Yeah, so I saw this potentially controversial movie today with a religious nutjob star who has a totally homoerotic vibe, and a director who may be insane, especially if he’s marketing this thing to families…
but enough about my PASSION OF THE CHRIST DVD. I also saw WAR OF THE WORLDS.
(P.S. Totally lying about that PASSION thing for the sake of a cheap joke. Father, forgive me.)
There has been a lot of controversy this summer about whether or not the big movies are appropriate for kids. STAR WARS has some scary stuff, BATMAN BEGINS has mature themes…child’s play compared to WAR OF THE WORLDS. See, parents trust Steven Spielberg. Unless he’s making a movie about black people or dead Jews, his stuff these days is usually sickeningly sentimentally suitable for all ages. So if they see his name on this movie, especially since it’s about extraterrestrials, they’ll likely figure it’s okay to bring the little ones.
Dead wrong. Wanna know what the main thrust of the action is in WAR OF THE WORLDS? It’s all about li’l Dakota Fanning being horrendously traumatized over and over again. Granted, those of you who saw HIDE AND SEEK may think she deserves it, but your kids won’t. They’ll be freaked out along with her. It’s only Spielberg and Tom Cruise’s combined clout that keeps the flick from an R rating, I’m guessing. The aliens drink human blood, for God’s sake!
As for the extremely heterosexual motion picture thespian known as Tom Cruise, the movie provides a new explanation for his recent public behavior. Cruise, who likes chicks, plays a crane operator named Ray, who’s a bit of a jerk and a nutcase, prone to talking over people, acting impulsively, and being really judgmental. Is it possible the actor, who definitely does not pound ass, is simply still in character, unable to break from Steven’s excellent direction? Maybe.
Ray’s daughter is played by Dakota, whose character name I forget. Not that she’s playing a character — it’s the same precocious comment/stare widely/scream thing she always does.
The beginnning of the film is the most annoying part. Morgan Freeman delivers some narration here and at the end which borders on camp. Since Freeman isn’t even in the movieas a character, it’s stupider still. Cruise, who apparently loves vaginas, could have read those lines, or Fanning.
Anyway, Ray is a sucky dad, and his ex-wife Miranda Otto is clearly a good mom, except that she leaves her kids with Ray to go off to Boston. Ray has a teenage son played by some actor I’m not familiar with. (I didn’t get a press kit for this screening. Can you tell? Blame Paramount for not putting my name on the list.)
Ray’s kid is working on a paper about the French occupation of Algiers (that’s onea them thar foreshadowing metaphors). And it looks like Indiana Jones’ hat is hanging on Ray’s wall, but thank the baby Jesus he never actually puts it on.
Then there are some freak lightning storms, and a bunch of killer machines that have been buried underground for a million years come to the surface. They’re controlled by Thetan souls trapped by Xenu in volcanoes for eons…oh wait, no, not quite.
They’re tripods, with kind of a retro look to them, and they immediately set about incinerating people. Somehow Ray is the only human being brilliant enough to dodge all their fire, and he gets home to his kids, taking them away in the only car that still works. In yet another piece of incredibly good fortune, even the traffic-clogged interstate always manages to have just enough room for their vehicle to squeak by. The goal is to get to Boston, to see Eowyn. And if you think that car’s gonna hold up, you’re nuts.
Spielberg seems to have totally forgotten that he’s a wuss, and plays this like the Holocaust and 9-11 combined. Ashes of dead people fall from the sky. Dead bodies float downstream. Vast swaths of people are casually massacred. Ray goes to extreme lengths to survive. Though the perspective is frequently kept intimate, like in SIGNS, there are enough glimpses of epic destruction to ensure that you remember this is a summer movie.
There’s no love interest for Ray, but you shouldn’t doubt that if there were one, they’d totally have a shitload of heterosexual chemistry. Tom Cruise gets to cry some in order to prove he’s a good actor. Tim Robbins is pretty good as a character sort of based on one of H.G. Wells’ original characters.
You get to see the aliens, and they look like Jodie Foster’s dad. Sorry, couldn’t resist. I won’t spoil their appearance, except to say that given their alien bodies, the faces are too similar to humans. However, they look absolutely nothing like John Travolta in dreadlocks and platform boots. By the way, I was watching a VH-1 show today on nudity in films, and apparently John Travolta has a no-nudity clause. I’d like to applaud him for standing firm on his morals. Yeah…morals. Anyway, Travolta certainly is a straight man like Cruise. He has kids and everything. But he’s not in this movie at all, so I’m getting off track.
Other than the preposterous invincibility of Ray during the first 45 minutes or so, I dug the movie. Very tense, and very ruthless. The last scenes aren’t as great, just because there’s a meeting which takes place that depends on way too much coincidence, and Morgan Freeman’s narration comes back to talk about God, probably to try to soothe over people like Rev. Thomas Carder and Dr. Ted Baehr, who may notice, quite correctly, that the Bible says nothing at all about Martian war machines having been buried under the soil before Adam and Eve showed up.
It never says that the invaders are from Mars. But it never says they aren’t, either. I congratulate Spielberg on finding his cojones. I hope he keeps them.
Also, Tom Cruise is not gay, and I have never written that he is. Wally George said Tom wanted to marry Rebecca DeMornay, and that’s all I need to know.
Killing the Robbins character completely destroyed the movie for me. It was illogical, nasty and mostly unnecessary (yes and rude). Couldn’t he have just tied him up for God’s sake or just left and found your own bolt hole. And the kid still being alive. Give me a break. Enjoyed the movie though!
Ok, my opinion might be unpopular, but the moment where Cruise’s character kills Robbins’ character is actually my favorite moment in the movie. I am perfectly aware that in a civilized society this is most certainly considered “rude”.
In fact, according to new movie etiquette, our heroes are rarely, if ever, supposed to kill anyone intentionally. If they are forced to take another’s life, then it must be as a result of a vicious attack only after all other means have been exhausted. For example, the recognized “bad guy” has been apprehended and handcuffed. Then, suddenly, the villain manages to grab a gun and make a last desperate attempt to kill the hero. At this point the hero of the movie puts a bullet in the “bad guy’s” brain and the audience breathes a collective sigh of relief, confident that justice has been served.(The only recognizable exception to this is shoot-em-up movies when the bullets are flying and anonymous bad guys are dying).
That said, I understand that Robbins’ character is not a typical villain. There is the creepy implication that he might be a molester, but his only real crime is talking too loud. However, Cruise’s character is an anti-hero, and this movie is about the loss of humanity. (Remember, he loses the mother and child as he enters the ferry, even though he promises to help keep them safe.)As Cruise’s feelings of love grow for his daughter, his purpose becomes single-minded. There is something primal about his behavior towards the end of the movie – he loses his connections to a disintegrating society, but forges a connection with his family.
Jeeez. Don’t you guys get anything?! God.
It all about symbols. Its Spielberg being theatrical, and all of these plot “holes” are examples of his unique childlike mind in an adult body, which makes him, like Michael Jackson, more valuable and financially rewardable in our society than a neurosurgeon, the President (who if you notice is nowhere to be found when he is needed in this movie, though the three Aliens we do see look suspiciously like Cheney, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld, a “tripod” of leadership), or even a really good baseball player.
And everything about the aliens makes perfect sense. E.T. and his homeworld were devastated by contamination from Reese’s pieces in the same way the aliens in this film were by that drop of water Morgan Freeman was talking about. They used their time machine to go back and plant the iPods for vengeance, not realizing that even if this movie had no Reese’s Pieces there still might still be the germs. It is a natural oversight. They were angry. It is hard to both think logically and feel passionately at the same time. A key moral of the tale.
And if you know anything about aliens, note that these were the LGMs, they are stupid, immature sub-aliens, the grunts, just sent to kill people. Look at their manners: They stumble around in the basement sucking on ketchup bottles they find in the wreckage. Of course they are going to get germs! Even the screeching little girl knows better than that.
The real aliens are the Greys. They are in low orbit, watching all of this on their TVs. Paying for it with their galactic tax dollars. But not participating in person, that would be highly unpleasant. Perhaps this is where the president is.
I could go on, but come on, people, lets just pay attention. Jeeez.
DId enjoy the movie, and was incredibly tense for the first hour. Can’t remember a movie doing that to me before. I think the 9/11 imagery of the dusting was part of it, but definitely have to credit Spielberg with ccreatiing a tense movie.
That said, the movie has non-sensical holes galore and was typical hollywood sci-fi. Sci-fi means you can do anything and none of it needs to make any sense because its sci-fi. I had expected better from a spielberg film but i guess his goal was all about the horror and suspense–which he succeeded.
things others didn’t mention–
- Parts of Boston are fairly unaffected, abandoned cars, leaves on the ground, no broken windows, no trash, no dust, no fires. The grandparents are immaculately and color-coordinate dressed and clean. Guess they have working water and food. Athens, NY, Pop: 4,000 has three to six Tripods scouring it, but the Boston(pop 600,000) block Eowyn’s parents lives on is unscathed.
- a city block sized hole explodes open a few blocks away and buildings are being blown apart. Kids at home here and see nothing. LOcal businesses don’t even know a 10 story tripod is setting everything on fire–no screams no noise no explosions
The ending was horrible. the son is still bloody so their arrivals are perfectly timed together. The only thing interesting was a friend pointed out that symboliclly nothing changed. the father stood alone, the rest of the family united together. What he did didn’t change the way things were. Then again, he’s an idiot and a murderer, and a bad, bad daddy.
Freakin’ hilarious review. I will return to this site!
You suck at writing movie reviews and you have a crappy sense of humor.
Have a good one!
-j
Yeah, funny how I manage to make a living doing something I suck at, ain’t it? Helluva racket I’ve stumbled onto.
This movie kicked serious ass, your review sucked big-time. A little obsessed over Cruise’s sexuality are we? Nothing like a latent-homosexual-borderline-anti-semite-pseudo-intelectual to brighten one’s day…and just because you make a living reviewing movies — doesn’t mean you don’t suck majorly!!
You think you are funny, but the joke is on you joyboy!!
Hey, if Tom Cruise will insist on forcing his heterosexual lifestyle down our throats, he should expect that it will be duly noted.
As for pseudo-intellectual…I have NEVER claimed to be an intellectual. You take that back!
Its stumbling upon sites like this that make perusing the internet actually fun to do. Your review rocks!!! thank you for the good read.
This is the worst movie in history. Iam English and Iam getting fed up with every single new American film being about terrorism and 9/11 inparticularly.
Please get over it and move on…
Just saw the movie last night. And I have some possible explanations for the various apparent plotholes that have yet to be considered. I’m a Trek fanboy, and can make just about anything work.
I believe that everyone could have been wrong about the tripods being in the ground for millions of years. The news van showed the slow-mo of the ships traveling with the lightning. The aliens could have had a technology that built the tripods underground. It seems unlikely, but it’s more plausible than they being there the whole time. Of course, this doesn’t explain why Boston was left untouched.
If they were underground, then they might have thought that Boston would have been an unlikely place to build a city. Or maybe things happened tectonically and whatnot that made the tripods unusable. A million years is a long time. Long enough to lose any immunity from Earth microbes. Besides which, they didn’t think on the microscopic level like that. If they didn’t foreshadow it in the beginning, and if you didn’t know anything about the War of the Worlds story, then would you have thought that alien microbes would be a problem? These don’t have to be experienced invaders like the Irken Invaders or the aliens on ID4.
The red weed-looking things are obviously the main food-source for the aliens. They looked upon our world with anger and contempt and jealousy. If we are to assume that they are Martians, as in the book, then their world is a cold, arrid wasteland. It is believed that the planet was once similar to Earth, based on the evidence that water once existed there in liquid form. Life could have evolved there and the world could have been very hospitable. The Martians looked at their world, then at ours, and realized we got the better deal. It was suddenly a goal that they possess the Earth, and regain the beauty they once held. It became an obsession. If our positions would have been reversed, our technological advancements might also have been reversed. We might be the agressor species. They didn’t need our blood for anything. They didn’t need to kill us all. They didn’t need to cage us up and spread our blood all over the place. It was revenge. They are a malevolent species, looking to rid Earth of every last man, woman, and child because we [by chance, by fate, by God] have the better hand.
I agree with whomever said it, that Ray’s morally ambiguous decision to kill Robbins’ character was very single-minded, so that he could save his daughter. He’s lost a son (apparently) and he’s not about to lose his daughter. Besides which, Robbins’ character was crazy.
I do wish they had gone into a little bit more detail how Ray’s son survived. It seems impossible, and the ending does seem to be a copout (esp w/Boston surviving). BTW, Eowyn was made pregnant by her new husband, in case you hadn’t seen him at the beginning of the film (Keddaris). Though, I didn’t see him in Boston, which I thought was kinda off.
The lasers which seem to destroy human flesh, but leave clothes largely intact could easily be explained (without the use of nanotechnology). The aliens seem to have a certain fascination with red (Mars) and our red human blood in particular. The lasers could just be heating our blood to the point that it explodes with anything that’s flesh. I’m sure that doesn’t make sense right now, but it did when I originally thought it up. And the “ash” on Ray’s face … I thought that was just dust from the debris that was all around him, not human ashes. Eh well.
Regarding the cars and why Ray’s worked but no one else’s. The news in the beginning reported that in the Ukraine that an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) was responsible for the loss of certain conveniences. If anyone remembers what happened in The Matrix whenever someone blew an EMP, we realize that anything that’s ON or RUNNING is instantly disabled (cars, watches, cell phones, power plants, etc.). Where things that weren’t on, or are not using electric parts, might still work (cameras, digital camcorders, ferries, parts for cars, etc.) I didn’t quite make out what Ray told the mechanic to fix, then again, I don’t know that much about cars.
Which brings me to the oblivious mechanic. There are many possibilities for his failure to realize what was going on. He, also, was very single-minded. His life was his job and he didn’t pay much attention to anything else. He might also be partly deaf, but can lip-read. This would explain why he could understand Ray, but not realize what was going on past his garage. We’re not given enough information about the character to make an accurate assessment either way.
Where was the president? Two things can explain this. First, he was probably one of the first to have been picked off. Second, where did anyone have access to the media so that our characters could hear things directly from the president. This film wasn’t about him (or her) or our respective governments. It was about this family, and about humanity’s fight to survive, despite the loss of humanity in many instances (killing for Ray’s van). Furthermore, the presence of government was quite there in the form of the military personnel trying to battle this alien presence and protect whoever remained.
Why were the birds landing on the still moving, yet wobbly, tripod towards the end? What kind of bird were they? We can’t really tell from that distance. I was assuming they were a scavenger-type bird like vultures, circling around a dead or dying prey. Some may have already been dead, and the vultures were trying to get through. Also the blood that was no doubt covering the tripod probably provided some tasty snacks.
I did find it odd that Ray in his van could find a navigable path through the backed up traffic, and through the plane wreckage.
The ferry could have fit them all (or most) especially if they dumped all the cars overboard or out of the way. There weren’t too many of people there.
I do like Morgan Freeman. I do like what was said by the narrator at the beginning and end of the film. But if Mr. Freeman was going to narrate a bit of the film, you would think he would be in it, too. I do think it would have been better if one of the primary actors had done it. Maybe even Tim Robbins. Though, I suppose Mr. Freeman is one of the few actors who can site God and get away with it in Hollywood (Deep Impact, Bruce Almighty) and have a good narration voice to boot. Edward Norton also likes to narrate. But that’s another story.
Altogether, I thought it was a great movie and the inconsistancies can be easily overlooked.
I just rented the movie and my first impression was the number of messages that it has in relation to terrorism and the Iraq war, from the essay that the teenager is supposed to do about the “French occupation of Algiers”, to Tim Robins assertion that no invasion can ever succeed” (historically inaccurate in general but may be accurate to a particular ongoing occupation). But the scene that I founded most controversial, was when Ray( the characters that supposedly we should identify with) in order to save his daughter almost become a “suicide bomber”, only spared from that role by the initiative of a soldier that managed to pulled him out at the last minute with the help of the others captives.
It surprise me also that no one pointed at that particular scene, that is bizarrely unlikely to really work, surviving a close explosion and dropping from hundreds of feet trapped in a cage right on top of a tree which branches should have impaled every single human.
Well, just a comment.
The item that was replaced in his car was a solenoid. However, there’s nothing sophisticated about it. There is only ONE TIME that it operates. When the key is turned ALL THE WAY so the starter motor operates. Let’s assume that an EMP could destroy a solenoid, which it can’t, by the way, since it’s just a magnetic coil. (Just like the IGNITION COIL! Which operates continually when the car is running. HELLO!!!) Okay, assuming the solenoid could be destroyed, the only time it could be destroyed was when it was actually operating. And that means the ONLY cars which would stop working would be cars that people were trying to start at that exact moment. Also, if solenoids can be destroyed anytime, how come the spare solenoids behind the parts counter weren’t destroyed? –Now here’s something NO ONE MENTIONED so maybe it’s just me. After the aliens bit the dust and there was a close up of Tom walking to somewhere with a group of people in the daylight, there was some ham actor guy just behind him with a “concerned” expression on his face, his eyebrows furrowed. This makes no sense. By this time, he would have been basically bone weary or shell shocked with virtually no expression on his face. But hey, that’s just my take.
You know, I just remembered something else. That second house they were in? That was the childrens house. How could it not be? They had to live with their mother so they were basically home. If Dakota was allergic to peanut butter, why was there any in the house? Who was the peanut butter for? The mother? The teen-age son? Not even. At that age, during his growth spurt years, he’s wolfing down lump after load of ham and turkey sandwiches. Screw that kid stuff peanut butter.
Someone earlier mentioned that there was no flight cover to speak of for the military. The problem here is that this story was written in the 19th century, in 1898, to be exact. Giant three legged machines would pretty much be unstoppable back then. Not now though.
Against an F-14 Tomcat, an F-22 Raptor, a Harrier, a Phantom, an F-111? What chance would one machine have being harrassed simultaneously by 4 jets at supersonic speed? Plus, the sheer magnitude of fire power on the humans side makes it no contest. How many machines do you think there might have been? Even one thousand of those things is no match for one hundred thousand fighter jets, in our country alone. Now add Britain, France, Israel, Russia, China and kiss your ass goodbye.