War of the Worlds

Published by Stephen at 4:00 PM on January 18, 2006.

I have been hearing conflicting stories about the strength of Steven Spielberg's War of the Worlds since the day it came out.

Good friends of mine, whos filmic opinions I truly respect have for, have given truly polar reviews of this movie. Some loved it, some hated it and it was pretty much split right down the center.

So when I picked the movie up last night, I watched it with anxious skepticism. A part of me thought it would be great, the other half was scared that the next two hours were going to become a bad memory.

Cut to today. The next day. I'm with everyone. I thought it sucked, but I thought it was awesome at the same time. I will try to explain what I mean here.

Steven Spielberg is undoubtedly one of the best story tellers alive today, and that comes off in this movie as well. While I didn't like some of the things he did visually -- mainly with the lighting of the early scenes -- the man can sure put an interesting visual on the screen with ease. He got great performances out of all of his actors, a feat I became even more impressed with when I thought about the actors jobs in this movie. Imagine having to act out all that fear, only imagining what is going on. That leads into part of my hate.

I have never been a fan of sci-fi movies, with a few exceptions: comedies, and movies set "realistically" in the future (ie: I, Robot, etc.). The premise of this movie is ridiculously far-fetched, I found it hard to buy in to. I'm sure the ridiculous premise was the whole point of the movie, but it just doesn't do it for me. The idea that these "tripods" were planted in the ground a million years ago is ridiculous. Especially considering that they end up looking a lot like something a human might produce - same metals, look, etc. Just outrageous.

Expectedly, Tom Cruise was good. Any less than good from Cruise and the movie is useless. I really bought his character, and loved the arc he followed. From a throwaway dad to the savior. Wonderful.

Dakota Fanning, ahh Dakota Fanning. I really can't believe how good of an actor this 11 year old child is. Personally, I think she out-acted Tom Cruise. Which is a bit troubling. I really don't want to see her become victom of the child-star syndrome. I hope she takes about 10 years off, on her own accord and then comes back big time. I really see it as the only way for child stars to make it.

I will probably watch this movie again, and will undoubtedly buy it on DVD. It's no E.T., but I would recommend you to watch it.

This Post

was published by Stephen on January 18, 2006 at 4:00 PM.

The previous post in this blog was Me.

The next post in this blog is Winter driving the RX-7.

This entry was filed under Movies.
Post a commentPost a comment