|
Post by Lensman on Feb 11, 2005 0:54:59 GMT
While Pendragon's live-action filming was obsessive in hewing closely to the text of the novel -- at least, that's what they claim -- it seems apparent that the FX will be rather more at variance. For instance, the handling machine (HM) is described as having 5 legs, yet the FX shot shows 8. Also, as somone has already pointed out it looks more spider-like than crab-like.
Pendragon's approach has been to treat this as a horror movie. The HM does look menacing, but I think we are going to have to resign ourselves to the fact that the FX in many cases will not be canonical.
I am amazed at how this thread keeps going on and on about the house model. Let's apply a little common sense here: Common sense says of *course* it's been broken up into a number of pieces in advance, preparatory to blowing it up. Common sense *also* says that during filming they will touch up the obvious cracks with caulking or paint or something, so they will not show up on film.
Let's give Pendragon credit for *some* ability and competance, huh? It's easy to tear something down. That's not constructive. *Constructive* criticism is suggesting how something could be made better.
Motile: You have stated as fact that Hines is lying, and that the movie is just a con job, altho of course that's only your opinion. Furthermore you have stated that what you are interested in is the Spielberg production, not Pendragon's. So why are you the heaviest poster on the Pendragon threads? May I suggest in the politest way I possibly can that it's far past the point that you should either restrict your comments to the Spielberg threads, or else actually attempt to make some constructive comments. Comments which are entirely negative are *not* constructive.
|
|
|
Post by Gnorn on Feb 11, 2005 1:04:09 GMT
I didn't read the entire thread and don't know of Motile's comments you are refering to. But as far as I am able to interpret Motile's comments on Mr. Hines project in general, he does want to see this version come to life and is hoping the best for Mr. Hines, but he is sceptic considdering the material released (theatrical trailer for instance) and the way Mr. Hines is doing his marketing. And I can't blame him, allthough I will back up Mr. Hines until I've seen the actual movie.
-Gnorn
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Feb 11, 2005 1:19:28 GMT
Motile... is sceptic considdering the material released... and the way Mr. Hines is doing his marketing. And I can't blame him, allthough I will back up Mr. Hines until I've seen the actual movie. -Gnorn I'm concerned too. It's only 1 1/2 months until the announced release, yet their website still looks like an amateur production, and several of the "coming soon" pages still aren't up. And if they have a distributor, I can't find any indication of it. I can understand that Hines wants to release it well in advance of the Speilberg production. If he doesn't, it's gonna be just a footnote as most movie-goers (not those on this forum) will say "I've already paid to see *one* WOTW movie this year, I'm not gonna pay for another!" Hines certainly knows this, and releasing it prior to the Spielberg production will let him capitalize on the Speilberg media blitz, too. If he delays it until later, he will lose a great deal of box office. Unfortunately, the lack of apparent progress makes me suspect that the production is not going well, and that either they will release an unfinished rush job on March 30, or else it will have to be delayed for a substantial period of time. BTW -- Y'all keep talking about images of the cylinder... or non-cylinder... where is the image of that? Can anyone please post the link for that? I've looked at the links posted at the beginning of this thread, and the thumbnails at that site, but can't see any cylinder in them.
|
|
|
Post by Gnorn on Feb 11, 2005 9:27:26 GMT
These pictures are from eveofthewar.co.uk -Gnorn
|
|
|
Post by HTT on Feb 11, 2005 9:58:49 GMT
Lensman: I don't know what FM shot you saw, but the recently released Pendragon shot of the HM only has five legs. I suppose if you include the 4 handling arms and 2 tentacles you can get the impression of 11 'legs' - but the book does give the impression of a few appendages!!
The same goes for the cylinder shot. It looks like a meteorite until it hits Earth, only then can it be seen to be a cyinder, as the clinker and ash fall off to reveal the shape.
I think Hines, so far, has been canonical with the FX, and I can't wait to see a full Fighting machine, flying machine & martian!!
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 11, 2005 16:09:36 GMT
Motile: You have stated as fact that Hines is lying, and that the movie is just a con job, altho of course that's only your opinion. Furthermore you have stated that what you are interested in is the Spielberg production, not Pendragon's. So why are you the heaviest poster on the Pendragon threads? May I suggest in the politest way I possibly can that it's far past the point that you should either restrict your comments to the Spielberg threads, or else actually attempt to make some constructive comments. Comments which are entirely negative are *not* constructive. Hold on there cowboy, your a little late and out of date there spiderman, no need to be the hero anymore, as the guys who are up to date know its been pretty cool in here lately, the only thing i've been crying for is more info for the guys who have been supportive through out. I have never told any lies and still believe all that I said, the difference between us is that you will settle for this version as the difinitive war of the worlds, I will not. I made a deal with malfunction that I would stay neutral as most of the guys did agree with the things I was pointing out but that did not detract from the way they supported this project, so now I support the guys on this board, and to a degree the actual project as I am getting curiouse but I do not support Tim Hines as I believe hes made a mess of the whole thing campagne wise. I must say its not nice to log on and find a post directed at me, i've not been hypocrytical or dishonest once but some just cant help painting me in a bad light, thats fair enough but I dont have to like it.
|
|
|
Post by dudalb on Feb 11, 2005 19:16:28 GMT
When I registered yesterday I though I was signing up for a forum for free and open discussion of the WOTW Films. I was not aware I was signing up for a cheering section and PR pages for Pendragon. I fully support a period War Of The Worlds film. I am not so sure I support the Pendragon effort considering some of the footage I have seen and that we do not seem to be getting many straigh answers from Pendragon. They could at least give a real release date, not the March 30th date which is obviously not going to happen. BTW what concerns me about some of the clips is not so much the effects but the acting....which seems to me to be not very good. No excuse for that, since even low budget films often have excellent acting.
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 11, 2005 19:27:39 GMT
When I registered yesterday I though I was signing up for a forum for free and open discussion of the WOTW Films. I was not aware I was signing up for a cheering section and PR pages for Pendragon. I fully support a period War Of The Worlds film. I am not so sure I support the Pendragon effort considering some of the footage I have seen and that we do not seem to be getting many straigh answers from Pendragon. They could at least give a real release date, not the March 30th date which is obviously not going to happen. BTW what concerns me about some of the clips is not so much the effects but the acting....which seems to me to be not very good. No excuse for that, since even low budget films often have excellent acting. Hi there dudalb and welcome. Just a polite little nod of advise in your shell. Some of the guys here are realy nice guys until you slate Pendragon, they don't like it. You will be told off and shushed in the nicest possible way. If you carry on slating Pendragon even though everything you say maybe totaly valid there will be a call to arms and you will be flamed causing you to defend yourself until you either give up or the thread is locked. Apart from that free speech and healthy debate are welcome, to a degree. motile
|
|
|
Post by jeffwaynefan on Feb 11, 2005 19:31:43 GMT
Don't add fuel to an already burning fire guy's.
|
|
|
Post by Gnorn on Feb 11, 2005 20:33:36 GMT
Hi there dudalb and welcome. Just a polite little nod of advise in your shell. Some of the guys here are realy nice guys until you slate Pendragon, they don't like it. You will be told off and shushed in the nicest possible way. If you carry on slating Pendragon even though everything you say maybe totaly valid there will be a call to arms and you will be flamed causing you to defend yourself until you either give up or the thread is locked. Apart from that free speech and healthy debate are welcome, to a degree. motile ;) Neh, we only flame Motile, Flynn and Rusti. You're welcome! ;-) -Gnorn
|
|
|
Post by dudalb on Feb 11, 2005 21:01:16 GMT
I am not so much trying to run down Pendragon, I just think they are not helping themselves by the total lack of information. I am not talking about new pictures, etc but stuff like Who will be distributing the film (and yes, they need a outside distributor to get into even art house theaters, a in house distributor from a small company cannot get the film into theaters) and a realistic release date. That is what gets to me. The March 3oth date is just totally unrealistic. Just admit that and mabye give an estimate for a new date and things will improve considerably. I an not so much trying to "slag" anybody, just introduce some realism into the proceedings.
|
|
|
Post by maniacs on Feb 11, 2005 22:34:35 GMT
Sentiments of most people here even to a hines supporter like me. In the last trailer I expected the release date to have changed but it hadn't. Seems he is confident he'll do it.
|
|
|
Post by dudalb on Feb 12, 2005 0:33:26 GMT
"Seems he is confident he'll do it. " No one else, aside from a few enthusisatic fanboys, thinks he can get it in the theaters by March 30th. Hell, it takes at least four weeks to set up a basic distriubtion , ie, book theaters, etc. not to mention minor things like advertising and marketing. And all indications are the film is some ways from a final cut. 98% chance you can kiss the March 3oth date goodbye.
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 2:19:39 GMT
dudalb, we have been over all of this with a fine toothed comb, you're a little late here. its best if we just leave this alone.
anywho, based on the new info that paramount won't even have MARTIANS in their WOTW film, well that just makes me ill to no end. i will put up with sub par effects. i will put up with a crap web page. i will put up with delays and lack of info. but i will NOT put up with a blatant raping of the core elements of the book to satiate the masses, and titled War of the Worlds, no less.
i just want to see this damn movie done by the book, and thats what pendragon is doing. who else is attempting an accurate production? nobody. if we want to see The War of the Worlds in our lifetimes done on the screen as close to the book as possible, then the pendragon film is our best hope... shoddy production values or not.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Feb 12, 2005 2:42:12 GMT
dudalb, we have been over all of this with a fine toothed comb, you're a little late here. its best if we just leave this alone. anywho, based on the new info that paramount won't even have MARTIANS in their WOTW film, well that just makes me ill to no end. i will put up with sub par effects. i will put up with a crap web page. i will put up with delays and lack of info. but i will NOT put up with a blatant raping of the core elements of the book to satiate the masses, and titled War of the Worlds, no less. i just want to see this damn movie done by the book, and thats what pendragon is doing. who else is attempting an accurate production? nobody. if we want to see The War of the Worlds in our lifetimes done on the screen as close to the book as possible, then the pendragon film is our best hope... shoddy production values or not. Well Mal I totally disagree with you about shoddy production values. I'd rather they didn't bother if the film is going to be like that. I think that would be bad for Wells memory and the books image. I totaly agree with you about Spielberg not having Martians though. What a firkin tw*t!
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 3:10:16 GMT
Well Mal I totally disagree with you about shoddy production values. I'd rather they didn't bother if the film is going to be like that. I think that would be bad for Wells memory and the books image. I totaly agree with you about Spielberg not having Martians though. What a firkin tw*t! i'm not saying shoddy production values are preferable by any means. my intention was to point out that the pendragon version is the only one that is going to be close to the book. and for better or worse (that includes shoddy production values) thats what we have to accept, if we want a movie that actually has martians in it (not counting waynes version, that one holds a special niche for all of us, plus its at least set in the original time and has MARTIANS in it)
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 12, 2005 12:44:27 GMT
Neh, we only flame Motile, Flynn and Rusti. You're welcome! ;-) -Gnorn Why thank you Gnorn, I will take that as a compliment
|
|
|
Post by maniacs on Feb 12, 2005 13:37:03 GMT
dudalb, we have been over all of this with a fine toothed comb, you're a little late here. its best if we just leave this alone. anywho, based on the new info that paramount won't even have MARTIANS in their WOTW film, well that just makes me ill to no end. i will put up with sub par effects. i will put up with a crap web page. i will put up with delays and lack of info. but i will NOT put up with a blatant raping of the core elements of the book to satiate the masses, and titled War of the Worlds, no less. i just want to see this damn movie done by the book, and thats what pendragon is doing. who else is attempting an accurate production? nobody. if we want to see The War of the Worlds in our lifetimes done on the screen as close to the book as possible, then the pendragon film is our best hope... shoddy production values or not. Gawd bless you mr.mal for saying wot I feel!
|
|
|
Post by maniacs on Feb 12, 2005 14:23:25 GMT
Note above! Mary Poppins, D1ck Van Dycke cockney accent by the way.
Sorry if that were bad but so was his!
|
|