Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Bzdega2
Feb 22, 2004
What the deuce?
Directed by: Spielberg
Starring: Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning, Tim Robbins

I wasnt expecting too much when walking in to see this movie Monday night because I didnt want to be too disappointed. I, however, found this movie to be quite enjoyable except for a few things.
The movie starts off with Tom Cruise being an rear end in a top hat father. His kids visit him for the weekend apparently and the tension between tom and his on screen wife had me fearing the movie was going to really suck. A huge freakish storm comes along and the movie starts to kick major rear end. The special effects are amazing. I really dont want to ruin too much until opening day so i wont go into too much detail. There are some parts of this movie i loved and some i despised. Dakota Fanning shows the best acting performance in this movie IMO. Tom Cruises deliverance of certain lines is pure poo poo. Through the entire movie his acting really got to me. Overall, go see this movie. You will definately be entertained. Braaammmmmmm (deeper)Brammmmm

RATING: 4.5

PROS: Awesome scenes of aliens kicking our rear end, Cool special effects and atmosphere, and the noise the things make....
CONS: The storyline involving Tom Cruise and his wife, Cheesy jokes

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0407304/

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

liquorhead
Jul 11, 2002

“But there are no bacteria in Mars, and directly these invaders arrived, directly they drank and fed, our microscopic allies began to work their overthrow. Already when I watched them they were irrevocably doomed, dying and rotting even as they went to and fro. It was inevitable. By the toll of a billion deaths man has bought his birthright of the earth, and it is his against all comers; it would still be his were the Martians ten times as mighty as they are. For neither do men live nor die in vain.”[/sppoiler]

Morgan Freeman reads this at the end of War of the Worlds. It’s a poignant and powerful narrative that illustrates that not only is Earth the sole responsibility of humans to gently caress up, but there are things both smaller and greater than us that are just waiting to take us out if we get too out of control.

What’s even more amazing is it’s a near verbatim excerpt from H.G. Wells original novel, written 107 years ago! [spoiler] Though bacteria were first observed in the early 1600s, that Wells could forsee the role of microscopic killers so long ago is mind boggling.


In the hands of Steven Spielberg, the modernized retelling of this movie works perfectly. As I type this, I’m still disoriented, blown away, and am reeling from the experience. War of the Worlds gave me that thrill ride feeling that a great special effects extravaganza is supposed to, but unlike so many disastro-explosivo-BANG movies as of late, you don’t have to be apologetic and use those lame “eh…just turn your brain off and enjoy it” excuse.

This doesn’t feel like a remake, but like the movie that should have been made originally. I always thought the 1953 original dragged and was rather boring, just itching for that alien to actually show up. Spielberg’s take on the book kicks your rear end from the start and just doesn’t stop.

What works so well in this movie is that there aren’t any rules laid out. Horrific things just start happening that don’t make any sense at all. Giant robotic tripods just come out of the ground and start loving things up. You’re as confused and disoriented as the people in the film. When crowds stagger down the street after chaotic events unfold, you’re right there with them, unable to comprehend how the hell something like this can happen.

Some of the characters try to put it in the context of a terrorist attack, but when clothes start raining down from the sky because hundreds of people were just vaporized, nothing makes sense at all.

The deaths in this movie are very real feeling and tragic. The CGI is done so well that it doesn’t look one bit of fake. I don’t know how many times I just mumbled, “Holy poo poo!” watching awful things happen to people. I’ve seen countless thousands of movie deaths, but Spielberg shows he’s the master of this sort of thing and makes it all new again. This was the thrill of watching Jaws and Raiders of the Lost Ark for the first time. Indepence Day Director, Roland Emerisch is probably going to hang himself in his closet after watching this one.

Tom Cruise is an easy media target as of late, and perhaps deservedly so, but any goofy feelings about the guy evaporate as soon as the movie starts. Like him or not personally, the guy can act. And he carries the role of a divorced dad tasked with taking care of his teenage son and little daughter while the whole world is blowing to poo poo amazingly well. He’s a fallible character that is doing the best he can.

Dakota Fanning is great, as Cruise’s daughter. She’s a scared little girl that is told to shut her eyes when the world turns to poo poo. The things she sees are enough to give permanent brain damage to any kid, but she’s appropriately tough, and when she keeps quiet in circumstances that would make any other kid have an aneurism, you can’t help but applaud her performance.

Spielberg is able to craft situations for the actors that work so well. You can be amazed at Cruise running down the street while aliens blast the poo poo out of everyone around him, or equally scared while he and his kids are in a mini van with hundreds of people shaking it and trying to get in.

Perhaps only James Cameron’s brilliant sinking of The Titanic comes close to the incredible stuff pulled off in this movie.

The sound crew in this film easily deserve an Oscar. The unearthly buzzing moans that the alien ships make is scary as hell. Definitely see it in the theater with the best possible sound system. At one point, my entire row looked back because it sounded like the projector booth was collapsing on us.

John Williams pulls out an all original masterpiece score as well that fills you with the proper sense of dread throughout.

Every critic and fan I talked to at the screening loved this movie.

And Mr. Spielberg, thanks for kicking my rear end!

EDIT: I hate having to spoiler details from a book that's more than 100 years old, but I know someone's gonna bitch.

EPS
Mar 19, 2003

READY... FIGHT!
I hated this movie. This wasn't aliens invading the earth, it was aliens invading Tom Cruise and his family. Representative of the whole, I think, was a scene where the combined might of the United States military drives up a hill to do battle with an alien craft. Just as the shelling and explosions start, the camera decides to cover the family drama going on between Tom Cruise and his son for the entire scene. There is an epic battle, probably much cooler than anything in the Lord of the Rings happening JUST UP THE HILL AND OUT OF FRAME TO THE LEFT, and all we are able to see is the flashing lights of the distant explosions FOR THE ENTIRE TIME.

The ending was simpering, cloying, inane and loving stupid. Why change nearly every single thing from the book and then keep the utterly implausible cop-out deus ex machina ending? It's a good thing those aliens have identical cell structure to ours, allowing our virii and bacteria to reproduce in their bodies. And I sure am glad that Tom Cruise's son is some kind of Shaman who has the power to come back from the dead after running into a Hiroshima-looking blast, because God knows an audience watching movie where the entire population worldwide is decimated wouldn't be able to handle a little personal tragedy.

1/5

SCheeseman
Apr 23, 2003

Opinions are very mixed with this movie. I think people were expecting something closer to Independence Day, which is sort of an epic story revolving around many people. War of the Worlds is different. You see it only from Tom Cruises point of view. There are no sweeping shots of devistated cities, only what Cruise can see from his eyes. The most you get to see of the worldwide devestation is through some TV screens in a TV van.

This makes the movie a lot more personal. With ID4, you didn't really feel anything when people got blasted to poo poo, they even pulled some humour out of it (the gay guy trying to get to his mothers while a giant explosion hurdles towards him, a bunch of alien nuts on top of a building with signs saying "bring back elvis"). With WOTW, the deaths are actually rather upsetting, not so much tearjerking, but the general tone of the movie is definately dark. This isn't really a negative towards ID4, just saying that the two movies are very different in tone, despite the similar base story.

Also, the ending kinda sucks. Not so much concerning the aliens, that was handled well, but the ending for Tom Cruise is rather disappointing. It didn't ruin the movie for me though.

I sadly havn't read the book or seen the TV series. It's been an aim of mine for a while though. Just wanted to add this to the review so you understand that I'm not biased in anyway towards the source material.

4.5/5

NovaHunter
Mar 13, 2004

Jack Bauer is my hero.
My new favorite movie. Spielberg has reclaimed his throne as the god of directing, and I will bow and worship him whenever I am given the chance.

The storyline was an excellent adaptation of the book and the end was faithful. Throughout the entire film my mouth was agape in awe. There is some seriously hosed up poo poo that happens in this film that you wouldn't expect Spielberg to pull, but he let loose. Then again, if you werre greenlit on the highest budget ever alloted for a single movie, you would let loose, too.

ILM did a superb job with the CG effects. Even though I know for a fact that there weren't 100-foot tal tripods wandering around, I couldn't tell. The CG was so drat perfect. There wasn't a single place in the movie that looked too cartoony or unrealistic for the storyline. The blew my expectations away.

Also, as an ending note, the genres that Spielberg goes through in this movie is an excellent mix. Action, suspense, horror, and drama. Throughout the entire basement scene (which lasts a good half hour), I was frozen solid.

5.5/5

Wolfsheim
Dec 23, 2003

and god is on your side
dividing sparrows from the nightingales
I agree with SwissCM, in that it was sort of perfect in the way that you really only see what happens through Tom Cruise and his family's point of view.

Like, for example, when the aliens come into the basement. There was no huge dramatic musical score, no big entrance where the camera centers on these bizarre creatures, we see it just as Tom Cruise does; with a mixture of quiet terror and confusion as these things slowly move in and out of the shadows of the basement.

My only negative reaction was to the ending. I haven't read the book that it apparently followed closely, but I already sort of knew what was coming something involving the aliens being defeated by germs, but I'm sure several people might not catch on. This isn't a gripe saying they should've dumbed it down for the average mindless moviegoer, but it just cuts so abruptly from Hey Tom Cruise saved his family and everyone's okay to By the way? The reason the aliens are dying is germs. I just think there could've been a bit more exposition to that aspect.

4/5

Ape Agitator
Feb 19, 2004

Soylent Green is Monkeys
College Slice
Good movie, not great, but quite good.

It's really great to see some nice matches to the original concepts of the tripods and the aliens themselves. I wouldn't have been disappointed to see them reimagined, but when you see one start walking and the shield itself, I got pretty jazzed. The 'Death Ray' was also very well realized and made for a very well done and disturbing scene when Cruise realizes what he's covered in.

The personal story of the family was also nicely done, with Cruise realizing he barely knows his kids through the events of the torturous attack. When I had seen the first preview, I had assumed that Cruise would play a scientist, but it was pretty refreshing to deviate from the 50's movie in that way and not retread ground that is well understood by current popular culture.

Some parts of the movie were not so good. There is a hide and seek scene which is so practically identical to Spielberg's Jurassic Park that he might have used the same storyboards. The conversion of the aliens from being opportunistic travelling invaders to very long-viewed and calculating invaders makes the deus ex machina ending of the previous War of the Worlds versions seem completely unreasonable and as flawed as the concept behind Signs. There is also a slightly pointless counterattack sequence that seemed very rushed at the end right as the inevitable conclusion was already playing out. Perhaps it was an attempt to rouse the audience in hope, but it seemed to me that the point of the previous films was that there was no hope from human action. The two tripods taken down from Cruise and the military's activity seemed to just be retreads of Independance Day's idea that they're 'weak without their shields'. If you're going to make them vulnerable, the path used in ID4 seems a better choice. If the resolution is immunity based, then don't let humans beat any tripods. That'd just be my preference.

Minor nitpicks in the movie that don't amount to anything (a video camera still working in Cruise's city, having machines buried undetected in major cities, and even the placement of the machines so that they would rise where major cities would eventually be built seemed hard to swallow) and a few heavy handed 'terrorist' and 'occupation' comments (not that I disagree, just they were very blunt) didn't distract from some fantastic sequences of mayhem and some good dramatic moments. I'll also say that Dakota Fanning continues to impress me. She's just marvelous in reaction without treading over to 'creepily adult child' territory.

Rating: 3.5/5

Pros: Great attack, and some good alien and tripod designs that nod to the other versions. Also some nice work by Cruise and Fanning
Cons: Last third has some bad choices, including a solid snake stealth section that is both unoriginal and far too long

adidas
May 10, 2005
"War of the Worlds"......
Sounds really cool doesnt it. So I purchase a ticket to see exactly that, a war of the worlds. Instead what I got a ticket for is "Tom Cruise's 2 Hour Acting Extravaganza" Sure I saw some thrills and got some chills. But the movie was Tom Cruise....and Dakota Fanning doing a great job by the way.......and more Tom Cruise....and an ok Cameo from Tim Robbins.....and MORE TOM CRUISE....this movie was all character development and not enough action. At least with films like Independance Day you get a good helping of action with your portion of acting/drama/storyline that drags on and on. Considering one of the best action sequeneces was a military unit leading a charge over a hill.....helicopters shooting there full loads towards (the tri-pods we hope) and that was it. ALL YOU SAW WAS THE SHOOTING OVER A HILL.....you dont get to see the missles hit, you dont get to see the tripods fight back....I know why the son wanted to go over that hill, to see some real action for his buck. I should have seen Batman : Begins again.

2.5/5 (just because Steve did a GREAT job on special effects.

a side note: what was up with the aliens, did they have extra heads from Independance Day and just say, "well we can just use these......" lack of effort on originality definately drops this film down a notch.

InterceptorV8
Mar 9, 2004

Loaded up and trucking.We gonna do what they say cant be done.
The camcorder poo poo really bugged me, that and if his car was a old Mustang, the points that engine had would have allowed it to run through a EMP pulse. Too bad the tripods looked like the robots from the Matrix, and where are all the action shots!?! I was also waiting for the battleship/destroyer to come flying up the rivier to kick some tripod rear end, but that's what I get for reading the book 15 years ago.

This movie is good to watch in a theater if you are going to also go theater hopping, otherwise wait till it comes out on DVD.

3/5

Schwarzwald
Jul 27, 2004

Don't Blink
This could of been a horrible movie, but Steven Spielberg pulled it off flawlessly. By far the best movie I've seen this year, even better than Batman Beyond.

5.0

jmnmu
Nov 21, 2004
f
One of the best movies of the year with Sin City and Kung Fu Hustle (much better than Batman IMO).

The movie stuck closer to the book than I thought it would (much closer than the 1950s version) and had a good mixture of action and suspense. Great acting, directing and the tripods are loving cool.

4.5/5

evil_cheese
Sep 11, 2002
I AM A LIAR
I'll say first off that i hate tom cruise to the point where i avoid most of his movies.

That being said, i thought he did a pretty good job in this film. He portayed an divorced dad, emotionaly seperated from his kids pretty well (drawing from real experience?). The build up and attack by the aliens was pretty well done. The scenes of terrible destruction brought about by the "tripods" were done with enought sense to believe real people might act that way when approached by them (ie no people standing and gawking after seeing one blow up their nieghbor ect..)

the movie had me up untill the very end, when the son appears alive after going over a hill which was subsequently expolded .

it was made apparent to me at that moment this was NOT a new look at the old story, but the same old movie done over with new effects. I had been willing to overlook this prior to said spoiler happening, but the movie "title" changed from one about how "regular people" would deal with a alien invasion, to one of how "movie people" deal with an alien invasion.


The sound was good, i didnt really notice any music, and the CG was well done. Cruise gave a pretty good performance, and dakota fanning seems destined to be a big star if she doesnt make a wrong turn somewhere. But the ending ruined all the hard work spielburg put into the rest of the film. I cant recommend this movie, as for 98% of it, it seemed to be a drama, but at the end it is revealed as its true self, a more depressing, less fun version of Indepence day.

3/5 all for the CG and sound work

Pros: CG is realistic, cities getting blown up is fun, sound is scary, cruise does a good job.

Cons: Annoying kids (but ok acted), Basment scene could have been cut entirely without any loss to the story as a whole, Ending does not fit with the rest of the movie at all (ie people getting vaporized, AIRPLANES getting shot down, but a certain character somehow escapes unscathed from literaly dead center of an alien offesive, and travels a large distance to appear for a happy reunion later)

SwedeRacer
Aug 2, 2004
Absolutely wonderful movie. Spielbergs decision to stick with Cruise rather then make it an action flick works perfectly, and makes War Of the Wars a chillingly claustrophobic summer film.

From the start we see Cruise as the rear end in a top hat dad, caring less about his kids then himself, and not knowing how to reach them. All that changes when he's forced to lead them away to saftey, with Boston (where his ex-wife is staying) in mind. He truely develops as a character throughout the movie, transforming believably into the leader his children need him to be. On that note, Dakota Fanning is one of the best actresses in Hollywood and she's only 11.

I also love the fact that there wasn't a huge battle scene - it really made the movie much more intense instead of the cgi-shitfest it could've become.

The ending really pissed me off though. I mean, can't we get a little more exposition then they got diseases lolz[/spoilers]? Plus [spoiler] the son should be dead

All in all I'll give it a 4/5

Johnny B. Goode
Apr 5, 2004

by Ozma
War of the Worlds is simply the best, thrilling, sci-fi movie since Jurassic Park. I'm glad that I chose to read the book last week, before I came to see the movie, because Spielburg really stuck close to the book, unlike the 1950's adaptation. I don't think any other actor could have done the job better than Cruise in this one. Sure he may be a looney Scientologist in real life, but in this movie he freaking owned the screen. Dakota Fanning did a splendid job, just as people have been saying.

The special effects were AMAZING. I honestly think Hollywood is making a comeback from the use of CG in lovely situations to make lovely effects, to actually making things feel more genuine. The tripods owned, and the aliens looked wonderful as well. About the tripods: did anyone else think, "Strider!" I have to say, the creepest part about the whole drat movie was the sound the tripods make. When you heard that squeelish blast, you know some poo poo is about to go down.

I liked the fact that the nararator indirectly stated that the common cold defeated the aliens, staying true to the book. I wondered how Spielburg would handle the ending, and I'm glad that he didn't spell it out like we're all retarded. I also liked the way we didn't know what the gently caress was going on. It felt like you were actually in their situation.

The only thing I would have preferred, would of been about 5-10 minutes more of US armed forces blasting the gently caress out of tripods/aliens. It would have been awesome if the alien at the end would have just gradually snuck out and everyone unloaded on him.

Pros: Everything: death, destruction, chaos, loving overall solid movie.
Cons: None.

Rating: 5.5/5

Linguica
Jul 13, 2000
You're already dead

Just got back from it and I'm drained. Blown away by the special effects of course, but I have a hardon for such end of the world fantasies. Some small nitpicks that I could make of course but I understand what kind of a film Spielberg was going for and I think that for the most part he succeeded. I was worried about the ending and how anticlimactic it would be, but luckily they spruced it up with some action that made me want to salute America, and made it feel like an "end" instead of just a kaput. Sometimes I feel like I don't like any movies anymore then I see something like this and it reaffirms my faith in Hollywood to get something right occasionally. 4.5/5

Oh and I am really sick of the Spielbergian gratuitous light boom, from Saving Pvt Ryan to Minority Report to this, please cut it out already.

Vernacular
Nov 29, 2004
I was blown away by the special effects, especially during the beginning of the invasion. The cinematography was also fantastic. Spielberg does a great job of really engaging you in the action.

I thought Tom Cruise was pretty good. There was nothing special about his role and he seemed to have it down pat. Dakota was good, but I really disliked her character. In retrospect, Rachel Ferrier didn't really have any redeeming qualities.

It was worth the $9.25 and recommend it.

4/5

StrikerObi
Aug 1, 2003
SECharger73 hates sad reminders :[
This film is intense. It's full throttle pretty much the whole way (minus the first 10 and last 5 minutes for exposition and closing). It feels close, and you really feel like you are there in the film. The aliens are scary. Their weapontry (which I refer to as the technicolor death) is unstopable.

The cinematography is mind blowing and there are a couple scenes (Tripods coming over the hill at the ferry dock) that I would love to have as a giant poster.

Kudos for taking out the tripod like it was an AT-AT in Empire Strikes Back!

Cruise does drat good job, Dakota Fanning is amazing. The kid playing robbie is ok, though his character is a tad underdeveloped. I don't mind the ending. This is probably going to be one of my favorite movies ever. It's the new Jurassic Park, seriously.

5/5

Jack's Flow
Jun 6, 2003

Life, friends, is boring
Spielberg has delivered a masterpiece. When I heard that he would do this movie, I was afraid he might focus on large battles between evil evil aliens and the US army. I'm so freaking happy that he did not do that. On the contrary, you get the feeling right from the start, that mankind is no threat to these invaders at all. The aliens are not even evil, they just take over a planet from a race that is to them, what insects are to humans. Do we think about ourselves as evil when we kill insects in our garden? Clearly the best movie I have seen in a long time.

Voted 5.0

exode
Mar 23, 2005
First off, this movie had very powerful special effects. Seeing it in the movie theater is just part of the expierience, especially if the theater has a THX rated audio setup.

As many others said, the opening scenes were a bit of a slump in the movies story. However, it gave emotional guidelines for the rest of the movie, allowing the audience to connect more and feel a little more of the fatherly "pain."

It seems that this fatherly pain was useless, the drat son didn't die which really just leaves no emotion at the end of the movie. Everyone reunites and is happy! woot.

The ending was much better than the original, they took their time on it and the narration really helped people who might've not read the book.

I really didn't see any holes in the plot, a few flawed lines, very good screenplay from the Tom and his on-screen daughter. I really enjoyed the hide-and-seek scene regardless of its Jurassic Park origins as some might believe.

Overall a well done movie, and its alot of fun to watch in the theaters.

4.5/5

Retroblique
Oct 16, 2002

Now the wild world is lost, in a desert of smoke and straight lines.
I need to see this movie a second time before I post my usual/detailed review. My enjoyment first time round was marred by a) an upset stomach and b) some chucklefuck sitting directly behind us who let out this loud, obnoxious giggle whenever someone said something that was either vaguely ironic/amusing or not at all ironic/amusing.

I knew we were in trouble when he responded thusly during the King Kong trailer:

Jack Black: Herb, get the camera.

Chucklefuck: HUUURRR! HUUURRR! HUUURRR! HUUURRR! HUUURRR! HUUURRR!

Christ, it was relentless. A "shut the gently caress up!" didn't have any affect.

Anyway, War of the Worlds. In a nutshell, a Spielberg masterpiece. Despite all the naysayers moaning that he opted for a modern setting, this adaptation is actually the most faithful to the novel.

The Independence Day crowd will be disappointed. If you want a melodramatic portrayal of an alien invasion, with wall-to-wall special effects and soap opera characters, then stay away. If you want a darker, grittier, more realistic portrayal of how people are likely to respond to terrifying and outlandish things happening to them, then this is the one to see.

In War of the Worlds, regular people don't jump on a plane with the President, fly to some secret base populated by crazy scientists and fighter pilots with poo poo-eating grins. This time round, regular people are powerless to do anything but run around in circles like headless chickens and die in spectacularly terrifying ways.

Keeping the focus (and perspective) on Cruise's family is what makes this movie stand out from the crowd. We experience the catastrophic turmoil of an alien invasion through the eyes of regular people, not stereotypical ciphers. Every single scene of the movie, without exception, is told from the perspective of either Cruise or Fanning.

We don't cut to the secret underground bunker to watch military personnel conduct a counter attack. We don't cut to the President sitting in the White House, pondering the fate of humanity. We don't cut to the fighter pilots about to launch an attack on the enemy. We don't cut to clips of news channels around the world reporting on events. We don't need to, because we've seen all that bollocks before. Instead, we're down in the mud with the rest of the herd, running scared, not knowing what the gently caress is going to happen next.

Erm, I think I said something about a short review. If you've read the original novel and want to see the best modern adaptation possible, go see this movie. If you want to see Independence Day 2, go and rent ID4/Godzilla/The Day After Tomorrow again.

Provisional score: 4.5/5

Retroblique fucked around with this message at 05:43 on Jul 1, 2005

Beavix
Nov 8, 2004
Natural Male Enhancement
I must say that with a movie like this, we're getting closer and closer to seeing that one unforgettable alien invasion film that is to come. Visual and sound effects were impressive, as expected. Once again the sound was really quite something, it was definately one aspect of this movie that made me feel closer then ever to the chaos that took place. Cruise and Fanning gave a commendable performance as opposed to Chatwin (Robbie) that stood out with his lack of effort in performance and an undeniably bogus sense of courage that he seemed to have to contrast Cruise's character.

Being viewed from the perspective of three characters, the deficiency of fully loaded, action scenes is understandable. Spielberg did not want to make the audience think this is but another "Independence Day", instead he scales it down to allow for a more palpable experience that even you can imagine being in yourself.

I wish to comment negatively on the abrupt ending of this film but I feel that I cannot. Apparently as I read, this movie is based on a novel and most that seem to have read it, are satisfied. Aside from that I believe Spielberg could have elaborated on the novel's ending and perhaps he could have composed one that extended this movie beyond two hours. (I also think that showing those U.S. soldiers destroying the tripod at the very end was unecessary in that not only did it feel like "Their shields are down, fire at will!" but it portrayed the false sense of humans overcoming the invaders.)

Oh and the character "Robbie" should have died and I don't think I need to explain that one.


Nitpicking:
-The tripods remained undetected while buried under cities throughout the development of the 20th and 21th centuries.
-A camcorder/VCR was used to capture the descent of an alien capsule traveling at lighting speed into an unearthed tripod.
-Aliens resembled "Independence Day" creatures too closely
-Cruise's character and his kids somehow managed to swim from the overturned ferry to the shore in a matter of minutes.
-Not sure how alien shields were disabled (bacteria?)


On a side note: The tripods felt like Striders when shown walking in the cities.

4/5 - Sound and Visualizations overpowered many of the negative aspects of the movie. Spielberg developed a great feeling of powerlessness on behalf of mankind and I loved it.

Beavix fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Jul 1, 2005

An Ounce of Gold
Jul 13, 2001

by Fluffdaddy
Maybe you guys saw a different movie than I did. I saw an over the top corny run away flick that focuses on boredom instead of the "War of the Worlds" that we hear about in the film's title.

Thinking back on the film I would say that the CG was the closest thing to flawless. The acting was on par for what I expected and everything else was mediocre at best. This movie has more plot holes than Signs (and shares it's insanity for endings).

HEAVY SPOILERS
Let's get down to it, this movie follows Tom Cruise and family that do NOTHING. There was no point for a movie to follow none of the important parts of an alien attack and just follow 1 group of people that are supposed to represent everyone else that have ZERO effect on the outcome of the human race. It was pretty lame.

Spielberg also made Jaws, so imagine if you can, if he made Jaws follow the story of a Lifegaurd. The Lifegaurd is there to see Jaws kill and attack people, he moves people away from the beach, but then runs away never to go after the Great White. Oh and by the way, the shark would be allergic to human meat and die or something.

Which brings us to the insane ending. I know I know, "THE BOOK! THE BOOK!" Who cares? Change it because it's a lame loving ending. They mention that these aliens have been studying us for years and know exactly how to eradicate us and yet these don't test for microbes? With all of their advanced weaponary they don't loving have microscopes? And what if they didn't? What kind of attack force doesn't send down advance scouts? THEY HAVE NO loving SCOUTS? This would be like humans attacking a Lava Planet filled with Lava People with our bare hands. It's just idiotic.

This isn't nit-picking people, this is a lack of common sense.

Finally, this movie brings us nothing new. We already have a movie about surviving a major human-devastating event that focuses on people with Deep Impact, we have a human survival and fight back story with Independence Day, and we already have a lame rear end never really fight the aliens but they just die in the end for no reason movie with Signs. You can forgive all that if War of the Worlds actually paid off or improves on those things, but it doesn't. It just hacks them all together in one mega-suck pretty package. It's bland, pointless, mediocre, but looks good.

Oh and the son survived. Give me a break Hollywood!


Some of you need your heads examined.
2/5


EDIT: Keep your eyes peeled for Speildberg favorites: The little blonde girl screaming and scared (E.T.) and the old Enemey gets to an area to check it out RIGHT after a character moves around a corner (almost all Spielberg movies, for reference see Jurassic Park's kitchen scene).

An Ounce of Gold fucked around with this message at 05:56 on Jul 1, 2005

Foggy
May 17, 2004

Incredible. The action scenes really made you feel "oh god all those poor people" in a way that most disaster/invasion movies don't, and the pace and feeling of completely hopelessness persists the whole way through.

Some favorite bits:

FIRE TRAIN OF DEATH. Combination of atmosphere, sound, and visual effects made this one of those scenes where you just gape your mouth for a few seconds before getting over yourself. Holy poo poo.

Great suspense with the "Is it over?" after the first super lightning storm. It's such an obvious setup for a super-loud bolt which never comes. Had me holding my breath for ages.

Basement scene (besides the Metal Gear Solid parts) terrific and very true to the book.

Alien weaponry perfect. The retro-futuristic heat ray of colorful doom was beautiful.


Nitpicks:

The ending. I've read and enjoyed the book, and I'm hardly suggesting they change it, but you can't deny that it could be better done. I loved the voiceover, but something feels like it's missing. Also, the son lives somehow. Felt obnoxiously Hollywood-ending-ey.

Actually, I'd rather have the protagonist on his own as in the book, instead of having to drag a couple kids along. Sure, they add to the drama, but in a fake OH GOD NOT KIDS way. Not my favorite.


All in all, though, goddamn good and worth seeing again. Seems like it might have the Fifth Element magical property of not getting boring on repeated viewings.

4.5/5

Sethan
May 18, 2002
War of the Worlds had great effects. That's it.

I initially thought it could've been interesting from a "what would Joe Average do if aliens attacked" angle.

This is negated by the fact that none of the characters are realistic. None of them talk or act like real people do.

We're treated to atrocious hack hollywood drama set with an alien invasion backdrop.

Mostly worthless.

1/5.

Random Numgen
May 4, 2002
The good: Everything involving the actual aliens and the tripods was beautiful. The destruction was great, and it really seemed like the world was being destroyed. For all of the 5 seconds you see it, Tom Cruise's car was sweet. Everything visual was pretty good, all told.

The bad: I hated all of the characters. Tom Cruise is an rear end in a top hat, the son is an idiot, and Dakota Fanning's shrieking grew old about 10 minutes in. She went from an annoying little brat, to an annoying, loud little brat. About half the movie is her either looking scared at something just off-camera, screaming, being cute, or screaming yet again in that high-pitched little monkey scream that makes me want to drill my eardrums out. If I had known that this would have been Steven Spielberg's 'look at me use child actors because I want cheap emotional involvement', I would have spent the money on something more enjoyable, like a hammer to strike myself in the balls with over and over and over.

1/5

estremoz
Mar 27, 2005

by T. Fine
A strong, thrilling first act climaxes as movie's central family, and country, come to a point where they must decide whether to fight or retreat. Sadly, while the world choose to fight on against the alien invaders, the movie retreats in Spielberg cliche, half-assed retreads of Jurassic Park, and a conclusion so abrupt and out of tune with modern day society that you'll wonder what went wrong.

How could a movie that started off with interesting characters, good dialogue, amazing action, and some of the most terrifying machines ever to attack New York, fall flat on its rear end? Blame the script's pacing and inability to shake free from the reigns HG Wells knit 107 years ago.

When War of the Worlds was originally written, is was one of a kind. People who read it could excuse some of its meandering sections and they could also excuse its abrupt, anti-climatic ending. Spielberg should've recognized that the script presented to him adhered too closely to the original story for modern audiences, and adapted it appropriately. The first act works because it takes parts of a classic, transplants them into modern day reality, then cranks everything up a notch with brilliant special effects, horrifying sounds (really, really well done throughout), and well thought out action sequences. As the second act begins, WOTW relies too heavily on its source material, and begins feeling clunky, outdated, and stupid--very dissappointing considering the magnitude the first act commands.

There are times in the second act where WOTW breaks free from its roots, but they are rare and Spielbergian; specifically, an homage to Jurassic park -underwhelming compared to its source- and a melodramatic feel-good ending cap off a less than perfect finale.

Touches of inconsistency do taint the entire picture, but they are forgiveable in light of the film's nature as a balls to the wall action flick. The viewer suspends disbelief when civilians use their cameras to videotape invading aliens despite the fact that EMPs have wiped out all electronics--even cars. We also are quick to forgive the speed in which Tom Cruise navigates his van through seas of people and wreckage. Other continuity errors dot WOTW, a fact shared mutually with most action movies.

So while WOTW -like Tom Cruise's character, Ray- narrowly navigates disaster by swerving from little error to little error, it erupts ridiculously in a crappy Hollywood explosion when the shaky premise is further eroded by the abrupt, anti-climatic ending.

After watching the first 60 minutes, I thought all the negative reviews were wrong. I thought my friends who'd seen it were wrong. I thought Spielberg was at the top of his game, crafting yet another Sci-Fi flick for the ages. It was a great film at that point--one of the best I'd ever seen--but it couldn't sustain that momentum, and continued losing steam until the ending.

See it in theatres for the enthralling first act, but avoid paying full price.

First act: 5/5
Second act: 1.5/5
Overall: 2.5/5

estremoz fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Jul 2, 2005

Raptor10001
May 7, 2003

Bend over and show me your Dark Side.
Pros:
-CG Aliens look loving amazing
-Throw-backs to the 50s film
-Great emotional build-up throughout the film
-The Tim Robbins cameo made me :lol:

Cons:
-Dakota Fanning screaming her head off.
-the convenient path through the debris that was made for their minivan to travel through except for the crowd of lunatics
-stupid son surviving the alien onslaught
-The ending didn't do justice to the build-up throughout the film. It felt like a 'Rick Berman ending'.

2.5/5

Mac No Pickle
Jan 26, 2004
I hadn't seen the previews to this movie, I had however heard the radio broadcast from 1938. Going into the movie I was expecting something similar to the broadcast (i.e. epic battles and gas attacks) unfortunately it was completely different.

The characters were terrible, cliche bad dad, cliche stupid girl, cliche rebelious male. Tom Cruise had many 'Tom Cruise' moments, the girl played just about every cliched idea of kids in movies. By the end of the movie I was hoping all the main characters would be killed off for being stupid.

It appeared to me atleast that sets were recycled (notice how all the basements look the same (pay special attention to the stairwell)

As everybody else has mentioned, the CG and audio was great, but thats all that was great.

In short I was hoping for an epic government/military counter-attack against the tripods, but I got a 'character development' movie with a cliche happy ending.

Overall: 1/5

criscodisco
Feb 18, 2004

do it
I'm truly surprised about the lack of love for this movie here.

I felt the ending was a bit abrupt, but that's not necessarily a negative. I think people wanted another Independence Day, and were disappointed when they didn't get it.

The movie never felt boring to me. I was literally on the edge of my seat throughout most of it. It might have had several Spielberg cliches, but I thought they were all used to good effect.

The things that people are bitching about, like the scene in which the military is rolling up the hill to battle the tripods while the camera focuses on the fight between Cruise and his son, I thought were perfect. I didn't need to see a CGI orgasm all over the screen, because it's been done a million times. I appreciated that the film made me feel as if I were there, because the camera didn't rest on a bunch of mass destruction. It didn't need to, the story was about trying to survive. A 4'8" guy with his kids wouldn't stand there to observe the damage, he would just run. And run and run and run. And I thought that was perfect. The whole thing felt claustrophobic and tense.

Also, I just want to add to the Dakota Fanning love. Jesus Christ, this little girl can act. I just hope she doesn't turn into another Haley Joel Osment. Usually, in movies such as this, the kids are annoying and ruin the film for me. Her reactions were perfect. In said scene, with the military rolling up the hill, her reactions when alone were perfect, especially her interactions with strangers.

5.5/5

Lemuel Fawnsley
Jan 8, 2004
I can't believe this movie has a good average rating. I feel obligated to write a review just to let people know what they're going into. I've told all of my friends so far that the movie was "well-done poo poo".

"War of the Worlds" was one of the most flawed movies I can remember seeing. It was honestly MST3K worthy. Hell, my friend and I were making jokes the entire time.

I'll start off with what was good about it. As even the nay-sayers admit, the CGI was flawless, as was the sound work. That's about it, although there were a sparse few chilling scenes. Dakota Fanning going to the river.

To begin the complaints, I'll mention that I can't stand any movie that is painful to watch (in the sense of bright lights flashing to disorient you instead of actually showing you something). It didn't happen often, but there were several scenes were Tom Cruise is staring out a window for minutes at a time and the screen just keeps flashing. The aliens' master plan must have included exploiting epileptics at some stage, or else Spielberg was just purposely trying to piss me off.

The main problem with this movie was that it was too Hollywood for its own good. I would have been able to accept a "War of the Worlds" remake that just focuses on the main family, knowing that you already know how everything ends, and just highlights the family dynamics, the way normal people would respond to a real alien invasion and the deaths of everyone around them, the general panic that would send the entire world into chaos, etc etc etc. But this movie made itself into a huge blockbuster with the above movie as a facade. We're expected to believe that Tom Cruise and his kids are the sole survivors from every single attack shown and that Tom is the only one in the world (except in Japan) to figure out how to beat the aliens? The key to making this movie a success would be to show that these are just people: weak, stupid, frantic, mortal twigs. Instead, we're given Bruce Willis from Unbreakable.

The family dynamics, the thing that the movie should have rode on, weren't even convincing. Tom Cruise didn't come off as the father trying to make a connection with his kids, he just came off as a stupid dumbass. All of the family conflict in the first act seems entirely forced except the very first introduction of the kids. Speaking of them, the son's rebelliousness gets old quickly (nothing he does is believable in such a life-threatening situation) as does Dakota Fanning's incessant shrieking. I'll admit, I think Dakota Fanning may be the best child actor ever, but this was her worst performance ever. I don't blame her; she has chops. It's the script's problem that her character is just poo poo. She's a little girl that gets in trouble a lot and screams about it. And when I say screams, I mean 80% of her dialogue is ear-piercing shrieking. The 20% that is human speech is overly precocious or annoyingly naive. Make up your mind, movie.

The instant pandemonium I was hoping for never happened. When the aliens first attack, they tower over every building and vaporize everyone within blocks (except Tom, of course). Somehow, by hiding around corners, Tom survives and runs home to his family (even though the aliens can blast through just about anything). Back in his neighborhood, however, not a single person has any idea what's going on. No one heard or felt the tripods tearing through the ground or firing their space lasers or groaning as loud as they could. Every death in the movie is emotionless and a pat on the back by the CGI team to itself. Thank God Tom and the kids escape when the aliens attack for a second time.

And again.

And again.

And even in a situation when they're completely hopeless (the ferry), they are the only ones who see the way to escape and take advantage of it (no one else can see this nearby, well-lit island?). They even get to a town where real chaos is underway, but it turns out it's just PG-13 chaos. People aren't raiding stores and shooting anyone who comes near them and beating people to death for what they want; they're just standing around clamoring. The movie touches on real chaos for a second, but of course none of it affects the main characters. The best the movie can do is to introduce a random character that Tom Cruise supposedly knew just to kill her off within five minutes as if we're supposed to care about who she is.

As other people have mentioned, there is a "suspenseful" "homage" to Jurassic Park in the middle of the film that lasts about 40 minutes. The only good part of it is the conflict is presents between two of the characters involved (which it does well, considering that their conflict would have cost them their lives several times over because they were making so much noise all the time). The conflict is resolved in a completely unsatisfactory way, although it tries to be emotional and chilling, just playing off of Dakota Fanning's presence in a "THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN" fashion.

Around this time, we're also shown a new facet of the aliens' plan, which makes absolutely no sense. Never explained at all are the blood tendrils creeping everywhere or why the aliens use them. Apparently, just to show how the aliens will treat people like cattle to be slaughtered when useful, which doesn't make sense given all their previous actions.

In a completely Hollywood ending, Tom Cruise against all odds and realistic possibilities, finally gets to his destination where the aliens have apparently shot up a lot of the place. Luckily not the wife's house or anything, despite the fact that Boston would have been one of their first places in North America to fry. Oh, and Tom tells the stupid army how to kill the aliens. Oh, and the dead son is alive, despite EVERY COMMON SENSE NEURON IN YOUR BRAIN SCREAMING NOOOOOO!!! And then the movie abruptly ends with a fifteen second explanation by ubiquitous narrator Morgan Freeman. WHAT?! IT'S DONE?!@*

This really is the kind of movie where you just shut your brain off and it's great. Otherwise, you'll realize how literally every event in the movie is completely unbelievable. Not unbelievable in the sense that "Aliens aren't real" unbelievable. Unbelievable in the sense that "None of this makes sense in any way, shape or form." Your suspension of disbelief is more stretched out over the characters and situations than it is over the fact that alien tripods are hiding underground, where they were never discovered during subway-building, pipe-laying, etc, or that they were supposedly there since before there were people ... all in an elaborate plan to kill all the ... people ... and take them over.

EDIT: There are comparisons in this thread to Independence Day. I'll say this: this movie was like if someone tried to make a movie that was the polar opposite of Independence Day but halfway through decided that it needed as much Independence Day in it as possible.

1.5/5
I'd watch it again on TV if nothing else was on, but I'm not renting this or buying it ever.

Pros: Graphics, the action towards the end
Cons: Everything

Lemuel Fawnsley fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Jul 2, 2005

Rasheed Walrus
Mar 11, 2004

by Fragmaster
I was on the edge of my seat for the entire first 3/5th of the movie.


Then it went to hell. I would have rather watched a lovely movie than one that was so perfectly filmed, paced, and edited for the first part and then turned into a bullshit emotional huggyfest.


God I'm so angry right now, that movie could have been something.

2/5


And I'm a little dissapointed that liquorhead doesn't seem to find any problems with this film...

Cigar Aficionado
Nov 1, 2004

"Patel"? Fuck you.
Terrible. Terrible, terrible terrible. Two hours of running away from aliens, and then they die from our atmosphere. I knew the ending was coming, but the setup to it was nonexistant/terrible, and the rest of the movie was excrutiatingly boring.

Pros: Special Effects
Cons: Everything else, especially Dakota Fanning.

1/5

RyoukoFanatic
Apr 26, 2004
A terrific film that did everything it was intended to. This was not a film about humanity overcoming a peril. This was about the only way a family could survive an utterly overpowering invasion of the planet.

The CGI was jawdropping. The acting was terrific (come on, how is a kid supposed to react to a two hundred foot tall tripod VAPOURISING everything in its path). Every single scene was laced with hopelessness, and by the end I was glad to see what remained of the US military finally down one of the fuckers.

Even the one Hollywood plot hole in the film (the son returning) is very easily dealt with by the fact that Tom Cruise spent five minutes of the film locked up inside a cage on the underside of a tripod.

I really enjoyed it in a way that I haven't enjoyed anything in a while. It was about as tense a film as I have ever seen, and some of the scenes really showed human ugliness at its worst.

Terrific.

5/5

jpop100
Sep 11, 2001

My faith in Humanity is restored
I have just returned from seeing this movie. I didn't expect much going in, but I was shocked.

The special effects are worth sucking dick for. I haven't seen FX this good ever.

Then there's the tension, or as someone else put it, "every scene is laced with hoplessness". I, personally, am never scared at horror movies. They always seem to be a long succession of gettting startled over and over again. This movie scared the poo poo out of me. In a good way. The only other movie that scared me was Blair Witch Project. And in Blair you never see what is causing all this poo poo too happen. And that's what made it so scary to me. In War of the Worlds, you see them and they still scared the poo poo out of me. And that is a hard thing to do. I was literally on the edge of my seat the entire movie. Not proverbially, literally. I got so anxious watching this that my chest hurt when the conclusion comes around.

Just like Blair Witch Project, people will complain about the ending. But if you think about what would happen if this really came about, then there is no other way to end the movie. It does feel a little cheap, especially when the son is still alive.

But over all it was an amazing movie.

Rating: 4.5

Pros: The special effects, the cinematography as a whole, and Justin Chatwin (for the most part.)

Cons: Both Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning seemed to overact for most of the movie, and the spoiler above.

Don't be fooled though. The pros definitely outweigh the cons.

Grammaton
Feb 3, 2004
Cleric
Despite some reservations about the plausibility of a few things, I found the movie quite engrossing and riveting. It moved very quickly, except for one notable location/scene. I was glad I watched it. 4/5

Regnevelc
Jan 12, 2003

I'M A GROWN ASS MAN!
Enjoyed the movie until the last 5 minutes, hated the ending, ruined it all for me.

I loved some of the shots, as a poster said earlier in the thread, I would love to have some as posters.
1.5 out of 5

Regnevelc fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Jul 4, 2005

NADZILLA
Dec 16, 2003
iron helps us play
There were a few tense scenes, but for the most part it was just more dull Spielberg storytelling. I'm honestly convinced that he doesn't have the time or inclination to talk to real people, so much that he's grown to believe the world really is filled with triumph-over-adversity dads and wise children. His characters are as phony and emotionally sterile as the European girls I watch Rocco Siffredi drill. He also does what most lazy directors do by making the enemies unbeatable, but stupid and vulnerable when it's convienient. There was even an extended scene where the "eye" of an alien ship scans the area Cruise & Co. are hiding out in that had me shouting my displeasure to the rear end in a top hat next to me. These are aliens with the ability to travel space, yet they can't use a human scanner to find life signs in a basement?

And for all the credit Spielberg gets as a legendary director, this sure was an artless, boring script. I couldn't help thinking throughout the movie that it was only average, and only average because he happened to have $150 million to spend on elaborate emotional jolts. Dakota Fanning is ridiculous to watch because she's a child actor playing a child, but who isn't really experiencing her own childhood. How the hell is she supposed to know how a kid really acts? She learns it from a screenwriter.

Chucklehead
Apr 14, 2004
I couldn't think of a custom title, so I got this piece of shit instead!
Having never read the book I didn't know what I would be in store for storywise. Invading aliens is always a cool premise so why not check it out. It started out ok, Mr. Freeman gave a nice introduction, then I got to check out Tom's lovely family for awhile. The explosions and invasion started and thats when the movie really grabbed my attention, for awhile...

I didnt mind that the story mainly dealt with Tom and his family, kind of interesting to see that perspective when dealing with something so grand.

I could go on and on with what pissed me off. I'll just finish by saying the ending turned this in to one of the most dissapointing movies ever.

Lloyd Christmas
Aug 3, 2004

by angerbot
You know, this movie could have been so much better. If it only had a decent script. I won't go into detail about all the plot holes, considering that I'd have to basically go over the entire movie. Here is my visual representation of this:



The performances, direction, effects were all top notch. It's just that the movie didn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense, especially the end. If you've seen it, you know.

I haven't seen the original war of the worlds, so maybe a lot of that stuff is explained there. But I was just completely lost and frustrated.

2/5

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

GonePostal
Dec 16, 2003
Sic Transit Gloria
This film had me from the opening frame to the moment that Tim Robbins shows up. Then it lost me, forever.

The first hour-plus of this film is incredible. The characters are paper-thin, but the characters are not the point of the movie. They are just really character types that the audience can associate with to make the horror of the invasion more personal. Starting with the emergence of the first tripod, in a sequence that is possibly one of the scariest things Spielberg has ever shot, through the stunned familiy's taking refuge in a basement with survivalist/nutso Robbins, the film is magnificent. The tripod design is spectacular and the way that Spielberg uses them is terrific. There are no massive, Battle of Helm's Deep overhead shots of them in action. We instead get the perspective of a refugee fleeing from carnage he can barely understand, as was the perspective in HG Welles book. For pure, terrifying moments, you can't beat the sight of a train speeding past a stop, completely on fire, or, more simply, a crowd of normal people driven to murder over a car that won't help them much anyway. As the family flees towards Boston, Spielberg never lets up on the horror. It's just that intense. Which is what makes the second half of the film so dissapointing.

As soon as the family holes up with Tim Robbins, the entire film changes tone and downshifts far too abrubptly. There is nothing worng with the performances. It's all the fault of the script and the director. The basement scenes go on for far too long, and include not one, but TWO sequences when the protaganists hide from the Aliens (which is way too like the "hide from the Raptor" scene in Jurrasic Park for my tastes). One would have been enough, and could have left time for a slightly less abrupt ending. The purpose of this sequence is to demonstrate what Cruise, the Everyman, will do to protect his kids. That's fine, but it's already been demonstrated what he will do for them, as the first hour is him saving them and keeping them together. Inserting Robbins and his little subplot here seems like overkill, and again, it goes on for too long. While it's shot well, it seems unnecessary.

When they leave the basement, well, the film never recaptures that sheer awe and power of the first half. There is a scene that is totally out of place for the film, involving a cage full of humans in a Tripod. Making Cruise the guy who takes out the tripod with the grenades up the rear end trick was way too much of an "Action Hero" moment in a film that should have no such moments, as is Cruise being the first to notice that the Alien shields are down. The downing of the tripod in such an "ID4" fashion also betrays the sheer industructability of them from the first hour. In this sequence, Spielberg finally let his worst tendencies get the better of him, and I began to wonder what happened.

Finally, the controversial finish. I though that the ending narration was fitting and that the final defeat of the Aliens by bacteria was handeled well, though I think the crowd in Boston and the soldiers would have beaten the hell out of the dead alien, shot it to ribbons. Not in a "Yeah we got em" way, but as a sign of impotent hate ata creature that destroyed their world. Still, the death of the invaders is so abrupt, and coming after the Cruise "hero" moment that I wish just a little bit of a hint about the impending die-off would have been inserted, just to make it seem less abrupt. I don't mind that it ends quickly, just that it's a little TOO quickly. But I cannot accept that his son survived. The kid walked into a field that was moments later engulfed in flame and then has a tripod walk out of it. The kid looked untouched physically, and frankly, it was pretty awful. Not because it was "happy" but because it is a cheat, and a cheep one too. There was no reason for the kid to make it. And essentially killing him before was a gutsy choice, and it showed. When he says "Hey, Dad" to Cruise, after calling him "Ray" all through the film, was a groaner. I totally hated it, and it killed the movie for me, in total. That scene betrays a lot of what came before, in the way the story is set up.

I desperately wanted to love this film, and did for an hour or so. The FX are used perfectly and the raw fear is truly awesome. That the film is betrayed by it's creators' lack of will in the final 40 minutes made the experience that much more unbareable. This is a long review, but hell, I had to get out my complaints. It could have been perfect, but I can give it just 2/5 for screwing itself so perfectly instead.

  • Post
  • Reply