<meta name='google-adsense-platform-account' content='ca-host-pub-1556223355139109'/> <meta name='google-adsense-platform-domain' content='blogspot.com'/> <!-- --><style type="text/css">@import url(https://www.blogger.com/static/v1/v-css/navbar/3334278262-classic.css); div.b-mobile {display:none;} </style> </head><body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar/9492254?origin\x3dhttp://spicefiend.blogspot.com', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>
7.18.2005
War of the Worlds

Tick tock, tick tock. Come on 10 PM! I'm bored, so I'll while away the last few minutes of my abnormally late work shift blogging the new War of the Worlds movie.

Before I begin, I will admit that I am a movie snob. If any of my readers were to see the list of movies I've scaled on Netflix, they would notice that out of the 803 flicks , only 10 were given 5 stars. Even my 4 star rating is pretty low compared to other lists I have seen. I'm not much of a movie buff, it takes a lot to impress me and I went to see War of the Worlds expecting disappointent.

I was wrong and caught completely off guard. Steven Spielberg truly is a great director. He tied the suspense and human element together beautifully! Many times throughout the film, I was gripping my seat or clasping my hands to my mouth antcipating the next scene. I haven't felt thrills like that in years! I only wished I had never seen the older movie so I might have been able to experience Spielberg's version without knowning the demise of the alien invaders.

I couldn't care at all for the way it ended, but I was still very impressed. I will say that because it's not a movie I can imagine adding to my video collection, I render it 3 stars.



5 Comments:

At 9:22 AM, Blogger Matt said...

Jessi, I have to respectfully disagree, though I don't have time for debating it now. have a good one!

 
At 10:48 AM, Blogger Jessi said...

That's okay, Matt. To each his own, that's my motto. :D

I do wonder about something. Say, in an alternative universe, Americans had never heard of War of the Worlds. There was no radio broadcast or an earlier movie and Spielberg's version is all that was. What would our expectations be? I bet we'd be less harsh with our criticisms.

 
At 2:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This was by far not, "War of the worlds" It was more like... "alien invader" Or... "run away run away the aliens are here!"

The radio broadcast alone was so much greater. More suspense, better actors!!! :) and much cheaper and more profitable.

However... the spielberg version... if you can even call it a version... had great effects, but I really found myself rooting for the aliens.

The character depth was so shallow it was sad. Sure there were moments of suspense which was great and seeing the, "human" element was ok.

Now... if there was no previous version of the movie then this one surely should not and would not have been called. War of the Worlds. My criticism would have been equally as harsh on how pathetic the plot was.

SPOILER ALERT
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
The ending was retarded and what intelligent species draws up a fantastic plan to invade a planet and waits millions of years only to be foiled by a disfunctional immune system. RETARDED! First of all... i can't fly through space... and even i would plan for something like that.
It was nice how that one block in Boston wasn't totalled and everyone gets to live happily ever after. Apparently aliens only attack the poor areas.

This movie reminded me way too much of the mel gibson movie by the... the guy who did the see dead people movie. "Signs" was the name of it. Anyway... pathetic... both of them. (just like my spelling and grammar)

 
At 2:58 PM, Blogger Jessi said...

Heh, Ash. I knew you'd jump in!

I agree that the movie would have been better without the unneccessary mushy ending. Other than the boy, what was so bad about the character development? And yes it was certainly noted that mankind survived the whole ordeal on a fluke, but as my co-worker put it the other day, no one installs a traffic light until somebody dies.

You know, we should have a geek night soon, listen to the WOTW radio broadcast and watch the old movies. What do you say?

 
At 5:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

that would be fun.

There was not very much character depth. In order to get a audience to care about your hero you have to first show the human side of the hero, relate him to the audience... make the audience see themselves.

Unless you are a loser dad who ended up with two brats because you partied too much... you can't really relate with the main character. In fact, there is only slightly a dad moment. Two of them actually...

Second, when ever I got excited about advancement of a character, "the son helping save people" they would screw it up with something really stupid, "the son running into certain death" Drove me bonkers. :)

I just felt like I went to Nordstroms for a fantastic pair of shoes, and I decided to wear them out of the store. By the time I got home they were worn through the bottom.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home