War of the Worlds

[ltheis]

Just finished War of the Worlds: all i can say is WOW this movie ROCKS!!! Absolutely the best DTS movie i have seen to date.

[Tomorrow]

Just finished War of the Worlds: all i can say is WOW this movie ROCKS!!! Absolutely the best DTS movie i have seen to date.

Whatever rocks you...unless of course you are talking about the 1953 version.

I thought the new one was a ridiculous, poorly acted, poorly directed, poorly written, incomplete remake of a GREAT movie. Just alien walkers and subsonic bass. Absolutely NOTHING else to recommend this flick...even for me...an sci-fi fanatic.

[ozdvduser]

Just finished War of the Worlds: all i can say is WOW this movie ROCKS!!! Absolutely the best DTS movie i have seen to date.
The new one is just a crook of commercialised ****e - the original puts it to shame, even though it was done some 50yrs ago.

http://www.war-ofthe-worlds.co.uk/war%20of%20the%20worlds%20george%20pal%201953.htm

[ltheis]

I am not talking about the acting/plot as far as that goes this thing blows, I mean come on where is the story line. I was really refering about the audio IMO it really rocks the room. And it is really nice to an audio track that was laid by someone not affraid to wake-up the people in the back row.

[mpompey]

Look, I'll lay it out there...

I loved WOTW (2005). I liked Speilberg's commentary and take on the post 9/11 world. The humans in the film were scarier than the aliens were. We saw some of the same things play out among survivors in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina.

I know lots of people are tired of Tom Cruise after is rant on the Today show. But I happen to like Cruise. And while I'm not Scientologist, I personally feel there was some merit to his views.

Plus, anybody who puts it to anybody on the Today show will always get my benefit of the doubt. Talk about a corporate orifice.

Uh-oh, I will a rant coming...

[nuance]

I wasn't much for the actual movie either......it was so so; al little to much "alien content". But I gotta say the sound is unbelieveable and the lows were incredible. It acually shook the glasses out of ourr kitchen cupbords and knocked a picture of the wall. this was the first movie I watched that the bass acutually "hits" you in the chest:D . I'm sure the neighbours 2 places down felt it. (I live in a townhouse) Great movie to show off the system........... I can't wait till I get two more MK2's:eek:

[ca_newbee]

Watched it last night...definately shows off my system.... farther-in-law was well impressed!

[Rob Babcock]

I thought the movie was pathetic, but the sound was okay.

[mike c]

let me repeat ... a war is a fight ... this was "the conquering of earth and the subsequent alien f&*k up"

this does not deserve the title war of the worlds ... the tv series was better than this (i dont know what year that was but the alien ships looked like green desk lamps)

[brushro]

Yeah....this movie sucked...what maybe 4 main characters?-& his son survives to show up @ the end?...c'mon...please!!!-yeah lots of guy explosion/destruction stuff....but it takes more than that to make a decent movie...guess I wasted my Netflix fee on that one...not to mention "Crash"...what a farse!!!-but then again that's why I moved out of the city.

[brushro]

By the way...I thought after T.Cruise did "Collatoral" his films were taking an uphill turn...my bad

[Leprkon]

there was some initial potential... the movie was simply not long enough to develop the story all the way... it needed another 45 minutes, regardless of a theatre audience's limited attention span... they could have at least added it to the DVD. too much set up and just not enough actual event.

it would be nice to someone (Scientologist, Saddam lover, anybody) justifying Cruise's kill of someone else in their own house. No one made Cruise stay there... he could have just left.... after all, the guy saved his life in the first place.

[markw]

It's amazing that out of the whole world he was the only one that could get a car to run.

It's more amazing that he could manuever around all the obstcles and blocked roads.

Knowing Newark, it's even more amazing he made it outta there in the car.

(I won't get into the kaka about his house being in Bayonne and he could walk across the river into down neck Newark in a matter of minutes when it takes at leas t 1/2 hour to drive it.)

He was able to drive as far a she did and still hold onto the car.

He never needed a shave. He never got tired. He never killed that whining little girl.

Firat the aliens wanted to kill us all,. Then they wanted to eat us. Can't they make up their minds?

What were those red vines anyway?

He wound up, in a matter of days, walking all the way to Boston, fresh s a daisy and still not needing a shave, into a neighborhood that seems to be unaffected by the whole thing, except perhaps their cable TV went out.

[j_garcia]

You're trying to apply logic and reality to a movie. It's not supposed to be 100% realistic, it's called "willful suspension of disbelief" It's a story, not a factual account of something that really happened.

If you want to see someone looking tired, check out Cristian Bale in The Machinist. He actually stayed awake for long periods of time so he would be convincing as a guy who hadn't slept in a year. It's a decent independent film. Also Insomnia with Pacino in Alaska, I was tired after watching him not be able to get to sleep. Also not a bad flick.

[Sounds Good]

i happened to like it... i was on the edge of my seat a few differant times... and your all definatly right about the LOW LOW bass my lil' energy take series sub coudnt keep up, but it sounded awsome non the less... ill definatly be re'watching this movie when i get my SVS 12 plus 2

[Paulvader]

Whatever rocks you...unless of course you are talking about the 1953 version.

I thought the new one was a ridiculous, poorly acted, poorly directed, poorly written, incomplete remake of a GREAT movie. Just alien walkers and subsonic bass. Absolutely NOTHING else to recommend this flick...even for me...an sci-fi fanatic.

FULL OF HOLES...these days making it a better 2 parter or more is normal. The special effects are awesome but the story line blows...it seems to take Tom and the world half the movie to realize they're in deep dog doo-doo! And thankfully they had the ONE vehicle that worked in New York! too bad that it can't be both story/script AND effects doing the job. Thank the Lord Tim Robbins was in it - he gave it some merrit. I am surprised that Spielberg would watch this in a theatre and feel happy his name was attached to it. One question...where did Tom Cruise' son come from at the end? I thought he ran over the hill to the "front lines"...my 3 cents! :D

[philh]

At the risk of getting flamed for keeping this thread alive...

The movie sucked. Glad I only wasted $5.00 on this horrible movie. While it was a great sub workout, I still had to reduce the sub signal by -5db, which was still too loud.

Wonder if my sub can accurately reproduce the sound of a 12g shotgun blowing the disc to time pieces?

[Jack Hammer]

...I just watched it last night for the first time. The soundtrack (DTS) is great, a bit too heavy in the LFE deptartment (I had to keep turning down the volume) for late night viewing. The story was ~ok, but it lost all hope with the lame last half hour of the movie, before that wasn't all that bad and actually entertaining at times (and stupid at others, though watchable). Bottom line - it was worth the $4.99 I paid for it, barely.:)

[johnnybon]

Best bass of any movie on DVD.

[Sheep]

You guys are lucky. One of my good friends, who shares an opinion with mine, said it was amazing.

So I bought the 2 disk special edition. Yeah, its a great sub test, but its a stupid sub test. I could play some 15Hz sine waves from my computer, and thats free!

SheepStar

[Ern Dog]

Best bass of any movie on DVD.


I agree. My Mirage S12 sub was shackin' the house down and I loved every minute of the effects:D . This DVD will given any sub a good work out.

[Jack Hammer]

...So I bought the 2 disk special edition. Yeah, its a great sub test, but its a stupid sub test. I could play some 15Hz sine waves from my computer, and thats free!

SheepStar

Well put. I'd agree 100% except I only paid $5 for my copy, just a little more than a rental. For almost free, it still sucks, but I'm happy.

If anyone needs a good sub workout, go watch U571, it's more watchable and will give the sub a lot to do.

[edonsmith]

I thought it was a bad movie. The special effects were ok but the movie was not good at all for me

Don

[skizzerflake]

I thought it was pretty good. My expectations were pretty low, what with Tom C as a star, but the movie had a nightmare quality that I appreciated. I could identify with giant bots coming up out of the ground and absorbing or zapping everybody; the only right response is to run and scream, and the red vines were like alien Kudzu. As for why TC had the only car that ran, remember that it was an old one with no chips, so EMP would not zap it. Deus Ex Machina perhaps but anything is allowable in a nightmare.

The FX were good as was the sound. I was never that fond of the old version from the 50's, maybe because I liked Gene Barry even less than Tom Cruise. As for why TC had the only car that ran, remember that it was an old one with no chips, so EMP would not zap it. Deus Ex Machina perhaps but anything is allowable in a nightmare.

[stratman]

I have the original, I think it's better made, faster paced and it just reflected a sign of the times, cold war paranoia. The new movie takes itself too seriously and just too much TC. My 2 cents.

[j_garcia]

The original, which I also liked better, was a good movie. This one is a popcorn flick IMO; aka Independence Day. It has a lot of flash and boom, but the story lacked something that the original had. One thing I did like was the cameo of the actors from the original (they were his ex's parents).

[stratman]

War Of The Words, featuring cow/pig/woman hybrid Rosie and raccoon/lemur/man hybrid Don, they're tearing up Manhattan !

[mpompey]

I know I'm outnumbered on this, so don't even start!

I loved the movie! According to Speilberg, TC having a car that was working (after changing to solenoid), plus the camcorder that worked, was supposed to show that the Alien ray wasn't 100% effective. Remember the HumVees and Deuce and a half's the soldiers where in ran. The news crew had a van and TV equipment that also ran. As well as all the cars that drove onto the ferry, not to mention the ferry itself. So TC wasn't the only one with a working vehicle.

[stratman]

[QUOTE=mpompey]I know I'm outnumbered on this, so don't even start!

We won't hold it against you. I mean TC needs his one fan.;)

[j_garcia]

While I felt the movie was flawed, I still liked it :D Just not for the same reasons I liked the original.

[croseiv]

The DTS track of this movie is INSANE. The Ultra handled it quite well though. The pod emergig scene has to be one of the most intense scenes yet. Also when the heat rays start zorching....Not the best acting, but awesome LFE and special effects.

[Shadow_Ferret]

I have the original, I think it's better made, faster paced and it just reflected a sign of the times, cold war paranoia. The new movie takes itself too seriously and just too much TC. My 2 cents.
The original is fantastic. Too bad it's 50 years too late for 5.1.

This one, well someone else already spoke on all it's flaws, including why the hell was Boston spared? The whole world is destroyed but Boston? Maybe the air there because of all the baked beans they eat? Who knows.

However, I think I might rent this one again now that I have a HT system with a decent sub just to hear what I missed before.

In other words, most of the movie will be in fastforward until I get to some LFE. :)

I will say that the only redeeming part of this movie is that the aliens used tripods like in the book. However, in many respects the lesser known WoTW 2005 release staring C. Thomas Howell was a much better story. Horrible Sci-Fi Channel special effects, but a better story.

[Pyrrho]

You're trying to apply logic and reality to a movie. It's not supposed to be 100% realistic, it's called "willful suspension of disbelief" It's a story, not a factual account of something that really happened.
...

There is a difference between a willful suspension of disbelief, and a total abandonment of all brain functions. Movies are not fact, true enough, but when they are 0% realistic, it is difficult for all but the brain dead to suspend one's disbelief for the complete length of a feature film.

If we look at 2001: A Space Odyssey, there was some effort to introduce realism into the film (like a lack of sound passing through empty space, and a realistic attempt at dealing with gravity in space). Of course, they did not, and still do not, have computers like HAL, which is where the suspension of disbelief comes into play. But the film did not ask that one totally check one's brain at the door to be picked up after the film was over.

In the case of the new War of the Worlds, the constant lack of realism was a constant reminder that one was watching a film, which prevents one from being totally immersed in the story. This means there was bad writing, causing a bad story, which makes for a bad film. They should never have shot the film with such a poor script. But, of course, the main point of film making is making money, not making great films (regardless of the constant propaganda to the contrary from Hollywood). How did it do at the box office? If they turned a good profit, then I am sure that its makers are happy, as they have achieved their real goal.