|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Jun 5, 2005 17:27:50 GMT
Now that I've been able to watch the trailer again properly [ thanks Doctor ] I can obviously see the good and bad points much clearer. My summary is as follows -
GOOD
Costumes etc look very good Bits with the people on Horsell Common Music for the most part like the bit with the Martian blinking it's eyes The shooting star seen through the window Acting for the most part seems competent Still think that Pendragons HG WELLS TWOTW logo is spot on.
BAD [ or somewhere in between good and bad ]
Really don't know what to make of those tripods and they do look very similar to the ones in Cinefantastique magazine which most of us didn't like.
Some of the special effects don't appear up to par. As has been said the handling machine at the end appears to a bit stuck on and not intergrated into the film very well. Where's all the state of the art effects Hines promised - some of them don't appear that state of the art to me. Don't know about anyone else but I want fighting machines that will give films like THE MATRIX and Spielbergs fighting machines a run for their money. The tripods again look too much like what they most probably are - mechanical puppets.
The accents aren't terrible but they are slightly over the top and do sound like Americans putting on what they think [or are told] a posh English accent should be like.
If I was making this film I would have made it as grand and epic as possible especially after Hines has said that money was no obstacle to his effects artists. One thing that seems to be lacking with this is a sense of grandeur. For instance as discussed on another thread things like the cylinder appear too small. It looks like it could be a bit threadbare in places.
Hard to tell from the trailer but some of the scenery looks a bit too much like North America [ might be wrong though ].
Most of all - where's the WOW factor?
I'll add some more after repeated viewings.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Jun 6, 2005 0:55:14 GMT
Charles your very quiet out there. What's your verdict on the latest trailer? Has Hines been in touch at all?
|
|
|
Post by thed0ct0r on Jun 6, 2005 1:07:26 GMT
You're quite welcome, 'Star!
|
|
MikeH
Full Member
Posts: 80
|
Post by MikeH on Jun 6, 2005 1:19:51 GMT
Good :
There is a film! Looks pretty true to the book Acting seems OK to me Handling machine looks like a good design, if not that well implemented in that particular scene.
Bad :
The special effects from this, and some screen caps I've seen look pretty bad. As I said elsewhere it looks like a computer game cut-scene in some places. Don't particularly like the fighting machine design. Looks a bit half-arsed in some places, the cylinder rolling towards the house, looks like it's just a house, a field and a cylinder, and that's it... thought it landed in a suburban sreet.
|
|
|
Post by Charles on Jun 6, 2005 4:07:01 GMT
Charles your very quiet out there. What's your verdict on the latest trailer? Has Hines been in touch at all? I liked it. The film seems to be exactly what I thought it would be and proves that a Wells novel can be filmed in its original context. Perhaps just as importantly, this entire episode has shown there is an audience eager for these kinds of films - though whether or not the power elite in Hollyweed will pay attention to all this remains to be seen...I haven't forgotten they know best. I have heard from Hines recently, yes.
|
|
|
Post by BrutalDeluxe on Jun 6, 2005 5:29:25 GMT
The visual effects are a mixed bag. Some of them are really good, some are glaringly bad. I don't think they will hamper my enjoyment of the film much but it is interesting to see such a variance in the finished product. I showed the trailer to my brother who studied computer animation, etc and he had a similar reaction. During some of the scenes he went "wow" and others he pointed and laughed.
Call me crazy but on the whole I really like what I have seen of the acting. I think the bloke who plays the narrator does a really good job. He seems to display a similar range of emotions that are conveyed through the text.
The scene with people boiling alive in the river at Shepperton is strangely disturbing.
|
|
|
Post by HTT on Jun 6, 2005 9:32:34 GMT
[glow=purple,2,300]The more I watch the trailer, the more I like it! Some FX are a bit shoddy - they remind me sometimes of video segements from games like 7th Guest or Phantasmagoria - even some episodes of Babylon 5! However, that doesn't make it bad to watch, more fun if anything!
Once thing tho' - is this a new trailer with the completed FX, or is it the one from months ago that was pulled because of the Tsunami? I remember people saying the Tsunami was a poor excuse to delay the trailer, but after seeing those shots, I cann see why Tim held it back. There's also a shot of the HM approaching from a green background - looks like a greenscreen shot that hasn't had the background composited in.
Anyway, apart from the writer squatting ludicrously in the road, and not being seen by the HM, I don't see anything really bad about it! [/glow]
|
|
|
Post by themaster on Jun 6, 2005 10:19:47 GMT
If this was any other film based on any other book that trailer would have been ripped to shreds. It was ludicrous from beggining to end. The blinking stop motion martian did make me laugh though...
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Jun 6, 2005 10:26:33 GMT
The blinking stop-motion Martian was tres cool! "More cheese, Grommit?"
But yes, I agree, any other subject and that trailer would have been mincemeat. Having said that, though, it is 'War of the Worlds' (albeit a really amateurish version) and so I for one am prepared to have a look. And a laugh.
|
|
|
Post by HTT on Jun 6, 2005 11:57:55 GMT
[glow=purple,2,300]I love that martian! Specially the shot of him waving thru' the window!
I suspect it won't be the spectacular adaptation I was after, but I'll really enjoy it due to dodgy FX, hammy acting, unintentional double entendres and corniness. It will probably become a well loved Kult Klassic along with Attack Of The Killer Tomatoes and Plan 9 From Outer Space. Godawful films, but curiously entertaining!! [/glow]
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Jun 6, 2005 18:09:44 GMT
Hmm....I saw the CGI Thunderchild and other screen caps before they were removed from Anthonys' site. What struck me, along with the trailer, was that they were so inconsistent. Along with some of the artillery shots (pardon the pun), the full Martian image looked great, but the Thunderchild was so inept, it would have looked out of place on an early Playstation One game.
I wonder if the film was rushed out with some minimally completed effects sequences in order to jump on the Cruise bandwagon. Perhaps Hines and Co. would have liked more time to complete the film to a more professional standard, as it appears in places they were capable of doing, but were forced to jump the gun to maximise sales.
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Jun 6, 2005 18:15:18 GMT
Or we complained so much he released it how it is.
................................................................................................ Or not.
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Jun 6, 2005 19:08:29 GMT
Or his main sfx bod had to go back to college, vacation over. Or he simply ran out of money, with no prospect whatsoever of any more forthcoming. Frankly, Hines's 'studio' is so far off the radar in terms of professionalism that I imagine he just got some mates to do technical stuff. Fair play to them for what appears, in effect, to be a very long fan film, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking that Hines, 'given a bit more time' (why? He's had five bloody years so far as it is) would pull something better out of the bag.
No, accept it for what it is - the 21st century equivalent of Plan 9, and enjoy it. I've ordered it, I'll watch it, I'll probably even have fun doing so (though I balk at 3 hours running time - that stinks of an inability to pace and edit) - but I ain't going to pretend that this is the work of some frustrated auteur-savant.
|
|
|
Post by Ashe Raven on Jun 6, 2005 19:55:36 GMT
I've ssen far far worse than this in terms of productionand even trailer value
And far far worse than Plan 9 to be frank, so I don't quite see how you come to that conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by jackson on Jun 6, 2005 20:21:53 GMT
good points . . . . . . . .it made me laugh bad points . . . . . . . . its S!*t
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Jun 6, 2005 20:23:26 GMT
I've ssen far far worse than this in terms of productionand even trailer value And far far worse than Plan 9 to be frank, so I don't quite see how you come to that conclusion. It's the grand claims Hines has made that's the problem. If he'd been straight from the beginning that it was a straight to dvd low budget flick people would have known what to expect more.
|
|
|
Post by jackson on Jun 6, 2005 20:25:10 GMT
iagree here here, ireckon he has just repackaged the Tripods (bbc 80's tv show) but with an on screen adonis antony piana
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Jun 6, 2005 21:26:58 GMT
And far far worse than Plan 9 to be frank, so I don't quite see how you come to that conclusion. I was trying to be kind so as not to get slagged off as a perennial Hines Hater. ;D I'm not surprised it's worse than Plan 9, bad CGI is always infinitely worse than bad miniatures (even paper plate miniatures!).
|
|
|
Post by WaverBoy on Jun 7, 2005 17:39:33 GMT
Actually, they weren't paper plate miniatures...that's a myth, unfortunately perpetuated by the excellent (if largely fictional) Tim Burton film ED WOOD. They were flying saucer model kits.
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Jun 7, 2005 19:48:46 GMT
I know, they were, I believe, Lindberg kits, among the earliest plastic model kits made.
But even a paper plate on a string is better than crap CGI...
|
|