jon_hill987 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Your probably right of course, being Spielberg it will be full of soppy garbage but it isn't because it is an addaption that is the problem, just Spielberg. Waterworld was s*** though. Still better than Titanic, Vanilla Sky or A.I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormHammer Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by jon_hill987 Spielberg hasn't made a good film since Jaws, I doubt this will be any different from his last few attempts, I'd actually disagree with you there. Close Encounters Of The Third Kind was a good film. I think he lost the plot a bit after making ET: The Extraterrestrial - but he redeemed himself in Saving Private Ryan and Schindler's List. He can make very thought-provoking, deep and interesting movies - but he also panders a lot to the mass-market popcorn-flick mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 indeed a modern adaptation is possible - the fifties version showed that, various events in the book were equated into modern terms but were still present such as the Thunder Child sequence becoming the atom bomb sequence, but it showed the story can be translated to new times, its just this version isnt going to do that, its going to invent a completely new story and call it War Of The Worlds, which is what im pissed off about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Leper Messiah bottom line, i really hate this movie because i know ill pay to go and see it, ill hate it (and probably say so more than once) from start to finish and fume for days afterwards about it, i dont know why i cant stop myself from doin it either If you make a thread about it I promise to kill you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by StormHammer I'd actually disagree with you there. Close Encounters Of The Third Kind was a good film. I think he lost the plot a bit after making ET: The Extraterrestrial - but he redeemed himself in Saving Private Ryan and Schindler's List Yeah I would agree there, but i liked ET and don't forget the Indy films. I seem to be the only one around here who likes The Lost World. IMO it's not a classic, but it's a fun way to spend a couple of hours. Plus that hunter guy was really cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alegis Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Of course a movie has to change some stuff from a book...Was needed for lotr and harry potter. But I haven't seen it like the bourne identity before. Only the names are same, and a location (Zurch). That is friggin all. They should be ashamed of themselves taking the name of a good book pretending it's based on it. It's as if they only read the backflap. Even I Robot had more from the book. Damn hollywood. Now they're even making movies of doom 3 and half life just because the movies suck and they need to replace good actors by famous characters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by ET Warrior If you make a thread about it I promise to kill you. then we must prepare for a duel to the death, pistol or swords sir? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by LightNinja at least they didint rape LOTR(well a bit) or Harry Potter =P oi ! dont use 'rape' and 'Harry Potter' in the same sentence !! Paedophiles googling these words will end up here silly man ! mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_hill987 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3 Indy films. Sorry, I add the indy films to the list. I did forget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 10, 2004 Author Share Posted December 10, 2004 just dug this up cos Speilbergs teaser trailer for WOTW been released: http://waroftheworlds.com/ looks terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by Leper Messiah just dug this up cos Speilbergs teaser trailer for WOTW been released: http://waroftheworlds.com/ looks terrible. can you see Tom Cruises pecs in it ?? mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 10, 2004 Author Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by Astrotoy7 can you see Tom Cruises pecs in it ?? mtfbwya Cruise is mercifully absent from it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by Leper Messiah looks terrible. Oh yeah, looks awful, I mean, all the scenes with people in their cars, or standing in the street. You get a real good feel from the movie from that trailer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckcsaber Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 The trailer look's alright. It really reminds me of ID4, but that's a leap, considering the fact that the trailer didn't show too much. I'm faithful in the Spielberg-Cruise combo. Minority Report was a fantastic film, IMO. In the end, Spielberg has always given me my moneys worth. I'm sure this will be an entertaining movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 I'm with ckcsaber on this. I don't care about if it's faithful to the book. I care if it's going to entertain me. Which is probably will because I like Spielberg's work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 10, 2004 Author Share Posted December 10, 2004 theres a difference between being faithful to the book (non essential) and being faithful to the story (vital) I wasnt trying to say the trailer is a good indication of the movie but compared to other teasers, including Episode 3, this teaser is pitiful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcd1234 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 I think that this could be a good movie. It has Spielberg and Cruise involved. They both don't usually dissapoint me so I will definately give it a go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted January 13, 2005 Author Share Posted January 13, 2005 well using this as the all-purpose War Of The Worlds thread, this great story has recieved another blow recently with the release of this absolutely diabolical trailer for the Pendragon movie that was the only glimmer of remaining hope for a decent version of one of the greatest science fiction stories of all time. So Pendragon joins Paramount in the "bastardised version" tent and WOTW fans will be waiting a hell of a long time for the CGI animated movie of Jeff Waynes Musical until they get something to actually look forward to seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted January 15, 2005 Share Posted January 15, 2005 Did you guys read the same book I did? on Jurassic Park? Clearly the concept is the same - but definately a different book from the movie. Harry potter has stayed pretty true and it is a good film and book. The nice part is that the followers of the books clearly are able to be more knowledgeable on the happenings that movie goers do not see - however it does not hinder the movie going experience. JP on the other hand....wtf... The man needs to stick to the story - its much better than his creations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-64 Posted January 15, 2005 Share Posted January 15, 2005 I never read the Jurrasic Park books but I thought the first 2 were great, some of my favorite movies. The third one however.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_hill987 Posted January 15, 2005 Share Posted January 15, 2005 One of my friends got the 50's war of the worlds on DVD for christmas, I watched it the other day, it is laughable. really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTV2 Posted January 15, 2005 Share Posted January 15, 2005 *shoots Leper Messiah* *revives Spielberg* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoxStar Posted January 15, 2005 Share Posted January 15, 2005 Originally posted by STTCT I'm sorry - but did you not see what he did to Jurassic Park - that was him right? Classic example of taking a great book, stealing the concept (dinosaur park), and then doing whatever the hell he wants to it. Oh well... I liked the movie version of Jurassic Park the best. I liked the novel version of "The Lost World". And I don't believe that Jurassic Park 3 should even be considered in the series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted January 15, 2005 Author Share Posted January 15, 2005 Originally posted by jon_hill987 One of my friends got the 50's war of the worlds on DVD for christmas, I watched it the other day, it is laughable. really. its was a better interpretation than Speilbergs and probably Hines as well. by the looks of the two new films the 53 version looks set to stand the test of time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted January 16, 2005 Author Share Posted January 16, 2005 Well lets face it, Tom Cruise is not the sharpest tool in the shed, he's a bit of an idot in fact and he's chosen to be part of the wrecking of my favorite book, but lets give Tom a chance, lets see what he has to say about adapting the works of a man a good five hundred times more intelligent than him. on the subject of the invaders, who are a complex illustration of the damage done to the world by war, the damage done to peoples lives by war and an effective illustration of what happens when our own advanced nations attack somewhere powerless to resist them, Cruise says: "The Martians in Wells' book are evil and ugly" Top notch insight there Tom. never mind that Wells is distinct in regarding the possibility they might not be evil, or at least not more so than our own society. But at least you did get one right, they are pretty ugly by our standards. Still since you've obviously read the book, lets get your thoughts on translating the book to screen: "it's going to maintain the tone of H.G. Wells' [1898 book]. These guys are coming to dominate Earth." oh dear Mr Cruise, if that is your real name. What about all the other aspects of the book? the underlying stuff that makes it such an important novel? Whilst i appreciate if you were to read the book you might miss such points im sure that you playing the lead role and all someone might have tried explaining it to you. Lets close on the most revealing quote of yours. When asked what the man HG Wells himself might have made of this charade of a WOTW film you say: "He's really pumped and has given us free rein to do what we want. [Laughs loudly]" please.....please god let it be a joke. The sorry thing is I cant really say for sure that it is. And even if its not it does make me sad the man himself isnt around to work on this, at least then nobody could argue with the end result and very possibly we might have avoided the plague of Cruise, evidently a closet George W Bush impersonator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.