WOTW: Overhyped
Category: Movies...
Posted Friday, July 08, 2005 at 09:51 AM [GMT-6]

Update: Cowtown Pattie over at Texas Trifles now has her review posted. She has a different -- and better articulated -- take than me on the movie, so you'll want to read hers if you're seeking "fair and balanced" coverage.

MLB and I did something out of the ordinary (for us, anyway) last night as we paid full price to attend an evening showing of War of the Worlds. She'd spent the last three evenings standing in the kitchen preparing the bushel of peaches we'd brought back from Fredericksburg, and she was ready for a change. I heartily approved.

WOTW was a good choice for an escapist escapade (as the first ominous scenes appeared on the screen, we simultaneously whispered to each other, "I love a good disaster movie!"). It's a breathtaking achievement on a technical level, incorporating special effects and real people in such a seamless manner as to cause a continual mental loop of "how did they do that?" We did not find the human story to be as dark as some of the reviews we'd read, but it also wasn't as compelling as we'd hoped it would be.

It's not a fun movie, in the spirit of, say, Independence Day. The inevitable defeat of the invading force (everyone knows the story by now) brings nothing like a sense of victory or achievement, just a sense that the human race inexplicably dodged a bullet, not because of any intrinsic merit (despite the solemn closing intonations of Morgan Freeman's voice), but simply because of dumb luck. Or illogical screenwriting.

Awesome technical effects aside, the classic plot of this movie was not improved in its updating. I don't want to drop any spoilers here, but suffice it to say that just because a storyline is decades old doesn't mean it needs to be "modernized" or otherwise tweaked to appeal to a modern "enlightened" audience.

Of course, having said that, I am still puzzled by the retention of the tripedal characteristics of the aliens, both physiological and mechanical. I realize that it's primarily a device to underscore the alienness of the invaders, but robotic research (PDF document) suggests that tripedal mechanisms are less stable and efficient than quadrapeds. So, am I being inconsistent with my critique? Absolutely!

Overall, WOTW was good, but not great. It will stand out this year primarily due to the lack of worthy competitors, but it's not a movie for the ages.

Oh, and if you have young children, take the PG-13 rating seriously. There are some really intense scenes which I think could generate nightmares for younger kids, not to mention more profanity than was absolutely necessary.

Technorati tag:

Permalink
Comments

You beat me. I might still add my own WOTW blog, though.

As you said, the movie is not a feel-good, John Wayne wins the day kinda stuff. Just like you pointed out, moreso mankind dodged a bullet.

This weekend I will write just why WOTW gets to me...

Posted by: Cowtown Pattie at July 8, 2005 12:08 PM

Looking forward to reading your take on the flick, Liz...

Posted by: Eric at July 8, 2005 12:12 PM

I wonder if how much effect the full price ticket has on the review(er).

It would influence me, I'm sure.

Posted by: jim at July 8, 2005 12:41 PM

Jim, until you just mentioned it, the bang-for-the-buck angle never even crossed my mind. Besides, it's a weeknight date with my wife...you can't put a price on that! ;-)

Posted by: Eric at July 8, 2005 01:05 PM

Remember Larry Niven's novel series Ringworld? When are they going to make it into a movie?

Anyway, my recollection is that the sentient aliens in that series were tri-pedal, too. Kind of like minotaurs or something, with one big hoofed rear appendage for ambulation and for a defensive/offensive weapon. So that when it looked like they were turning to run away, they delivered a kick to your head, instead.

I'd like to see the ringworld on the big screen.

Posted by: Larry S. at July 8, 2005 01:22 PM

I'm wondering if trying to take Wells' story, and set it in the modern era, poses challenges that be insurmountable ... even for a gifted director such as Spielberg.

Like Pattie, I feel a longer post coming on, and I'm going to follow her lead and do it on my own blog this weekend, after I've seen the film (I'll NOT take the boys ... thanks for the heads-up, Eric).

Something that might add to the discussion of Spielberg's flick (and Haskins' from 1953) is a British film, described as an authentic adaptation of Wells' 1898 novel, and supposedly being released this summer.

Posted by: Jeff at July 8, 2005 01:29 PM

Larry, I think tripeds have long been a staple of sci-fi writers, if for no other reason than we don't see any naturally occuring examples on earth. Even insects have opposed legs so that the multiple of three is just a variation on the quadraped or biped theme.

"Ringworld" would be cool on the big screen, but I'd settle for Peter Jackson making a movie version of "The Hobbit."

Jeff, there was the distinct feeling that the WOTW screenwriters were trying too hard to update and provide an edgier feel to the original story. I'm not adverse to applying such "improvements," if they're done well and logically integrated. In this case, they were technically flawless and logically pathetic. I'll be interested to see if you and Pattie agree.

Posted by: Eric at July 8, 2005 02:19 PM

Eric, its done. My review, that it is.

Tried to set a trackback, but Haloscan had heartburn over it for some reason...

Posted by: Cowtown Pattie at July 10, 2005 02:23 PM

*grinning*
Better Articulated - awww. Shuckenss ( eyes downcast at shuffling feet). And I never, ever touched Miss Ellen's portiers...not while I got breaf in ma' body!

BTW, did you happen to read Peanuts today? I cut it out and plan to frame it over my desk at home...

Posted by: Cowtown Pattie at July 10, 2005 08:24 PM

BTW, did you happen to read Peanuts today?

"Good writing is hard work"?

Well, I wouldn't know! ;-)

Posted by: Eric at July 10, 2005 08:27 PM

Oh, pshaw, sure you would. And yes, that Peanuts. My all time favorite comic strip *grin* - for real...

Posted by: Cowtown Pattie at July 10, 2005 08:40 PM
Post a comment [Take your time...we're in no hurry.]
Note: You must provide either a website URL or an email address...but there's no rule that says you have to tell the truth. If you don't want your email address published on this site, just input a website URL, or make up an email address.









Remember personal info?