The War of the Worlds
discussion
Let's have fun or make fun!
message 1:
by
Dei sha
(last edited Jan 24, 2008 05:10AM)
(new)
Jan 24, 2008 05:09AM
Isn't this the one that turned out to a movie?? With Tom Cruise as the main character? The movie kinda made me say "do-oh!!" a lot of time, isn’t it ridiculous??
reply
|
flag
This has been adapted a number of times, most famously in an audio version directed by Orson Welles that scared the piss out of radio listeners decades ago.
My favorite cringe moment of the Tom Cruise movie was when the aliens first showed up. In the book, the space capsules were fired from Mars from some sort of gun apparatus. In the movie, they were just sort of inexplicably already here and released by lightening or traveled here in a lightening bolt? Apparently, it didn't matter much to the writers because the movie just went on from there in a classic Hollywood emphasis on special-effects-rather-than-plot story telling technique.
Don't blame the book for the movie, don't know many good book to movie transitions.I think this is classic steam-punk though.
Mindy wrote: "My favorite cringe moment of the Tom Cruise movie was when the aliens first showed up. In the book, the space capsules were fired from Mars from some sort of gun apparatus. In the movie, they wer..."No the premise of that film is that the aliens were already here, and we woke em up! But I do wish peopld wouldn't compare a film to a book- theyre different entities entirely!
What I'd like to know is where the constantly screaming child appeared in the book.@Larry: If we cannot compare them, why call it War of the Worlds then? The only common ground was the aliens' tripods.
Bigal-sa wrote: "What I'd like to know is where the constantly screaming child appeared in the book.@Larry: If we cannot compare them, why call it War of the Worlds then? The only common ground was the aliens' tr..."
Agree!! We all know they are two different things, but if it's based on a book we love it's normal we want to talk about both of them. :o)
I didn't like the movie a bit, but I loved the book, specially cause I live 'next door' to where the aliens land: I'm 40 mins away from London and 20 from Woking, where they even have a statue of one of the aliens! :oD
I will say one thing for the Cruise film...the sound the aliens made was great...it made the whole theatre shake.
I enjoy the cruise film...I just ignore the kid at the end...for to me he died on the hilltop.
I thought the recent movie managed to capture the desperate feel of the book rather well. The rest of the movie was rather lackluster, it felt like it hardly had any plot at all, and the characters were uninteresting, but the feeling was there.The 1953 movie was a lot better, although it was even less faithful to the book. It is a darn shame that out of all movies/games/radio/TV-series/whatever else has been made shows, only the musical has remained faithful to its source material, and still remained good (the less that is said about Timothy Hines movie, the better).
There are two movies. It's very ironical that the one of Tom Cruise was more attached to the book's plot than the one of 1953 which it was 10 times better.
I thought the Speilberg movie was good in parts. The alien tripods were very menacing and the action was visceral. It was let down by too many plot holes and unanswered questions.That said, it's high time a proper studio did a big-budget version of the original Wells story set in Victorian England. I love the book (one of my top 3) and Jeff Wayne's musical version.
Just bought the '53 version and I love it. It is quite entertaining even in our day of amazing effects.
Kevin wrote: "Just bought the '53 version and I love it. It is quite entertaining even in our day of amazing effects."I've always liked the '53' version. The later versions lack a lot. The book is best though.
I also own a copy of War of the Worlds. The old '53' version that is.
As a matter of fact when it first came out my grandmother took me to see it.
I remained impressed with the '53 version. The winged bomber that resembles the B-2 so well aids in allowing it to transfix itself throughout the ages.
Kevin wrote: "I remained impressed with the '53 version. The winged bomber that resembles the B-2 so well aids in allowing it to transfix itself throughout the ages."Yes the original flying wing. I remember once when I was real small seeing one fly over head. This was before it crashed killing all the crew members.
The sound effect in the Speilberg version when the tripod began its attack is terrifying but the sound in the '53 version when the raygun struck is iconic.
Kevin wrote: "The sound effect in the Speilberg version when the tripod began its attack is terrifying but the sound in the '53 version when the raygun struck is iconic."Yes and it even made more sense compared to the theory behind the new one.
I also liked the sound of when the tripods moved in the '53' version compared to the new one.
Ken wrote: "Kevin wrote: "The sound effect in the Speilberg version when the tripod began its attack is terrifying but the sound in the '53 version when the raygun struck is iconic."Yes and it even made more..."
The Spielberg effort had some good things going for it.
The tripods were terrific! They captured brilliantly what I'd always imagined them to be.
The movie paid homage to the 1953 film with the alien's hand at the end and the force field protecting the aliens from our weapons.
The scene in the basement, with the tentacle camera searching, was straight out of the novel, as was the spread of the red plant across the landscape (I think Wells should be credited with being the first to ever conceive of "terraforming" a planet to suit a new civilization for that idea, by the way).
And of course, the new movie was true to the novel in that our savior happened to be microbes.
One thing I really liked was a deviation from Wells' octopus-like aliens. These aliens had clearly evolved from quadrupedal forms, like we did, into tripedal forms, the hind legs evolving into small appendages, while the spine or tail evolved into a third "leg." So the psychology of a 3-legged being lends itself into designing machines based on a tripod mobility.
The only good movie version is the original with Gene Barry from 1953. I found the Tom Cruise version boring with Cruise dragging his complaining bratty kid across the country side and the 'Martians' always just over the next hill. What a waste of time and talent!The book is Wells at his best but puts many people off because of its time period. Many readers have the same problem with the original James Bond books. These, and many others like them, are time capsules, glimpses into another time, another way of life and another mind set. As serious readers we need to immerse ourselves in the time, settings and dialog as well as the plot and action. Classics are a window into history, not just 'old books'.
BJ
BJ wrote: "The only good movie version is the original with Gene Barry from 1953. I found the Tom Cruise version boring with Cruise dragging his complaining bratty kid across the country side and the 'Martian..."Love you statement. The 1953 version with Gene Barry is 100 times better than the Tom Cruise version. I read books that are set years ago with the old mindset. Of course since I'm 68 its easy to get into the time I was young. I was taught to read and take into account the setting which many don't do now.
Have you seen the C Thomas Howel version? Don't, it is the best garbage movie on War of the Worlds there is.
The C. Thomas Howell flick was horrible. There was another movie version coming out at the same time that was actually going to be set in England at the time Wells set the novel, and would be very true to the novel. I've seen clips, but everything I read from people who viewed it said it was not only bad, but one of the worst movies they'd seen in their lives. Ouch.
Ken wrote: "The C. Thomas Howell flick was horrible. There was another movie version coming out at the same time that was actually going to be set in England at the time Wells set the novel, and would be very ..."I am a glutton for punishment so if I ever can see it I will just go go boo.
Christopher wrote: " I love the book (one of my top 3) and Jeff Wayne's musical version."I've always liked the Jeff Wayne musical version and Richard Burton's narration on that album is well... just classic Burton; what a voice that man had.
I agree with Ken's assessment above. I really loved the Tom Cruise version. I thought it was a nicely balanced mix of old and new and the outdated parts were replaced with modern happenings.
While I'm a fan of older movies, I just think there's something really magical about paying homage to Wells in a modern setting. After all, when he wrote these, the setting was modern, too.
I would just like to point out that both the 1953 movie and the Tom Cruise movie were War of The Worlds where H.G Wells wrote The War of The Worlds. It is a subtle difference but it was enough for them to be able to change all but the core premise of the book. As far as I am aware there was only one film made that followed the book word for word and that was the Timothy Hines version, which was released at about the same time as the Tom Cruise movie and with a fraction of the budget.
War Of Worlds - directer David Michael Latt, staring C. Thomas Howell, Rhett Giles and Andrew LauerI don't now about Timothy Hines version.
We all know the 1953 staring Gene Barry and the version wirh Tom Cruse.
Like I said the C Thomas version was terrible.
Has anyone every seen the TV version?
Ken wrote: "War Of Worlds - directer David Michael Latt, staring C. Thomas Howell, Rhett Giles and Andrew LauerI don't now about Timothy Hines version.
We all know the 1953 staring Gene Barry and the versio..."
If you are talking about the '80's TV series that started with a two hour movie, I loved it! Highly recomend it if you can find it, not real sure if it's available from Netflicks. I know there are a few episodes on Youtube. Believe it or not, packed away somewhere with other stuff and junk I have the entire two season series on VHS taped right off the TV. This discussion has got me wanting to pull it out and watch it again. I'll let everyone know if it has held up over the almost 30 years.
BJ
B.J. wrote: "Ken wrote: "War Of Worlds - directer David Michael Latt, staring C. Thomas Howell, Rhett Giles and Andrew LauerI don't now about Timothy Hines version.
We all know the 1953 staring Gene Barry an..."
Yes I'm am talking about the TV series. and I loved it too.
After the first time I got into this discussion I dug out my 1953 version (on DVD now) and watched also.
There is a musical version of it. Richard Burton narrated it and it included Julie Covington, David Essex, Justin Hayward, Phil Lynott, Jo Partridge and Chris Thompson.
It come in a 2 DVD set. I got it the first on a 2-8 track tapes. Now of course I have it on DVD and have loaded into my computers.
I'm sorry War of the worlds is 2 Disc CD set not a DVD.It can be gotten from Barnes & Noble for about $23.00.
That CD set is the Jeff Wayne musical adaptation.
Mike wrote: "That CD set is the Jeff Wayne musical adaptation."Yes
Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds has recently been remade. Liam Neilson narrates and Gary Barlow plus others sing.
The song "Forever Autumn", off the Jeff Wayne WOTW, was a hit back in the late 70s. Very nice song. I believe it was Justin Hayward of the Moody Blues who did the lead vocal.
Peter wrote: "Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds has recently been remade. Liam Neilson narrates and Gary Barlow plus others sing."I'll have to get the remake then.
Ken wrote: "The song "Forever Autumn", off the Jeff Wayne WOTW, was a hit back in the late 70s. Very nice song. I believe it was Justin Hayward of the Moody Blues who did the lead vocal."Yes I do remember.
Rate H.G.'s books. My ranking:1) The Time Machine
2) The War of the Worlds
3) The Island of Doctor Moreau
4) The First Men in the Moon
5) The Invisible Man
6) all the rest, in whatever order...none of them compare to the above list.
Going right back to the second comment, the Orson Welles radio version was broadcast as if it were talking about "live events", and folk lore has it that it caused some panic with accounts of people leaving their homes to hide.
The book was one of Wells' best - the fact that it was re-made into a film (and the story, faintly disguised, used for Mars Attacks) shows how it has stood the test of time. An awful lot of science fiction doesn't......
The book was one of Wells' best - the fact that it was re-made into a film (and the story, faintly disguised, used for Mars Attacks) shows how it has stood the test of time. An awful lot of science fiction doesn't......
Andy wrote: "Going right back to the second comment, the Orson Welles radio version was broadcast as if it were talking about "live events", and folk lore has it that it caused some panic with accounts of peopl..."I do think it will be around for quite some time yet.
I found on the internet whaer I got to listen to 13 tracks of the War the Worlds CD remake with Liam Nilson. It was great and though there are a few changes in the music is still good. Liam Nilson did a great in narrating it.
As a matter of fact I think there was a link to the 55 minute radio version. Which I need to go back and find.
I own a book, inherited from my late uncle, that was published right after the Orson Welles radio production. Describes the panic and includes the entire script of the radio play. Very cool.
Ken wrote: "I own a book, inherited from my late uncle, that was published right after the Orson Welles radio production. Describes the panic and includes the entire script of the radio play. Very cool."Whats the name of the book and can you tell me the ISBN #.
Mike wrote: "That CD set is the Jeff Wayne musical adaptation."They also created a stage version of this. Justin Hayward performed his song live and they had a prop of the Martian war machine. It was pretty cool. They released the performance on DVD, though I would love to have seen it live!
Kevin wrote: "I enjoy the cruise film...I just ignore the kid at the end...for to me he died on the hilltop."That was the worst kind of feel-good pandering! I do the same as you. Other than that I rather enjoyed the movie.
Ken wrote: "The song "Forever Autumn", off the Jeff Wayne WOTW, was a hit back in the late 70s. Very nice song. I believe it was Justin Hayward of the Moody Blues who did the lead vocal."Yup, great song. It appears in slightly abbreviated form on the Moodys' Time Traveler box set if you can't find WOTW.
They didn't do a very good job in the 1953 movie because they didn't really stick to the original story.
It was a great popcorn flick. I enjoyed it with my fam.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
