War of the Worlds

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
It's getting pretty mixed reviews, it sounds like.

Me? I was torn about seeing it. On the one hand, I kind of want to boycott the annoying asshatery of Tom Cruise. On the other hand?

Aliens blowing shit up.

:rockon: :rockon: :rockon:

It's the same reason I love the first half of the otherwise dumb "Independence Day" - aliens blowing shit up!

So yeah, I'll probably go. :wink:
 
First hour and a half was some of the most harrowing and nerve-racking cinema I've seen in a long time.

The rest? Some of the most laughable.
 
deep said:

it should do fine at box office
As the only big movie released over the holiday weekend, it'll rack up huge numbers from Wed till Monday.
I suspect it will suffer a huge dropoff in weekend 2 under a Fantatsic 4 avalanche.
 
inmyplace13 said:
First hour and a half was some of the most harrowing and nerve-racking cinema I've seen in a long time.

The rest? Some of the most laughable.


the first 90 minutes was pretty riveting

the effects are some of the best I have ever seen

Cruise does his typical, creditable, action acting

Dakota Fanning is great

The last half hour was not laughable to me,
it just faded fast and did not close as strong as the first 90 minutes.
 
Chizip said:
how the hell did they get so many signatures :angry:



-We do not want to watch his ‘out of control’ yet suspiciously manipulative antics nor listen to his condescending, holier-than-thou judgments. This man cannot even articulate a coherent sentence. He should stick to reading movie scripts.

It is revealing that the most compelling character Tom Cruise has ever portrayed is “Frank TJ Mackay” from Magnolia, a control-freak with a pathological need to assert his obsession over not just those around him, but the public as well, by exploiting his access to public media. Apparently Mr. Cruise was playing himself.
 
Saw this yesterday, and as a HUGE TC fan, I can only say this.....Awful.

So predictable...so dull. I expected so much more from TC and SS especially. Maybe I just love Jeff Wayne's musical version too much to be able to enjoy any other version of this story.

5/10:down:
 
I didn't like this movie either. I was really into for about the first 45 minutes, but then it just went downhill. I didn't like the end at all. It was too abrupt. I couldn't believe this was a Steven Spielberg movie.
 
I'd give it 2 or 2 1/2 stars. Very impressive technical achievement, but it's just not what I've come to expect from Steven Spielberg. To me he is a storyteller w/ that rare quality of subtlety, and this has no subtlety whatsoever-and very little story.

Dakota Fanning is one fine actress, and I thought Tom did a decent job.

One thing I have to say-this movie is NOT appropriate for kids. There were two kids in front of me who looked about 7 or 8..they were terrified and the parents eventually left. It took them long enough. I don't understand why people don't read up on the content of these movies. It should be rated R.

People had strange reactions to it-the scene where Dakota goes to the river and sees what she sees, people were laughing :eyebrow: Maybe it's that situation where people laugh because they're so unnerved and uncomfortable.
 
I haven't seen War of the Worlds yet, but have a question about Spielberg. I think his greatest achievemnts were Jaws and Indiana Jones trilogy. After that (meaning since 1989) all his movies are just OK at best. "A.I." is an exception, but mostly thanks to Stanley Kubrick's "spirit".

What do you think?
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
what about Schindler's List?

well... I can imagine how it came out as some kind of revelation for a lot of people. With all those terrors of WW2 portrayed quite realistically.

Why there was nothing new for me in this movie is mostly because we have a lot of great movies, documentaries and books about WW2 here in Russia. So the topics of henocide, mass killings, tortures and all those terrible things which goes along with nazis are very well covered in our mass-media.

As for the rest of the movie components: story is based on the Thomas Keneally's book and you simply can't lose with Liam Neeson, Ben Kingsley and Ralph Fiennes so not much left to give Mr. Spielberg a credit for.

Oh, and the little girl in the red dress definetely belongs to "Titanic" :wink:
 
Last edited:
Paramount's highly anticipated "War of the Worlds" invaded 3,908 theaters Wednesday and grossed $21.3 million on its opening day in North America. Day 1 for "War," directed by Steven Spielberg and starring Tom Cruise, proved to be the distributor's best opening day ever and the seventh-biggest Wednesday bow of all time.

"We are thrilled. It's an absolute home run for the studio. It's on the high side of what we were hoping for," Paramount president of distribution Wayne Lewellen said. "Because of Spielberg and Cruise's involvement in the film and the tremendous job of marketing and publicity, there was a tremendous amount of interest in the picture from the public -- and from all four demographic groups." Lewellen noted that 52% were younger than 25, and 54% were male.

Sony's "Spider-Man 2" holds the record for the biggest Wednesday opening of all time, with a staggering $40.4 million, followed by New Line Cinema's "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" with $34.5 million. It's also interesting to note that of all the Wednesday openings with grosses higher than "War," only Newmarket's "The Passion of the Christ" (sixth biggest with $23.6 million) was not a sequel.

As to Paramount's best bow, the distributor's previous biggest opening day was for "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider," which gleaned $18.1 million on a Friday in June 2001. And for a recent comparison, Warner Bros. Pictures' "Batman Begins" pulled in $15.1 million on its Wednesday opening just a few weeks ago, and that included grosses from midnight shows. Lewellen noted that "War" didn't have midnight shows.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
Paramount's highly anticipated "War of the Worlds" invaded 3,908 theaters Wednesday and grossed $21.3 million on its opening day in North America. Day 1 for "War," directed by Steven Spielberg and starring Tom Cruise, proved to be the distributor's best opening day ever and the seventh-biggest Wednesday bow of all time.

"We are thrilled. It's an absolute home run for the studio. It's on the high side of what we were hoping for," Paramount president of distribution Wayne Lewellen said. "Because of Spielberg and Cruise's involvement in the film and the tremendous job of marketing and publicity, there was a tremendous amount of interest in the picture from the public -- and from all four demographic groups." Lewellen noted that 52% were younger than 25, and 54% were male.

Sony's "Spider-Man 2" holds the record for the biggest Wednesday opening of all time, with a staggering $40.4 million, followed by New Line Cinema's "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" with $34.5 million. It's also interesting to note that of all the Wednesday openings with grosses higher than "War," only Newmarket's "The Passion of the Christ" (sixth biggest with $23.6 million) was not a sequel.

As to Paramount's best bow, the distributor's previous biggest opening day was for "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider," which gleaned $18.1 million on a Friday in June 2001. And for a recent comparison, Warner Bros. Pictures' "Batman Begins" pulled in $15.1 million on its Wednesday opening just a few weeks ago, and that included grosses from midnight shows. Lewellen noted that "War" didn't have midnight shows.

I guess the petition is not doing much...
 
PhunkPhorce said:
I haven't seen War of the Worlds yet, but have a question about Spielberg. I think his greatest achievemnts were Jaws and Indiana Jones trilogy. After that (meaning since 1989) all his movies are just OK at best. "A.I." is an exception, but mostly thanks to Stanley Kubrick's "spirit".

What do you think?

I think quite a few people enjoyed the original Jurassic Park as well.

And for me personally, the first film he did with Cruise, Minority Report, was excellent.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
I'd give it 2 or 2 1/2 stars. Very impressive technical achievement, but it's just not what I've come to expect from Steven Spielberg. To me he is a storyteller w/ that rare quality of subtlety, and this has no subtlety whatsoever-and very little story.

Dakota Fanning is one fine actress, and I thought Tom did a decent job.

One thing I have to say-this movie is NOT appropriate for kids. There were two kids in front of me who looked about 7 or 8..they were terrified and the parents eventually left. It took them long enough. I don't understand why people don't read up on the content of these movies. It should be rated R.

People had strange reactions to it-the scene where Dakota goes to the river and sees what she sees, people were laughing :eyebrow: Maybe it's that situation where people laugh because they're so unnerved and uncomfortable.


i pretty much agree with most of this


not for children


and i would call it nervous laughter
 
U2Girl1978 said:
I think TC exerted some sort of control over the movie and SS to be honest. Do you think I'm wrong?


yes, very wrong


maybe h. g . wells did


The film's second half is weaker because the aliens have to compete for screen time with Los Angeles mob scenes, a showy and irksome display of American military hardware, and dry narration of military war tactics. But even in this second half, suspense filters through, as we watch the heartless "swans" eject their heat rays on a helpless Los Angeles.




This movie is very close to




This "War of the Worlds"


Am I the only one that has seen this movie?
 
Back
Top Bottom