War of the Worlds gets the thumbs down

  • Thread starter Pengwuino
  • Start date
In summary, the critic thinks that the movie from 1953 is better than the new one. He thinks that the psychological incident from the novel is still studied today, and that the ending sucks.
  • #36
It was this absolutely HORRIBLE movie that received more jokes then ticket sales that starred ben afflick and one of his wives or something that really really really really really really sucked according to just about every human being on earth.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
Really? Never heard of it.
Guess I'm lucky then.
 
  • #38
Palindrom said:
Are you guys serious? Is it that bad?
Well, I'm seing it on Sunday. I expected it would be good, with Spielberg and all.
Now I'm bumped.

I think it depends on what you are expecting. I went in expecting an adaptation of a late 19th century novel, but not nowing how fatihful it would be to the original work (other than the fact that it was of course set in modern times). All in all, I came out pleased with how much of the original flavor of the novel survived.
I've heard people complain here about how the story was centered on just one family, But the novel was written in the first person and told of that persons experiences.
The tripod machines were taken from the novel, and something I, for one, would have missed if they had been left out.

Other elements were taken from the Fifties movie; The placement of the story in present time, The protective force field, Cruise's character attacking the probe with an axe, etc.

The moive was an attempt to pay homage to both these prior works and as such, I guess it is just not everybody's cup of tea.
 
  • #39
Well, I've unfortunately neither read the book, nor seen the first movie. So I guess I might enjoy it anyway.

Stupid question: H.G. Wells, Orson Wells. Are they related, or is it just an amazing coincidence?
 
  • #40
Palindrom said:
Well, I've unfortunately neither read the book, nor seen the first movie. So I guess I might enjoy it anyway.

Stupid question: H.G. Wells, Orson Wells. Are they related, or is it just an amazing coincidence?

It's Orson Welles, so no, they are not related.

If you are going into this movie without having read the book, just bear in mind that it is based on a book written in 1898, and that it was made with those people that had read the book in mind. As such, it is going to take a little bit more "willing suspension of disbelief" than normal.
 
  • #41
I can live with that. It's only more interesting that way.
I just regret not having read the book before going...
 

Similar threads

Three new books to read about expertise vs. democracy
Replies
4
Views
2K
The Scientist as Hero - or not
Replies
1
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top