Hikuro Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 The Associated PressNEW YORK -- "No one would have believed ... that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligence greater than man's and yet as mortal as his own." "The War of the Worlds," the classic H.G. Wells science fiction novel that begins with those foreboding words of alien observation, will be updated by director Steven Spielberg, with Tom Cruise to star, Paramount Pictures and DreamWorks announced Monday. Shooting will begin in November. H.G. Wells' 1898 novel has been adapted in a 1953 film, a TV series and as an infamous 1938 radio broadcast by Orson Welles that convinced thousands of listeners that aliens had indeed invaded. My god.....MY GOD! AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! WHY GOD DEAR FREAKING A LORD WHY! WHY MUST SPIELBERG RUIN EVERYTHING!!!! God dammit he hasn't made a good movie since Jurassic Park! The 1953 film was just fine FINE! EVEN IN COLOR DISPITE YOU COULD THAN SEE THE WIRES ON THE UFOS! AND THE TV SERIES! AAAAAHHHH ADRIAN PAUL!!!!!!!! God just LEAVE classics alone.........leave it.......leave it.......LEAVE IT!!!!!!!! .........................anyone else agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GobotFool Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 (edited) actually no, as an adaptation of the book the 1950's version is horrid and after reading the much better book I am incapable of watching that POS ever again. -If Spielberg places it during the 1800's like it should be I will be very happy. -If the alien tripods actually have legs like they should I will be happy. -If the hero remain's nothing more than a bystander, like he was in the book, merely watching the horror unfold I shall be very happy. I have general faith in Spielberg to make a decent War of the Worlds movie. Anyway there are plenty of worse HG Well's adaptations out there War of the Worlds 1953 - bad Island of Dr Moreau 1996 - aweful Time Machine 2002 - on my top 10 list of worst movies ever made Poor HG must have been awefully dizzy after these movies. Edited August 18, 2004 by GobotFool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 (edited) Err. Ruin everything? Good Steven Spielberg movies since Jurrassic Park? Lemme think. Schindler's List? Saving Private Ryan? Amistad? Catch Me If You Can? Minority Report wasn't all that shabby, either. You know, raping a classic is one thing. But making alterations and still have it be entertaining and interesting in its own right is another. Unless you consider Orson Well's radio play raping of the original source material. The 1953 film is a "butchering" of the original novel, too, unless you believe that somehow it's perfectly okay to alter a 50 year old classic 50 years ago, and somehow it's not okay now. My bet is that given Spielberg's track record, War of the Worlds will at least be watchable. Let's not confuse Spielberg with Paul Anderson here. *Eyes thread tagline* Oh, we just did. -Al Edited August 18, 2004 by Sundown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southpaw Samurai Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Sadly, all I remember about the tv series was that it had Predator's Poncho, Richard Chaves, in it...which was cool enough for me at the time. I loved the original movie as a kid, but haven't seen it in at least a decade and a half. I'm not going to immediately jump on the bandwagon of "why remake a classic? It's gonna suck!" despite the fact that this could very well become (actually, with 98% certainty) become a Tom Cruise vehicle. Don't have high hopes, but won't brand it without further evidence. I do believe, however, that stories should only be retold if one can tell it better for whatever reason or one has a particular take or spin one wants to present (Spielburg has the potential to be doing one or the other, or both, hence why I won't immediately bash it). Remaking for the sake of just making money off an already popular concept without leaving a personal mark on the tale is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Yeah that Spielberg....what a "hack." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ladic Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 As long as they don't beat the Aliens with a Computer Virus or Water, I'm game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 As long as they don't beat the Aliens with a Computer Virus or Water, I'm game! Funny, this is the one Sci Fi film where that would actually make sense. Or, it would at least be ironic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDisco Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 who really cares. so they make a modern update. if its a flop just go back and read the book. i'm sure people said the same when LOTR was announced and that turned out alright. Just think - in 50yrs some hot shot director will probably do a star wars remake. now *that* would be scandalous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otaku-Smeghead Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Yeah there was a early 90's TV Show on The Future UPN Network that was based on the 50's movie WOW. It was cool but the second Season sucked only saving grace on the second season was a pre Highlander Adrian Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemstone Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Ah.... Another remake. Wonderful. bsu, didn't you know that Lucas is the real culprit for this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaijin Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 That show was before Highlander TV series? Or do you mean Post Highlander? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Just think - in 50yrs some hot shot director will probably do a star wars remake. now *that* would be scandalous. At this rate, I'm actually looking forward to this. Lucas is cornifying his own creation, and adding and changing bits that previously had deeper meanings he somehow seems unable to see. But then again, he wasn't always directly responsible for those bits in the original films, and I suppose it plausible that he's missed them, as ironic and incredible as that seems. -Al Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 WHY GOD DEAR FREAKING A LORD WHY! WHY MUST SPIELBERG RUIN EVERYTHING!!!! God dammit he hasn't made a good movie since Jurassic Park! Bah........the only good movies that Spielberg has directed IMO have been Jaws, Close Encounters ofthe Third Kind and Raiders of the Lost Ark . I'd also like to second that any War of the Worlds movie should be filmed as an 1800s period peice, with Tripod war machines. Just say no to modern movie re-imagings of classic books. Best War of The Worlds ever IMO has to be Jeff Wayne's musical version Superbly acted and sung and has great illustrations as well. Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noriko Takaya Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 It's been publicly stated that Spielberg is making a movie adaptation of the book, and that it will take place during the same time the book did, circa 1898 or whenever. As for this being a remake, I do not think it is. If Spielberg sticks to the book, then it will be the first true adaptation made. George Pal's version was very loosely based off it. The man has made some pretty decent movies in the past and has had a few flops, but if anyone can make a decent adaptation, he can. The movie is slated for release in between 2005-2007, so I'm sure more news will follow. As for the 1953 George Pal version, I liked it as a kid and to this day I still do. Yeah, it's dated, but it is basically an entertaining flick. As for the 1988 television series War of the Worlds, the first season was the only one of the two seasons which was any good, despite its cheese factor. (Kind of like Space: 1999, which had a decent first season but was axed because some stupid director changed the show's format.) The show's death knell came when they killed off Richard Chaves' character Paul Ironhorse at the end of episode one of season two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Sadly, all I remember about the tv series was that it had Predator's Poncho, Richard Chaves, in it... WOOOAH!!! FLASHBACK!!! I totally forgot about the old War of the Worlds TV series!!! It was actually pretty cool, IIRC... Crazy lil' three-fingered muthas that'd melt into goo... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 yeah, schindler's list, saving private ryan those were pretty bad too. I mean just because speilberg pretty much defined the visual vocabulary for modern horror movies and just because he played a large part in creating one of the most iconic action heroes ever and brought WWII into the American consciousness again, was one of the first to use realistic CGI in a feature film... has turned out hit after hit for three decades, he can't possibly be trusted to make a good movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARTHTODD Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Amen, Spielberg's about the only guy you can trust nowadays NOT to ruin a franchise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Amen, Spielberg's about the only guy you can trust nowadays NOT to ruin a franchise. oh yeah.... Jurassic Park 2 anyone? maybe if it was Spielberg and Tom Hanks I'll rest easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hikuro Posted August 18, 2004 Author Share Posted August 18, 2004 how come when someone mentions a cross over or a remake, everyone tends to agree its gonna suck, yet when when it comes to Spielberg and TOM CRUISE! Doing War of the Worlds a REALLY good book and I thought a good movie........now everyone doesn't show any doubt? I personally enjoyed the movie, the guy wasn't a hero, he was like just some guy who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.....just an ordinary scientiest if I remember....who was lookin for a girl towards the end and than witnessed the aliens demise......and I think a Virus would still be perfect, just the common cold. Now if they go and do it in the 19 century, than fine, yeah I'm up for that, it should be as closely based to the book as possible, but when has really ANYTHING been close to the book? Espically by Spielberg.... Schindlers List.........didn't like........Private Ryan........first 20 minutes, fine, the rest of the movie, blew.........Close Encouters..........I fell asleep after an hour................Raiders of the Lost Ark, haven't even watched it since I was 10............Minority Report I hated it........just about anything with Cruise after the very early 90's, I dislike....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 bsu, didn't you know that Lucas is the real culprit for this? D'oh...of course. Now that you mention it, my right rear tire was a little low on air this morning. That damned Lucas probably let the air out last night. Durn bastage is tryin' ta rape my....er, drive to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Schindlers List.........didn't like........Private Ryan........first 20 minutes, fine, the rest of the movie, blew.........Close Encouters..........I fell asleep after an hour................Raiders of the Lost Ark, haven't even watched it since I was 10............Minority Report I hated it........just about anything with Cruise after the very early 90's, I dislike....... Y'see...at this point, I can't even read your post any more. It's like some unintelligible gibberish, like some language spoken by those stone-age tribes they used to find secluded in the amazon. No sane person would knowinly string those words together in english or any other language. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 how come when someone mentions a cross over or a remake, everyone tends to agree its gonna suck, yet when when it comes to Spielberg and TOM CRUISE! Doing War of the Worlds a REALLY good book and I thought a good movie........now everyone doesn't show any doubt?I personally enjoyed the movie, the guy wasn't a hero, he was like just some guy who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.....just an ordinary scientiest if I remember....who was lookin for a girl towards the end and than witnessed the aliens demise......and I think a Virus would still be perfect, just the common cold. Now if they go and do it in the 19 century, than fine, yeah I'm up for that, it should be as closely based to the book as possible, but when has really ANYTHING been close to the book? Espically by Spielberg.... Schindlers List.........didn't like........Private Ryan........first 20 minutes, fine, the rest of the movie, blew.........Close Encouters..........I fell asleep after an hour................Raiders of the Lost Ark, haven't even watched it since I was 10............Minority Report I hated it........just about anything with Cruise after the very early 90's, I dislike....... well, because usually when they announce crossovers or remake it goes something like this: a remake of a good movie by that guy who did the crappy movie about the video game! a translation of a book that is going to have nothing to do with the book! remember that horrible movie about the stripper? well now he's going to do one about a book! speilberg and cruise have made some great movies, yeah yeah, jurrasic park 2 but please, no one bats 100% speilberg has shown that he treats the source material very respectfully, I think he can be trusted not to butcher HG wells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Now that's what I call planning... http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?a...8&obj_id=42337# Well, anything with Ash would rule. Even if Speilberg and Cruise were part of it... Hell, even if Lucas produces it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beltane70 Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Despite its differences from the novel, the 1953 film version of War of the Worlds does keep to the spirit of the book. To this day, this film remains one of my favorite science-fiction movies of all time. For a film that was made 51 years ago, it still looks pretty good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 (edited) how come when someone mentions a cross over or a remake, everyone tends to agree its gonna suck, yet when when it comes to Spielberg and TOM CRUISE! Doing War of the Worlds a REALLY good book and I thought a good movie........now everyone doesn't show any doubt? Cross overs and remakes get panned only because the people assigned to do them are known to suck. AvP is an idea that fans love. The hate is over who was responsible for the flick and how it turned out. And people.. well... by golly... like Spielberg. Go figure. The dissapointment in the megathread isn't because people hate the idea. It's because they love it, and it wasn't given due justice. Schindlers List.........didn't like........Private Ryan........first 20 minutes, fine, the rest of the movie, blew.........Close Encouters..........I fell asleep after an hour................Raiders of the Lost Ark, haven't even watched it since I was 10............Minority Report I hated it........just about anything with Cruise after the very early 90's, I dislike....... Um. Okay. And a mostly plotless dino-CGI-vehicle endears itself when said films here don't? I'd wager your opinions regarding this list says more about your particular and unique taste in movies than Spielberg's inability to make a good one. Give me visceral WWII and more Jones anyday. -Al Edited August 18, 2004 by Sundown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hybridchild Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 (edited) Best War of The Worlds ever IMO has to be Jeff Wayne's musical version Superbly acted and sung and has great illustrations as well. By far the best version, well next to the book of course, and it had Philo (Phil Lynott) in it Hybridchild Edited August 18, 2004 by Hybridchild Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaine23 Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Dude, HG Wells has been rotating in his casket at about 200 mph ever since that godawful Time Machine movie with Guy Pearce came out. He was already rotating before that from Kilmer and Brando in Dr. Moreau. And he likely never gets any rest in his grave from the countless awful versions of the Invisible Man that exist. If anything a Spielberg/Cruise announcement is probably the best news old dead H.G. has had in a long, long time. I'm also surprised that no one's mentioned Empire of the Sun as one of Spielberg's best. A Color Purple's a great film too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GobotFool Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 how come when someone mentions a cross over or a remake, everyone tends to agree its gonna suck, yet when when it comes to Spielberg and TOM CRUISE! Not a remake of the WOTW movie. This is an adaption of the book. Big difference. Closest thing to a remake of the WOTW movie was independance day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otaku-Smeghead Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 (edited) That show was before Highlander TV series? Or do you mean Post Highlander? No way dude this was DEFFINATELY pre Highlander. I was still in High School when WOW was on Highlander was after I graduated in 95 Check TVtome.com Edited August 18, 2004 by Otaku-Smeghead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Jenius Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Man, I don't think SS will screw it up, but stranger things have happened. Who cares anyway? I always thought WotW was lame, Sci-Fi has come such a long way since then. (with the exception of AVP lol) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowlightman Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 It might be a decent movie, if only because it falls under the 'Spielberg Good Movie Rule' which is, if a Spielberg movie has either a) Nazis or b) monsters it'll be decent. A.I. had no monsters, no Nazis, and look how it turned out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ladic Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 I liked A.I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix01 Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 It might be a decent movie, if only because it falls under the 'Spielberg Good Movie Rule' which is, if a Spielberg movie has either a) Nazis or b) monsters it'll be decent.A.I. had no monsters, no Nazis, and look how it turned out. But isn't that redundant? The Nazis were monsters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hikuro Posted August 18, 2004 Author Share Posted August 18, 2004 LOL I liked Jurassic Park cause it had big dinos eating humans than again.......so did Conasaur....*cough* I know it may seem a bit ..........stupid, but one reason I didn't like: Schiendlers list: After like 8 years of learning nothing in history class but WWII and than hearing about it from your own father whose fascinated by it....to where your house has decorations of WWII items, books, posters, etc......you get sick of anything WWII related, to me it's overdone in learning, sure an important event, but myself and ALOT of kids in my school got sick of it.....it sounds wrong, but when you had a teacher who knew nothing BUT WWII based around Spielberg.....yeah Close Encouters: It wasn't a horrible movie, but the problem is I'm not a Dryfess fan, I never have been, which might be why I didn't like Jaws all that much...sure giant shark eating humans cool.....but the characters kind of suck, only cool guy was the shark hunter who got killed off. But still, special effects were cool, yet, I just couldn't stay awake.... Private Ryan: Like I mentioned I'm sick of WWII material.....I've been forced to watch SO many WWII flicks that have been SO poorly done in my opinion. My dad even knocked that Private Ryan was one big joke after the Normandy scene....like I said first 20 minutes great, after that, you just turn it off. Even in History we watched it, but only till the Normandy scene was finished cause after that it gets far fetched. Raiders of the Lost Ark: I myself yeah, I like Jones movies, espically this one, it wasn't bad, but I'm not intellegent enough to understand 1/4th of Indiana Jones when he is searching for something, I mean for god sakes I was a little kid, the only thing I thought was cool was the people melting to bare bones, yep yep. But I got all 3 movies, like 'em alot....but once again.........World War II material....Nazis versus an american Archeologist..........hmmmmmmm Jurassic Park: Yeah a bit cheesey around the edges, but it made a way towards what CGI is pretty much at what it is today. Not too mention I didn't mind JP2, it was the third one I hated with a passion. Now than about remakes, this counts as a remake in very simple terms in my opinion. Once a movie no matter how old it is, has been released, and than someone goes and does the movie again in their terms or closer to the original way, its a remake. The Time Machine is a perfect example, it was already done around the same time as WOTW's was made, the movie was much better than the remake we see today....but when the new release came in, it was a remake, than again it didn't follow either the old 50's movie, NOR the book at all.....I don't know if the 50's movie followed either, I can't recall since I've seen both movies and read the book. Pretty much making another version of a movie already done, is a remake....that's my point of view.....WOTW's was done, maybe not to the book standards, but it was done. Now that Spielberg is doing it supposively "close to the book" its classified as a remake. Its even quoted as being an updated version, it's just a more polite term of saying "remake" no matter how you toss it around I think. No matter how you slice the cheese, to me, this movie is a remake, and it's probably gonna be WAY over done in effects....not too mention I can't see tom cruise being just "someone who is observing the end of the world" he's gonna have some big role, like a scientist or a military officer, SOMETHING....he's always got some flashy character, Days of Thunder, Top Gun, Far and Away, Last Samurai, MIMP, Minority Report, SOMETHING, I just can't buy that this will be closer to the book, not with Cruise in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemstone Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Hikuro, are you saying Close Encounters of the Third kind was the same film as Jaws? Then again you didn't get Saving Private Ryan at all or what war in general is (judging by your "far fetched" comment) so I'm not gonna bother. And what's with this thread? It's all become about defending Steven Spielberg instead of fanboy whining and bitching about the next sure to be sci-fi film remake that will rape our childhoods. Come on, guys. That's the MW way! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.