Smoker2Buffalo Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 What did ya guys think? As much as I enjoyed Batman, this was the movie event of the summer. The film was awesome, and stayed pretty true to the book. Fantastic!
jayg Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 What did ya guys think? As much as I enjoyed Batman, this was the movie event of the summer. The film was awesome, and stayed pretty true to the book. Fantastic! 371593[/snapback] Two friends of mine went to a preview last Monday and both hated the movie. I probably won't see it in the theatre but will watch eventually.
The Riddler Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 saw it and hated it. DONT WASTE YOUR MONEY GUYS!
SF Bills Fan Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 I've heard good things. I wanted to go tonight, but missed the showing I wanted. I'll go Friday. I still need to see Batman and Land of the Dead
smapdi Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 This movie was the best I've seen in awhile. It blew Star Wars out of the water. The whole expierence is great; the effects and sound make the movie. You really feel like you are there and apart of the commotion. Go see this movie.
Dr. Fong Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 I'll be blowing off work this morning and catching it. It will have to do a lot to overtake Batman in my mind, but we shall see.
Gavin in Va Beach Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 saw it and hated it. DONT WASTE YOUR MONEY GUYS! 371604[/snapback] You know if you take the O and the N out of money, then added ULARK, you'd get Mularkey. Never thought of it that way and it struck me funny but hope its just his name and not in his coaching lol.
todd Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 It's such classic Sci-fi I'd be afraid that hollywood would screw it up. Hell, they've ruined so many classics I'd be afraid to see what they did to this one. I also don't want to give another penny to moron Tom Cruise, which he then gives to the cult of Scientology. I'll probably wait for it on DVD.
Dante Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 You know if you take the O and the N out of money, then added ULARK, you'd get Mularkey. Never thought of it that way and it struck me funny but hope its just his name and not in his coaching lol. 371656[/snapback] LOL! Nice morning smile for me today. Funny as hell
Dante Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 It's such classic Sci-fi I'd be afraid that hollywood would screw it up. Hell, they've ruined so many classics I'd be afraid to see what they did to this one. I also don't want to give another penny to moron Tom Cruise, which he then gives to the cult of Scientology. I'll probably wait for it on DVD. 371668[/snapback] These are both reasonalbe factors in not seeing the movie. I agree totally. Don't know if I can resist it a the Imax though.
nick in* england Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 OK - I am going to see this tomorrow night - it opens over here tonight on general release, so tomorrow is my first chance to see it. I'm a bit sad to see that Hollywood has transplanted the story to the West Coast of the US instead of Surrey. For me the story automatically loses some of it's innate charm by going to a US location. The reactions in the original story being so very British that I am not sure that the translation to a US setting will be totally comfortable. I do understand WHY they did it though. I haven't heard if they have kept the original music score from The War Of The Worlds that has had me scared to death since my Dad would play it to me as he read the story at bedtime. If not, the film will score minus points from the get go, because WOTW is WOTW vecause of that score. Anyhoo - it's going to be the first part of my Brothers Stag Party (Batchelor Party), so we'll have fun whatever. The drinking starts in earnest on Saturday (inc. Karaoke bar and a couple of clubs)
Smoker2Buffalo Posted June 30, 2005 Author Posted June 30, 2005 We's got some difference of opinion. Other than the change of location, they stayed pretty true to the book, which was nice to see for a change.
nick in* england Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 (edited) We's got some difference of opinion. Other than the change of location, they stayed pretty true to the book, which was nice to see for a change. 371685[/snapback] I was only speculating... I haven't seen it yet... EDIT: Do they use the original WOTW music? Edited June 30, 2005 by Nick in England
Smoker2Buffalo Posted June 30, 2005 Author Posted June 30, 2005 Do they use the original WOTW music? 371688[/snapback] No, it's a completely new John Williams score.
nick in* england Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 No, it's a completely new John Williams score. 371700[/snapback] That is a critical error.
Puhonix Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 I was only speculating... I haven't seen it yet... EDIT: Do they use the original WOTW music? 371688[/snapback] No way would they use the same theme as the original. Probably a soundtrack by John Williams or Hans Zimmer, thought if its Spielberg, probably Williams.
nick in* england Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 There will never be a greater WOTW soundtrack/audio than this: Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds
Smoker2Buffalo Posted June 30, 2005 Author Posted June 30, 2005 That is a critical error. 371702[/snapback] I don't see using one of the great composers of our time as a critical error. I have the John Williams score, and it's pretty enjoyable. No where near his best, but I liked it. It sounds great in the movie though.
Fan in Chicago Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 What did ya guys think? As much as I enjoyed Batman, this was the movie event of the summer. The film was awesome, and stayed pretty true to the book. Fantastic! 371593[/snapback] [MAJOR SPOILERS BELOW} I have not seen the original or read the book so consider this a truly unbiased opinion. (1) The movie really worked as a human drama. Spielberg really knows how to distill a tragedy down to its impact on a family level. (2) Special effects and story development was very good Okay here comes the criticism (3) Tom Cruise can't act for peanuts. Enough said (4) The underlying premise was ridiculous to say the least. If this was the classic book and movie, I am very disappointed: - There is a mention that the tripods were planted there before humans existed. Then why plant them ? Did the aliens like randomly go around the universe planting tripods in the hope that something good can be harvested millions of years later ? - If the aliens were of such superior intelligence, what did they want with earth and humans ? - What did the aliens want anyway ? Annihilate humanity and then grow blood-containing weeds ? - If the aliens wanted human blood, why massacre so many humans in the beginning ? Doesn't it give them less raw material for their grand plan ? - Why do they start dying ? The voice-over in the end says they could not digest us and our survival methods had evolved over the eons. Give me a break ! What a lame-a** way to end a movie. - So lets say the machines start dying because Cruise plants some hand grenades in their belly and they are connected like the Borg. Then why do the weeds start dying ? - How does Robbie survive when the entire battalion is blown to kingdom come ? - How does Robbie reach Boston ? I am sure I will come up with more if I bother to think some more. I mean Shyamalan's 'Signs' got trashed by many saying why did the aliens come in the first place if water was acid to them. Guys, if that movie can be criticized, this one is really a very amateurish sci-fi tale. For me the movie of the summer so far was Batman Begins.
Recommended Posts