Viewing Thread:
"War Of The Worlds"

So anyone seeing this when it comes out ? :-) I'm looking forward to it big time ! I was saying ages ago how there should be a remake of this film, and just a couple of days later, I'm looking around film sites and there was news of this one being made !

And just to add to it, the release of the film pretty much lands on my birthday ! The old film is one of my favourites so its cool to have the new one arrive for my birthday. ;-)

I've been watching trailers for it since around Christmas time, but I've managed to avoid seeing this one thats supposedly doing the rounds online that shows the Martian war machines. Don't want to see them in all their glory till I see the film. :-)

Gonna be going on Thursday 30th June seeing as they start showing the film in Basildon a day early. ;-)

Going by the book, the Martians died from bacteria which got into their system when they fed on our blood. The 1953 film tells of the bacteria coming from them breathing our air - but then a film of that time probably wouldn't go as graphic as humans being captured, held by a mechanical arm and drained of thier blood which the Martians then injected into themselves.

The latest film has Morgan Freeman telling of how it was a combination of bacteria in the air and the Martians feeding. What the film fails to show is what the Martians actually ate because instead, we are shown to basically be fertilizer for the red weed.

As far as the Martians appearance goes, I didn't find them all that scary. Going by the description of them in the book, the 1953 film shows a more accurate appearance. The latest film really just takes ideas from both the book and the old film, then adds in some of its own BS (which has essentially dragged it down rather than helped).

Of course having it set in modern times rather than 19th century England gives it promise of some epic battles between the Martians and our modern day weapons. But on the downside, to counter this, both films have handed the Martians an impenetrable shield that stops anything hitting them. So now the story loses those moments where it seems we have a glimmer of hope in fighting back with moments like the artillery shot and the Thunderchild battle.

Instead its just constant bleakness right to the end. I really think you should all read the book - I think at least most of you will agree that it gives off a more exciting story than the films.

I saw the film afew nights ago and thought it was pretty good but i feel its slightly flawed. For a start its like a mix of ET and Indepedance day. Somehow the son survives even though it looked like he got blown uporcaughtin fire yet he turns up at the end of the film. I don't understand the end fully as a number of things could have killed them, my first guess was something in the atoms but others say its blood, water etc. I think this film had the potential to be great but to be that it wouldof had tobeen longer so it could explain more.

Might go and see this,this weekend I think it looks just great.

Chr1s wrote:
> I thought Morgan Freeman (I think he was the narrator anyway) said
> something along the lines of "as soon as the aliens breathed our
> air they were doomed." That's what led me to believe that gases
> might have played a part in their demise.

I think it's taken that they catch a virus (or whatever the hell it is) from breathing air. So I guess it isn't the blood what done it...

mikelar wrote:
> But I don't think they had a problem with the gases we breathe did
> they? I mean, you see them in the basement. Or have I missed
> something. I do hope I'm not making myself look outrageously stupid
> by talking about this before reading the book.

I wouldn't worry, I haven't read it either and you're making me doubt myself as well.

I thought Morgan Freeman (I think he was the narrator anyway) said something along the lines of "as soon as the aliens breathed our air they were doomed." That's what led me to believe that gases might have played a part in their demise.

Savatt78 wrote:
> If only the camera had followed that Robbie kid up the hill, we might
> have seen something exciting. Plus it would have been funny to see
> how Spielberg works out how the stupid kid survives.

So true. I love the way after he goes over the hill there's a huge fireball suggesting EVERYBODY died, yet somehow he pops up at the end. Fair enough if he explained what the hell happened, but it's just left.

Chr1s wrote:
> To the best of my knowledge, there was no particular disease to be
> caught. The aliens simply had no immunity or resistance to
> microorganisms or any of the gases that we breathe because they had
> never come into contact with them before, so after a while they all
> inevitably got infected or suffocated.

Well yeah, I mean they eventually caught some sort of virus/disease because of the lack of immunity.

But I don't think they had a problem with the gases we breathe did they? I mean, you see them in the basement. Or have I missed something. I do hope I'm not making myself look outrageously stupid by talking about this before reading the book.

Cycloon wrote:
> Hahahahaha, yeah, they should have torn up the book entirely and just
> made it a massive explosion fest where the humans CAN actually fight
> back.

Actually, if the film had just followed the book, there would have been exciting battles with a few Martians being taken out. Those shields that block everything we fire at them didn't exist in the original story. The Thunderchild war ship took down two or three of them before finally being sunk. Can only imagine what that confrontation could look like on a big budget film.

But then with American director's determination to murder excellent stories, I doubt we'll ever see it.

I'll take the book over the films anyday. And I still can't get over that lame lightning idea for the Martians arrival - what the hell was Spielberg thinking ?? One of the key things of the story is the Martians arriving in cylinders.

So in 1953, it was Ann Robinson hurting everyones ears with constant screaming and now in 2005, the job goes to Dakota Fanning. Any chance of a War of the Worlds film that doesn't try to burst your eardrums every 2 minutes with some poxy woman/girl screaming ?

If only the camera had followed that Robbie kid up the hill, we might have seen something exciting. Plus it would have been funny to see how Spielberg works out how the stupid kid survives.

mikelar wrote:
> And I'm not sure if the birds transmitted the disease, I think they
> were supposed to symbolise that there was something wrong with the
> tripod because a few shots eariler, you see some birds eating the
> dead/dying plants. I think they actually catch the disease from the
> human blood you see the tripods 'sucking'.

To the best of my knowledge, there was no particular disease to be caught. The aliens simply had no immunity or resistance to microorganisms or any of the gases that we breathe because they had never come into contact with them before, so after a while they all inevitably got infected or suffocated.

Unless that's what you meant by disease, if so then nevermind. :)

mikelar wrote:
> Oh, and as for the camera at the beginning, if you look you see him
> winding it on, so it's not a digital camera. Not that I was thinking
> the same thing, I just noticed the guy.

Sorry I just realised you meant the camcorder. But not wanting to disappoint, I'm gonna say the guy kept it in a lead box.