completely and utterly defeated and the other being the whole tripods hidden under the ground for a million years... When they started bursting up out of the gound I thought that perhaps the tripods had been converted into energy and then blasted accross space only to rematerialise upon impact with the Earth, but then that wouldn't have been something that could have been easily explained within the plot of the film.

ObeyGiant

BlitzKrieg wrote:

When we come to the ending of this...we still have the military...we still have hundreds of survivors, we still had some form of order

While I agree that a completely apocalyptic wasteland would have been more visually effective, the book's ending makes little sense in a post-nuclear setting. Military (defence!) technology has improved exponentially since Wells' day, and things like NORAD - which harks back to the artilleryman's original suggestion of people surviving underground - exist to ensure the continuation of the military, at least.