|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Jan 15, 2005 21:57:16 GMT
If the Thunderchild is include in the upcoming WOTW film, what type of ship would you like her to be? HMS Southampton Type 42 Destroyer (my favourite) HMS Invincible Aircraft Carrier Royal Navy Type 45 Prototype Destroyer USS Missouri Battleship USS Nimitz Aircraft Carrier Do you have a favourite? If not but you have suggestions then feel free!
|
|
|
Post by Zoë on Jan 15, 2005 21:59:06 GMT
I like the 1st one.. i dont actually know anything about ships, but i think it looks right
|
|
|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Jan 15, 2005 22:00:52 GMT
Yeah everyone likes that one.
|
|
|
Post by Stewymartian on Jan 15, 2005 23:38:13 GMT
I'd go for the type 23, it's bigger and more heavily armed.
Ideally I'd like to see Ark Royal number iv (the one that was scrapped in the late 1970's) having a go against the Martians. I have images of 892 squadron's Phantoms letting rip with rocket pods into a group of fighting machines, followed by one of the survivors doing a spectacular mach 1 nose dive into the a Martians hood.
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Jan 15, 2005 23:56:40 GMT
i'm pretty sure the US navy retired the battleship class... is that missouri pic recent? anywho, since the ironclad was the top of the line defense back in the day, i would think that nothing short of an aircraft carrier kicking some martian ass before getting melted by the heat ray would do.
|
|
|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Jan 16, 2005 1:59:52 GMT
I doubt a heat ray would melt an aircraft carrier. It would get flattened like a bug before firing a shot. I stil prefer the Type 42 but that's just personal preference. Although you're right that the Battleship class has been retired by the US Navy. A few people have mentioned using a ship out of mothballs, like a desperate attempt to stave the Martian invasion.
|
|
|
Post by Cylinder on Jan 16, 2005 23:46:05 GMT
How about a submarine?
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Jan 17, 2005 0:00:07 GMT
a submarine... i think that would be a bad idea. a submarine is underwater, and who wants to see a martian getting rammed underwater? it wouldn't look like much if the view was of the martian above water, and it would obviously compromise the hull of the submarine, pretty much suicide for the crew.
|
|
|
Post by Cylinder on Jan 17, 2005 0:12:38 GMT
Have you never seen a submarine rise above water - Would make a powerful image surprising the Tripod
|
|
|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Jan 17, 2005 0:25:44 GMT
It would look cool maybe they could work it into the film somehow?
|
|
|
Post by timeship2 on Jan 17, 2005 2:17:32 GMT
What makes you think they'd use a British ship anyway? They already moved the location to the USA and using only American actors, so I just can't see them using a British ship of any description either.
The US likes to show off it's firepower to the world, so you think they'd miss a chance in a major movie!
Of course as the Thunderchild gets destroyed, you might just have a chance as it wouldn't look good for the US military would it? Much better to have a British ship destroyed instead! ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Jan 17, 2005 2:56:51 GMT
'Dubya' is enough of an embarrasment for you, so including a British ship would be absolutely fine! Same questions to you, why would a British story have an American in it? Since it's changed a lot from the book, i.e time, setting, characters etc.. why not add one thing that's British. Despite what you think Americans don't always do things by themselves. Besides imagine a 'HMS Thunderchild' leading an allied fleet towards the Martians, just reinforcing the 'special relationship' our two nations have Anyway judging from all accounts the US Military is going to get 'trounced' not much of an advertisement is it..unless you're planning on going to Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by timeship2 on Jan 17, 2005 3:18:21 GMT
Hey no need to get upset I'm just saying it like it is. I'd much rather see a British ship and I really hope you make me eat my words but I can't see it happening. Let's try not to turn this thread into a political one
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Jan 17, 2005 3:30:23 GMT
What makes you think they'd use a British ship anyway? They already moved the location to the USA and using only American actors, so I just can't see them using a British ship of any description either. if its gonna be called Thunder Child, it will have to be a British ship. have you ever heard of a US ship with such a cool name? the US names its ships after presidents and states. boring Have you never seen a submarine rise above water - Would make a powerful image surprising the Tripod well of course, but is a submarine really at its most effective when its above water? if a submarine were attacking a martian, you can bet that it would be underwater at the time. besides, that would be an unforgivable departure... i know ss is gonna mangle the story, but for gods sake, the Thunder Child was a ship... lets keep it a ship!
|
|
|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Jan 17, 2005 14:18:58 GMT
Didn't mean to come across as nasty, just i saw nothing wrong with using a British Ship. Besides it would've made a good homage to the book.
Using a submarine would be tricky, so the Martians would have to come up with something.
However a lot of people seem to have a problem with the fact that SS has made a few changes. Which is understandable, however you have to realise that H.G Wells made a story that was relevant and contempory for his time. Britian is no longer central power in the world, America is and to relate to today's audience you need to have a story that's relevant.
I know it's unpopular and the cynic inside will say it's driven towards the popcorn market within America, but that's just something you have to accept. I personally would prefer to see a more modern, updated story to see how we today would cope, not how people a hundred years ago would.
|
|
|
Post by mars2005 on Jan 17, 2005 17:03:55 GMT
i agree iron man, remember were going by the book, so all these assumptions of aircraft carriers ect.. could be a load of rubbish, you all seem to think it's coming from real life you have to realise IT'S A FILM ! so in ss world we might not have loads of ships.
|
|
|
Post by <[Iron Man]> on Jan 17, 2005 19:59:59 GMT
Yeah i know it's just a film, that's why i'm speculating what if we they fought Aircraft Carriers or whatever.
Since it's set in modern times why not include things such as that? The only things you need to keep close to the book is the essence of the story. I.e Martians invade, we get our arses kicked and we see how an individual/family try to survive. It doesn't matter what time or setting the story is, it's more exciting to tell the story in the 21st century, not late 19th century.
The point of having films is escapism, we don't have to worry about constraints of real life and we could do anything we choose. We're not going to be invaded by Martians, however since we have the capability and means to create our own world, why not explore a Military vs Martians scenario or whatever you choose to pursue.
Another thing, i generally know the capabilities of things like Battleships, Aircraft, Tanks etc.. so it's easier for me to speculate on what if...however because Tripods or Martians don't exist, i can't speculate much on them.
|
|
|
Post by BrutalDeluxe on Jan 18, 2005 0:27:57 GMT
In my opinion they would most likely go for an Aircraft Carrier so they could launch a multi-pronged attack on the martians. The aircraft could engage the martian flying machines (which are vaguely alluded to during the Thunderchild battle) while the carrier could launch Tomahawks or whatever at the fighting machines.
|
|
|
Post by Cylinder on Jan 18, 2005 0:32:53 GMT
. The aircraft could engage the martian flying machines Reminds me too much of Independence Day (shudder)
|
|
|
Post by BrutalDeluxe on Jan 18, 2005 0:38:47 GMT
Yes, that dawned on me while I was writing. God forbid!
|
|