War of the Worlds was OK. I'd personally give it a 2 stars out of 4. Roomie loved it, and he has a pretty good take on movies, so it might just be me. I might have been too overly influenced by the version that came out in the 50's. Instead of a nerdy-yet-dashing scientist, a priest and his daughter, we have Tom Cruise, a daughter, a teenaged son.
More of the story was devoted to the preservation of family, rather than the survival of the human race (and, per the Wall Street Journal, that is turning out to be one of the good points). In the 50's version, there was more of a "beat-em-with-science" feeling.
The special effects, of course, was the star of the show. They did stick closer to the original vision of the aliens, with tripod walking machines (rather than the flying triangles of the 50's movie). Also, there was a more faithful treatment of the environmental changes, such as the red plants that took over the earth in the book version (not even mentioned in the 50's movie). In the book, the boat that sank was one of the last naval destroyers; in this version, it was a refugee-laiden ferry. Also, this version stuck to the story that the humans were being harvested and held as a nutrient source (again, not mentioned in the 50's movie).
I don't think I'll need to see it in the theaters again, I can wait for the DVD release.
And I wasn't that successful in trying to imagine it was Toby McGuire instead of Tom Cruise.
At work, it's 50/50 -- half liked it, the other half didn't. What I find interesting is that the folks that are familiar with the 50's version didn't like it. The nurses that liked the movie never saw the 50's version. So I have been looking for it online to buy -- at Amazon it lists at something like $100 for used copies! Amazing... And I just found out critics want to put that little girl up for an Oscar... what's up with that? I mean, she was good and all, but an Oscar?
Posted by: Eric | July 09, 2005 at 06:56 AM
I thought it was pretty awful, and it seems most critics, and the ones I actually trust, agree.
I'd say you're more on the spot, and your friend really doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to movies =)
Posted by: jay | July 08, 2005 at 10:29 PM
LOL I know you have a think for Toby :-) Although, in reality, he was too young for the part, with the teenaged son. Possibly with the little daughter.
Posted by: Eric | July 07, 2005 at 04:46 PM
Isn't Tobey Maguire dreamy...? ;)
Posted by: Maria | July 06, 2005 at 06:41 PM