|
Post by Norris on Jun 24, 2005 2:05:19 GMT -5
Well, let's face it! A majority of film-makers only care about money, end of story!
Anyway, I've seen a couple of clips from the film WAR OF THE WORLDS (2005), and I find it as convincing as Dr. Crippens' defence lawyer, probably the worst film created in the history of the cinematograph since THOMAS & THE MAGIC RAILROAD.
Sorry, Speilberg, but you've really let yourself down here. If anyone has any intelligence, they have the choice of not seeing this film at all.
|
|
|
Post by Razgriz aka Dahaka on Jun 24, 2005 10:43:18 GMT -5
Speilberg? With a wacked out movie? A HollywoodFirst
|
|
|
Post by Hush Mazmanos on Jun 25, 2005 0:28:58 GMT -5
I agree. Steven Speilberg makin a movie thats crap? I dont see how thats gonna happen. And with Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning? Those 3 are a pretty powerful combination. It's like Tim Burton and Johnny Depp for the movie Willy Wonka. Theres a low possiblity anything can those movies can be that bad with combos like that. Sorry if Im shooting you down or anything.
Hush Mazmanos
|
|
|
Post by Norris on Jun 25, 2005 1:17:07 GMT -5
You're not, you're expressing your own opinions.
I'm not saying that Tom Cruise is a bad actor, the mans' far from it, but it's the story in general that disappoints me.
As well as wrong time, place etc, where the frell did that wretched girl come into it all? There wasn't one in the book except for the children being captured by the Martians for food. The only travelling companions with the main character were the Artilleryman for two parts of the story, and then a priest who is driven to insanity and later captured by the Martians.
|
|
|
Post by Razgriz aka Dahaka on Jun 25, 2005 3:20:49 GMT -5
I've seen many revision from books that came out as a bad movie,but this could bethe worst
|
|
|
Post by Norris on Jun 25, 2005 11:06:07 GMT -5
Indeed so, and I have to put up with a poster of the film on the bus stop right outside my house!
I feel sorry for the poor Martians who have to put up with all of this.
|
|
|
Post by Razgriz aka Dahaka on Jun 27, 2005 4:08:26 GMT -5
Lol hehe
But I'll still watch it, maybe theres more to it, I mean it is a Speilburg film
|
|
|
Post by Norris on Jun 27, 2005 4:48:18 GMT -5
You watch it if you want to, I however am going to just sit back and whinge.
|
|
|
Post by Pow! on Jun 30, 2005 20:04:22 GMT -5
It seems to received quite well, judging from the critics'reviews....
|
|
|
Post by Norris on Jul 1, 2005 1:21:59 GMT -5
Yes, well they know little about 19th C. literature. If they read the book first from beginning to end, then I think anyone would understand why I'm so frustrated, and a similar process applies to why THUNDERBIRDS in 2004 recieved such a poor rating, because it didn't stick to the original!
|
|
|
Post by Razgriz aka Dahaka on Jul 1, 2005 8:19:23 GMT -5
Its the lenght of the books, thats the root of all this
|
|
|
Post by Norris on Jul 1, 2005 9:44:05 GMT -5
Wells wrote long books because he liked to put his novels into detail. If you consider how long THE FIRST MEN IN THE MOON was and then see how long the 1964 film with Lionel Jeffries was, the film lasted just under 1 hour from a book measuring 186 pages.
|
|
|
Post by qwerty on Jul 2, 2005 18:48:05 GMT -5
Ogilvy is a deranged hillbilly!
|
|
|
Post by Hush Mazmanos on Jul 2, 2005 21:43:45 GMT -5
I've seen War of the Worlds. And I really have to say it's pretty d*mn good. Just funny with certain scenes with Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning but all in all its pretty good. ^^
Hush Mazmanos
|
|
|
Post by Norris on Jul 3, 2005 2:05:54 GMT -5
I can see I'm fighting a losing battle at this point.
Qwerty, you're only right about Ogilivy being a hillbilly if you look at the 1953 film, as he was indeed a hillbilly there, and not an astronomer.
|
|