Philaflava.com ::

I actually played hooky for it, well that and cause I'm a lazy ass.

Anyway, I was really impressed by the special effects, and also with my quasi-mortal enemy, Dakota Fanning. She actually did well (even though I now realize that I am irked with her existence because she looks like a female Stewie), and while there was so much to like about this movie, I left the theater pretty depressed.

I felt the same way at the end of Minority Report, which had some amazing special effects and a real good story and then... well, ya know. I'm not gonna turn this thread into a double-movie-spoil-a-thon, but both movies third acts made me kind of pissed.

Who else saw this? Wanna talk about it? Would you like a soda?

just came back from it, liked it alot. was pretty captivated the whole time.

ending was a little unsatisfactory, but still decent.

didn't those tripods remind of half-life 2's striders?

You know you're playing too many video games when...

those tripods remind of half-life 2's striders

I haven't seen it, but I would like a soda. Mr. Pibb please, thank you.

ChristPuncher wrote:just came back from it, liked it alot. was pretty captivated the whole time.

ending was a little unsatisfactory, but still decent.

Thats pretty much how I was. Spielberg does know how to make a speactacle movie. What I liked was the film didnt mess about with 60 minutes of characterization at the begining and virtually just getting into it. Maybe I'm crazy but I like Dakota Fanning. She was amazing in "Man On Fire" and good in this, she does freak me out though. Tom Cruise didnt annoy me like he normally does so I was pleased with that. The special effects were ace and I was never bored. A good time was had by all.

I'm off to listen to the Jeff Wayne musical!

I thought it was very cool to sit through, and I was definitely into the movie, but ultimately left unfulfilled.. As ChristPuncher said, the ending was unsatisfactory...

DO NOT READ MY POST IF YOU DO NOT WANT ANY OF THE MOVIE SPOILED.

I know "Day After Tomorrow" was doo doo on a stick, but it's a similar premise in my opinion, and I always leave these types of movies feeling this way.. What I mean is, you have characters that do not defeat anything..The danger dies off on it's own.. Maybe I'm old fashioned.. For a summer blockbuster, I look for shit like Independence Day, with people going out gunz a blazin...

And I mean..Jesus.. Two words : "Robbie. Boston". -

And a little homage trivia.. Cruise's ex wife's parents were played by Gene Barry and Ann Robinson from the original War Of The Worlds in 1953.

ChristPuncher wrote:didn't those tripods remind of half-life 2's striders?

HL2's striders were modeled after those in the H.G. Wells novel.

the ending was taken directly from the book, which I thought was good..I can see why people might see it as a disappointment, esp. when Spielberg has been cranking up the tension throughout the film..

I thought Fanning gave a very strong performance, as did Cruise..It was the son I had a problem with..

Useff wrote:

ChristPuncher wrote:didn't those tripods remind of half-life 2's striders?

HL2's striders were modeled after those in the H.G. Wells novel.

Oh really? I had a feeling, they are very similar. I gotta pick up "Raising the Bar".

datura wrote: I thought Fanning gave a very strong performance, as did Cruise..It was the son I had a problem with..

Agreed.. I know he was supposed to be playing a typical disgruntled teen, but I wanted to Sean Landeta that kid too much..

this movie was total shit, in the same vein as Day After Tomorrow. Nice effects and all but what a shitty movie. weak plot, flat ending, annoying characters. it would have been better if at least one of them (preferably all) got punctured through the skull, like that one cat.

the only enjoyable part was in the beginning where the aliens started zapping everyone. hilarious!

I heard the reviews for it were not good but my homegirl saw it & said she liked it. I'll probly fuck w/ it for free on some Clausir Jones call-in status..... (g'eah!)

Apathwhy wrote:this movie was total shit, in the same vein as Day After Tomorrow. Nice effects and all but what a shitty movie. weak plot, flat ending, annoying characters.

C'mon man. I can kinda see your point, they are similar but this movie pissed on "Day After Tomorrow". I thought that movie was weak at the cinema and I've been to see shit at the cinema I thought was cool, watched it again on DVD and wanted to vomit.

Just my opinion though. I see where you're coming from.

it was aiiiiiiiiiiiiight

So, a day later, this is my perception:

The special effects in this movie are groundbreaking simply for the fact that much of it is real sets. Imagine, building real sets with pieces of airplanes crushing cars and demolished houses.

That's a true feat in set design.

Did anyone else hear that this was the most expensive film ever made? I don't know where I can find that kind of thing out, but just based on the fact that [with emphasis here people]THOSE WERE REAL SETS, I can definitely believe it.

But yeah, the film was ultimately disappointing, and yet I still recommended it to a bunch of people just based on the amazing visuals alone.

I, too was disappointed the ending.

I sort of want to see this.

But that's because I want to see lots of innoncent people get killed.

Tell me, do lots of people get mushed or vaporized? If not, I will be upset.

Orson did it better.

cascarrabias wrote:I sort of want to see this.

But that's because I want to see lots of innoncent people get killed.

Tell me, do lots of people get mushed or vaporized? If not, I will be upset.

Yes. Yes they do. It's pretty impressive.

Breath Mint wrote:Orson did it better.

Ladies and gentlemen, behold!

THE OLDEST POSTER AT PHILAFLAVA DOT COM!!!

Tell us, oh wise one, did you hear it on the old radiotrola machine in Pa's den, or did you have to hear it from the neighbors the next day?

P.S. You are gay.

Smooth Lou wrote:Tell me, do lots of people get mushed or vaporized?

not sure about mushage, I think a few did. Lots of vaporization.

Smooth Lou wrote:

Breath Mint wrote:Orson did it better.

Ladies and gentlemen, behold!

THE OLDEST POSTER AT PHILAFLAVA DOT COM!!!

Tell us, oh wise one, did you hear it on the old radiotrola machine in Pa's den, or did you have to hear it from the neighbors the next day?

P.S. You are gay.

i have the original broadcast on vinyl.

Smooth Lou wrote:

Breath Mint wrote:Orson did it better.

Ladies and gentlemen, behold!

THE OLDEST POSTER AT PHILAFLAVA DOT COM!!!

Tell us, oh wise one, did you hear it on the old radiotrola machine in Pa's den, or did you have to hear it from the neighbors the next day?

P.S. You are gay.

Nope, I just downloaded it smart guy. Like I said, it's better than the movie.

There's about fifty on ebay if you'd like to purchase one.

Allan Smithee wrote:I heard the reviews for it were not good but my homegirl saw it & said she liked it. I'll probly fuck w/ it for free on some Clausir Jones call-in status..... (g'eah!)

It got generally good reviews. It's score on rottentomatoes.com is 72%.

Ebert didn't like it.

the original was a break thru flick. one of them Technicolor movies...

I thought the movie was decent. Some of the scenes were straight from the old movie. There were a few things I didn't understand.

SPOLIERS BELOW















































How come the martians hid the ships on Earth before there was any intelligent life. If they wanted the planet they should have took it before mankind populated it ?

Now I know they wanted to stay in-line with the original movie. But the whole something in the air or something in the water(Signs) is getting tired. Any beings with a high level of technology would know if there was something poisonous or hazardous in the enviroment. They would most likely wear enviromental suits or some type of shielding. I know its just a movie , but dammit I'm a nerd and I want realism

Diggedy wrote:I thought it was very cool to sit through, and I was definitely into the movie, but ultimately left unfulfilled.. As ChristPuncher said, the ending was unsatisfactory...

DO NOT READ MY POST IF YOU DO NOT WANT ANY OF THE MOVIE SPOILED.

I know "Day After Tomorrow" was doo doo on a stick, but it's a similar premise in my opinion, and I always leave these types of movies feeling this way.. What I mean is, you have characters that do not defeat anything..The danger dies off on it's own.. Maybe I'm old fashioned.. For a summer blockbuster, I look for shit like Independence Day, with people going out gunz a blazin...

And I mean..Jesus.. Two words : "Robbie. Boston". -

And a little homage trivia.. Cruise's ex wife's parents were played by Gene Barry and Ann Robinson from the original War Of The Worlds in 1953.

yea this is pretty much on point with how i feel about the movie. but the scenes of destruction were pretty cool tho

Too many holes in the plot, special effects were cool, overall disappointed though

i won't say this was an amazing movie, but i was on the edge of my seat throughout it.

i am not as picky as some of you, so i thought the special effect were really good. i liked how there wasn't so much dialog in the movie. it was just an entertaining movie that i thought speilberg did well.

i just wish he didn't do exactly as the book, cuz that kid (robbie) SHOULD have died.

can anyone explain to me the whole thing about the birds? how exactly did the aliens start to die?

what was the whole deal about sucking the blood out of these peeps too?

Philaflava wrote:how exactly did the aliens start to die?

If it's all book-based, then they died because their immune systems weren't up to handling the bacteria in human blood. Alien vampires killed by AIDS.