|
Post by RustiSwordz on Oct 23, 2005 21:54:58 GMT
in relation to the combat and sheer spectacle that is. As everybody knows TC's and SS WOTw hardlyy had any battles in it despite the souce material being riddled with combat scenes all through the book.
I just saw ID4 again and i was on the edge of my seat again during the arial battles. The WOTW i actually found boring. The 50's movie was more tence.
I'm so dissatisfied with the film.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 24, 2005 3:27:07 GMT
in relation to the combat and sheer spectacle that is. As everybody knows TC's and SS WOTw hardlyy had any battles in it despite the souce material being riddled with combat scenes all through the book. I just saw ID4 again and i was on the edge of my seat again during the arial battles. The WOTW i actually found boring. The 50's movie was more tence. I'm so dissatisfied with the film. Yep, for all it's faults I'd rather watch ID4 any day. At least it wasn't pretending to be anything other than a big B movie and at least it didn't pinch the title from a masterpiece of fiction. Spielberg and Cruise gave us a cliched family drama instead of spectacle [ with tripods in the background ]. Even if they shoved more battle scenes in WOTW it would still be a lame film. I haven't seen it for ages but I seem to remember ID4 had a good musical score too.
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Oct 24, 2005 8:10:50 GMT
''At least it wasn't pretending to be anything other than a big B movie and at least it didn't pinch the title from a masterpiece of fiction.'' True.. it just nicked the plot. I'm torn on this.. as far as spectacle goes, ID4 has it. But, to me, those SS tripods give WoTW the slight edge. Also it didn't suffer as much from some of the cheesy gung ho stuff that ID4 did. They both have their own merits (and pitfalls) I guess and I'd find it hard to put one before the other, for different reasons.
|
|
|
Post by sunnyrabbiera on Oct 24, 2005 9:20:42 GMT
I dunno, killing an entire advanced alien race with a computer virus seems so.... errr I mean come on, what were the aliens in ID4 running? Windows 95?
|
|
|
Post by Anthony on Oct 24, 2005 9:38:28 GMT
I did not find ID4 much of a spectacle, i found most of the action sequence more of a Roland Emerich cheesy mess up than a spectacle. I think what spoilt it for me was during the battles Will Smith character had to add in lines like "woop ETs ass". It was overblown tripe in my own opinion.
The "battles" and action sequences in WOTW had a better sense of realism. I look on WOTW and ID4 as "totally" different movies when it comes to the way it has been structured and filmed. The battles and action sequences in WOTW had a different effect on me, in WOTW it was more shock and horror, but with ID4 it was more humour,yeah whatever, and here we go again.
But i agree with WOTW it would of been good if we actually full on saw the battle over the hilltop.
Anthony
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Oct 24, 2005 12:45:06 GMT
Yes, I think Spielberg's main mistake was avoiding the military action to such a degree. Whilst I think TOO much would have ruined the film, there would have been a place for at least one big battle.
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Oct 24, 2005 15:28:30 GMT
Battles in novel.
1) soldiers fighting martian on horsell common. 2) battle of weybridge & shepperton 3) the thunder child 4) ambush where the martian gets its leg blown off 5) martian attack on london
five main combat sequences and all we get is a ferry tipping over and some flashing over a hill from 'berg.
as i said: totally let down
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 24, 2005 15:35:48 GMT
''At least it wasn't pretending to be anything other than a big B movie and at least it didn't pinch the title from a masterpiece of fiction.'' True.. it just nicked the plot. I'm torn on this.. as far as spectacle goes, ID4 has it. But, to me, those SS tripods give WoTW the slight edge. Also it didn't suffer as much from some of the cheesy gung ho stuff that ID4 did. They both have their own merits (and pitfalls) I guess and I'd find it hard to put one before the other, for different reasons. That's really the only thing I find impressive in Spielbergs mess. And it's so annoying to think of what this film could have been if they had tripods like that in a faithful film. I think Spielbergs film is neither here nor there. ID4 was cheesy yes but it had no pretentions whilst I think Spielberg thought he was creating a masterpiece.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 24, 2005 15:39:15 GMT
Yes, I think Spielberg's main mistake was avoiding the military action to such a degree. Whilst I think TOO much would have ruined the film, there would have been a place for at least one big battle. I don't think it's just that. I think he made a lot of mistakes with this film. Cruise is certainly one of them for a lot of people. He just affects the believability of the film for a start. He should stick to films like Top Gun or cocktail.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 24, 2005 15:42:02 GMT
I dunno, killing an entire advanced alien race with a computer virus seems so.... errr I mean come on, what were the aliens in ID4 running? Windows 95? Well it was a bit silly but there again the film never took itself seriously. It just went for spectacle and didn't pretend to be a masterpiece.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 24, 2005 15:44:05 GMT
Battles in novel. 1) soldiers fighting martian on horsell common. 2) battle of weybridge & shepperton 3) the thunder child 4) ambush where the martian gets its leg blown off 5) martian attack on london five main combat sequences and all we get is a ferry tipping over and some flashing over a hill from 'berg. as i said: totally let down There's absolutely no comparison!
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Oct 24, 2005 16:58:25 GMT
The other thing that bugs me is that SS has the nerve to say that the film is seen from one mans perspective. SO was the novel, yet you saw decent fights in that.
The whole thing was a rush to put bums on seats nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Oct 24, 2005 19:12:08 GMT
I agree with everything Rusti and FStar have here.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 26, 2005 20:40:06 GMT
The other thing that bugs me is that SS has the nerve to say that the film is seen from one mans perspective. SO was the novel, yet you saw decent fights in that. The whole thing was a rush to put bums on seats nothing more. Yes, this being seen from one mans perspective has nothing to do with being similar to the book it's so Cruise and his tw*tish Ray character could be on screen for as much of the film as possible. It's a rushed sorryarse mess of a film.
|
|
zelos
New Member
Posts: 2
|
Post by zelos on Oct 26, 2005 21:50:36 GMT
Yep. ID4 did have more battle scenes. But WOTW was a better movie by miles. For a start, it actually had an atmosphere around it that didn't make me want to laugh. Remember the faithful dog jumping to safety from the explosion in ID4? It makes me sick. WOTW was better in every respect beside battle scenes.
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Oct 27, 2005 1:18:26 GMT
But WOTW proclaims to be a masterpiece, a well made alien invasion film that takes itself seriously, and follows the novel faithfully, if not arrestingly. Wether or not it succeeds in those points is debateable, but, I personally believe it does not, and falls flat on many. ID4 on the other hand, as never pretended to be anything but escapist, fun, and somewhat cliche, corny entertainment.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 27, 2005 1:19:29 GMT
None of us are saying that battle scenes are all that counts zelos - far from it [ and the book is about a damn sight more than battle scenes ] but when you consider the source material that Spielbergs film is based on and when you think what it could have been - Spielbergs film is nothing more than an overblown cliched typical blockbuster [ with the usual 'star' as it's main selling point ]. Yes ID4 was aswell but as I've said it didn't pretend to be anything other than an updated B movie. ID4 is far from a great film but Spielbergs is far from a great film too.
Wotw [ the book anyway ] is about more than just battles as most of us know - but Spielberg swung too far the other way and this film is more about Cruise and his kids than an alien invasion. The book was a story - unlike this movie which is more like a promotional film for Cruise. The bit with the dog in ID4 might have been silly but there's plenty of stuff that made me sick in WOTW - like the cliched happy ending or Cruise's all American jerk who turns into the all American hero.
There are 'some' good points about the film but whereas ID4 at least had some spectacular scenes going for it - this film is bland and forgettable on most levels.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Oct 27, 2005 1:24:06 GMT
But WOTW proclaims to be a masterpiece, a well made alien invasion film that takes itself seriously, and follows the novel faithfully, if not arrestingly. Wether or not it succeeds in those points is debateable, but, I personally believe it does not, and falls flat on many. ID4 on the other hand, as never pretended to be anything but escapist, fun, and somewhat cliche, corny entertainment. Exactly, and how some people can say it's faithful to the book is beyond me. It's nothing of the sort!
|
|
|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Oct 27, 2005 13:17:43 GMT
''At least it wasn't pretending to be anything other than a big B movie and at least it didn't pinch the title from a masterpiece of fiction.'' True.. it just nicked the plot. I'm torn on this.. as far as spectacle goes, ID4 has it. But, to me, those SS tripods give WoTW the slight edge. Also it didn't suffer as much from some of the cheesy gung ho stuff that ID4 did. They both have their own merits (and pitfalls) I guess and I'd find it hard to put one before the other, for different reasons. Well i'm sure many stories have 'nicked' the tragic theme from Romeo & Juliet. Although i wouldn't say ID4 'nicked' the story from WOTW i'm sure it gained some inspiration from it. After all WOTW was the first contemporary alien invasion tale, which will undoubtedly influence other similar films. I always avoid comparing WOTW & ID4 simply due to the fact they're constrastly two different films, both in tone and style. ID4 is more of a summer escapist film. While WOTW is more deep and serious. Also it didn't suffer as much from some of the cheesy gung ho stuff that ID4 did. How was it 'gung ho'? I think you'll find that Military personnel who are trained to kill need to have a certain attitude or 'enthusiasm' for the job. Regardless if they're fighting insurgents, giant killer ants, aliens or whatever. I remember i asked someone here once why they thought it was gung ho. They just replied "because it's what the critics said" lol. I dunno, killing an entire advanced alien race with a computer virus seems so.... errr I mean come on, what were the aliens in ID4 running? Windows 95? Well if we go along with the premise of the film, which is the recovery and subsequent reverse engineering of its technology then that can go some way of explaining how we could infect them with a computer virus. Besides ID4 is purely sci-fi, artistic license is used. Anyway i find it equally laughable that an 'advanced' alien race invades Earth and drops dead from the common cold, because they didn't realise we had bacteria. Which is why both ideas requires a 'suspension of disbelief'. Yes, I think Spielberg's main mistake was avoiding the military action to such a degree. Whilst I think TOO much would have ruined the film, there would have been a place for at least one big battle. Even though WOTW isn't about big battles and guns. It's still a part of it, just like Rusti kindly listed. If we want to see the downfall of mankind then you need to show it, so you get the visceral and uncompromising nature of the battles. I'd equate this to Saving Private Ryan, where avoiding to show the true nature of the Omaha Beach would not have given us a real sense of what happened.
|
|
|
Post by sunnyrabbiera on Oct 27, 2005 13:53:35 GMT
well HG Wells can get away with it because at his time there was not a lot known about Bacteria, though in the modern era.... well the new aliens could have gotten AIDS quite easily and even in the 1800's you had blood diseases that the Martians could have contracted.
but the ID4 stuff... meh, even with the alien ship in roswell the aliens could have had a different operating system...
|
|