|
Post by RustiSwordz on Feb 18, 2005 15:22:43 GMT
Agreed, infact the Americans many of whom think the 50's film is the origonal, will think: 'hey they never had tripods or gas weapons and whats with all the blood drinking? that reminds me, isabella get me another bud and 3 litre tub of ben Jerrys ice cream, i cant be bothered to get out of my chair my stomach is so big. What a fine American i am, can someone tell me where Australia is...?' ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 18, 2005 16:34:06 GMT
Agreed, infact the Americans many of whom think the 50's film is the origonal, will think: 'hey they never had tripods or gas weapons and whats with all the blood drinking? that reminds me, isabella get me another bud and 3 litre tub of ben Jerrys ice cream, i cant be bothered to get out of my chair my stomach is so big. What a fine American i am, can someone tell me where Australia is...?' ;D ;D Rusti! you crack me up dude! ;D
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 18, 2005 16:37:47 GMT
I see what your saying For me its not that Wells wont get the credit from Mr. Spielberg but rather people will assume it is a remake of the 1953 Pal version, which for a lot of Americans is the original war of the worlds anyway. I think they could do more to make it clear its an adaptation 'based' on the novel not the 1953 corn feast. Some so called professional movie critics are already calling it a 'remake' which it is not. That is the thing that is bad for Wells not the movie itself, that can only be good for the book as it does say H G Wells in the credits and Mr. Spielberg has said his name dozens of times in interviews so credit for Wells isnt lacking. I think the historical society have more to fear from Hines as in "gee this is so bad the book must be sh*t"
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Feb 18, 2005 19:15:42 GMT
I think the historical society have more to fear from Hines as in "gee this is so bad the book must be sh*t" i never thought of it like that, you have a point.
|
|
|
Post by Bayne on Feb 18, 2005 19:33:42 GMT
[glow=red,2,300]I once had an argument with one American online who was convinced that New Zealand was the capital of Australia and that Kangaroos were used as riding animals instead of horses... the worst of it was that I was saying "Look I live here and thats not true" and they were trying to tell me otherwise Still, I know plenty of well educated humble Americans and we shouldn't fall into the trap of stereotyping people. Otherwise everyone will think all Australians wear cork-brimmed hats and are named bruce. [/glow]
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Feb 18, 2005 19:35:10 GMT
[glow=red,2,300]I once had an argument with one American online who was convinced that New Zealand was the capital of Australia and that Kangaroos were used as riding animals instead of horses... the worst of it was that I was saying "Look I live here and thats not true" and they were trying to tell me otherwise Still, I know plenty of well educated humble Americans and we shouldn't fall into the trap of stereotyping people. Otherwise everyone will think all Australians wear cork-brimmed hats and are named bruce. [/glow] But i thought that they all were, and all the women were called Sheila... LOL ;D Sorry for my little dig just my humour.. PS: Australia is up near Alaska innit?
|
|
|
Post by Topaz on Feb 18, 2005 19:40:11 GMT
All I can say is thank God we have England and Australia to hold up to the world as a shining example of culture, refinement, and tolerance.
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 18, 2005 19:58:14 GMT
All I can say is thank God we have England and Australia to hold up to the world as a shining example of culture, refinement, and tolerance. Refinement went out the window when England embraced multiculturalism.
|
|
|
Post by Charles on Feb 18, 2005 20:25:22 GMT
More people will get interested now because of Spielberg, and start picking up the book. After seeing what SS does to the plot, reading the book later may come as a dissapointment to many young readers. Besides, we'll probably get the dreaded Novel Of The Movie Adaptation Based On The Screenplay by David Koelp, which won't help the original novel. After all, in the public eye, Jaws & Jurassic park are connected with Spielberg more than Peter Benchley & Michael Crichton - remember the 'childrens version' of Jurassic Park the book, and the re-novelization of the film? They could release the original text and include the novelization of the revised movie as a bonus, like the 1977 revision of The Island of Dr. Moreau marketed. Hollywood isn't doing anything they haven't tried already; the same old rules apply, even if it is for a new generation. The text will fluorish no matter what Koepp and DreamWorks does to it. The Island of Dr. Moreau is a perfect example of how interest never dies in the original text. Moreau is more disturbing and less understood than Worlds. In spite of it all, Frankenheimer tried revising it again in 1996 - with Brando, no less; and well, yeah, let's just say he tried... And there were other, more obscure adaptations... Twilight People, ahem. No matter how good, bad or forgettable the movie is, the original text always survives. ;D
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 18, 2005 23:54:58 GMT
Agreed, infact the Americans many of whom think the 50's film is the origonal, will think: 'hey they never had tripods or gas weapons and whats with all the blood drinking? that reminds me, isabella get me another bud and 3 litre tub of ben Jerrys ice cream, i cant be bothered to get out of my chair my stomach is so big. What a fine American i am, can someone tell me where Australia is...?' ;D ;D that attitude is gonna have to change when we annex the UK as the 51st state, us tub bellied budweiser swillers don't warm up to that brit humor, you know... we just shoot first and maybe we'll ask questions later, if anybody is still alive
|
|
ClaytonForrester
Full Member
This kind of defense is useless against THAT kind of power!
Posts: 112
|
Post by ClaytonForrester on Feb 19, 2005 0:40:03 GMT
It's like the corpse of Robert louis Stevenson said in Jekyll and Hyde Together Again....''The bastards! The bastards!My book!They ruined my book!Damn them!'' ClaytonForrester.
|
|
|
Post by thed0ct0r on Feb 19, 2005 0:44:48 GMT
I saw that when I was just a kid (for the T & A of course!) I bet if I saw it now it would suck! I LOVED that movie! All I can remember is his girlfriend complaining that all he was "a freaked out junkie",the woman being very happy with her augmentation nd , of course, "The bastards!" Thanks, Dr. Forrester!
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Feb 19, 2005 1:26:53 GMT
that attitude is gonna have to change when we annex the UK as the 51st state, us tub bellied budweiser swillers don't warm up to that brit humor, you know... we just shoot first and maybe we'll ask questions later, if anybody is still alive thats OK we brits have nukes too, not many mind you but enough to make 90% of the good ole US of A uninhabitable for 50,000 years! LOL ;D
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 19, 2005 7:30:04 GMT
if you guys want us to share our missile defense with you then you'd better be a nice little America Jr. and don't get in daddys way, otherwise we'll have to spank ;D
|
|
|
Post by Topaz on Feb 19, 2005 9:49:27 GMT
thats OK we brits have nukes too, not many mind you but enough to make 90% of the good ole US of A uninhabitable for 50,000 years! LOL ;D Oh Rusti, you do make me laugh. Probably not for the reasons you want, but I'm rollin' over here. Now that we've peaked on the comedy (and hopefully the pissing match), can we get back to discussing TWOTW, and listen to the nice moderators when they tell you to stop bashing other countries in your posts?
|
|
|
Post by maniacs on Feb 19, 2005 10:57:03 GMT
Great responce and some decent points. However to clarify my point. We've got two films coming out. (waynes is CGI so I put that in a different class, Im looking forward to it but I would prefer live action, at least part!) and yet we're all devided over both. Lets face it. Neither truly satisfies our eager anticipation as we'd hope.
SS had all that money and has gone down the modern route. I know it will be good. Ive no doubt.
Hines seems to be botching his PR and has not truly satisfied anyone with the given special FX. Im still looking forward to it if it comes out but feel let down as a fan.
This book is your most (or almost) eagerly waited novel to be filmized! Yet were still argueing and falling out over both. We should almost all be saying they'll be nuts hot!!! I did not read LOTR forums but I wish I had. I wonder wether his adaptation caused this much falling.
That is why I feel we have been badly let down
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Feb 19, 2005 11:34:36 GMT
that attitude is gonna have to change when we annex the UK as the 51st state, i thought you guys already had..... LOL Anyway here is a little fact for you. Hitlers cronies theorised that they would have to kill 75% of the UK population after any sucsessful invasion, simply because we would have refused to surrender, and would have fought to the death.
|
|
|
Post by maniacs on Feb 19, 2005 13:54:18 GMT
i thought you guys already had..... LOL Anyway here is a little fact for you. Hitlers cronies theorised that they would have to kill 75% of the UK population after any sucsessful invasion, simply because we would have refused to surrender, and would have fought to the death. Makes you proud don't it!?!
|
|
|
Post by Topaz on Feb 19, 2005 17:51:27 GMT
This book is your most (or almost) eagerly waited novel to be filmized! Yet were still argueing and falling out over both. We should almost all be saying they'll be nuts hot!!! I did not read LOTR forums but I wish I had. I wonder wether his adaptation caused this much falling. From the extremely little I saw, yes they were. With the same pointless speculation and badgering. I remember a fairly heated debate about Peter Jackson "not having any real experience," and so he'd never be able to pull off something like LOTR. This person was of the opinion that none of the three parts of the trilogy would ever be released. Any of that sound familiar?
|
|
|
Post by Topaz on Feb 19, 2005 17:53:50 GMT
Anyway here is a little fact for you. Hitlers cronies theorised that they would have to kill 75% of the UK population after any sucsessful invasion, simply because we would have refused to surrender, and would have fought to the death. Your point being?
|
|