|
|
Post by recumbentrider on Jun 6, 2005 23:56:01 GMT
I have a feeling that for most of you that have not seen it, this film is 'critic proof' enough that you want to see it no matter what anyone says. I know I still wanted to see it after seeing the trailers, and after reading a lot of other people's commentary on the trailers and stills. (I know some of you have been questioning Pendragon's wisdom in even releasing trailers. After having seen the film, I firmly believe that the trailers did make this film look far better and far more interesting than it actually was, at least for me!)
I also read a few comments in this thread comparing the special effects in this movie with the George Pal War of the Worlds, Space 1999, the original Star Trek series, etc. In my opinion, the effects in any of these productions was far better that anything in Mr. Hines' War of the Worlds.
Even after saying all of this, I would still like to tell everyone on this board that if you want to see this film, by all means do so. Most of you have been following this project for so long, you deserve to see what the end product looks like. Although I think that most of you won't like it, a few of you might. My opinion of this film is negative, but the first person to review the film on this board thought it had some redeeming qualities, so there is at least one person who found it entertaining. Even if you end up not liking the film at all, your curiosity will have been satisfied, and you will almost certainly get a few laughs out of how silly a lot of this film looks. I recommend that if you can watch the film with other War of the Worlds fans, you could probably have a good time making fun of the film together, if nothing else. I know this is not the sort of entertainment most of you hoped for from this film, but I say take what you can get! Just be sure if you get together with other fans to watch this thing, be sure to have plenty of beer!
|
|
|
|
Post by TOMAHAWK on Jun 6, 2005 23:56:42 GMT
We must cast out the demon called Nerfy ...........cos he is scaring me.....we must clenze him by smearing him in marmite , cutting of his head, and scooping out his body, and filling it with mashed potatoe and leaving it out in the garden to be feasted upon by Hedgehogs ans squirrals and other cute fluffy things for a period of 2 weeks. Only then will he be cleanzed... if not all together lemon fresh, alive or in one piece ..but you cannot have everything, or something
|
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Jun 7, 2005 0:04:18 GMT
Hey, Tomahawk!
I don't let just anyone smear me with Marmite you know.
All the rest of that stuff is old news.
Been picking Hedgehogs out of various places for weeks.
|
|
|
|
Post by recumbentrider on Jun 7, 2005 0:50:56 GMT
I hope it is a promo, but I somehow really doubt it. Why post a 190 min. promo. Then again with Mr. Hines, nothing would suprise me. If the DVD I watched yesterday was a 'promo', it was undoubtably the worst 'promo' of all time, and has strongly surpassed all of Pendragon's 'negative marketing' to date. In spite of everything, I believe the DVD that it out there is the 'finished product'. |
|
|
|
Post by BrutalDeluxe on Jun 7, 2005 1:16:40 GMT
Just be sure if you get together with other fans to watch this thing, be sure to have plenty of beer! Now there is something we can all enjoy! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 7, 2005 5:22:53 GMT
On a different note: anybody remember Space Truckers with Dennis Hopper? It also had poor effects, poor acting and a poor script, but it is a very enjoyable film to watch. -Gnorn Yeah, that was a fun film! Sometimes a bad film can be fun when the people in it don't take it seriously and have fun themselves. Fun can be infectious. I enjoyed "The Barbarians" for the same reason. Pendragon's WotW, OTOH, takes a very serious approach... which makes the unintentional humor even more embarrassing. |
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 7, 2005 5:33:48 GMT
Then there's the Space 1999 episode where Maya transforms into a shoe in order to trap a deadly Cobbla monster which terrorizes Moonbase Alpha <snip> Or did I dream that? Musta dreamt it, Nerfy. I've seen a few "Space: 1999" episodes, and they weren't nearly that well written! <Lensman ducks...> |
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 7, 2005 5:42:41 GMT
I also read a few comments in this thread comparing the special effects in this movie with the George Pal War of the Worlds, Space 1999, the original Star Trek series, etc. In my opinion, the effects in any of these productions was far better that anything in Mr. Hines' War of the Worlds. Absolutely! The FX in George Pal's "War of the Worlds" were cutting-edge for the time, and I think most of the film still stands up well today. Anyone who thinks Pendragon's WotW effects are, overall, better than Pal's... hasn't seen Pendragon's movie yet. Yeah, much of the tripod animation was okay, and many of the shots of just the legs were very good. But I think the tripod animation was stop-motion using models-- not the terrible CGI which is so pervasive in Pendragon's WotW. How I wish they had used a model (instead of CGI) for the Thunder Child! |
|
|
|
Post by obiwanbeeohbee on Jun 7, 2005 6:04:40 GMT
My intro to WOTW was the Bell Records High-Camp Adventure Series vinyl childrens' album in 1968 when I had just turned 8. I have since gone on to collect 5 copies of the novel from various publishers plus 2 e-book versions, 2 different CD versions and 3 different cassette recordings of the 1938 "panic broadcast" including the 1988 50th Anniversary MetaCom documentary, 2 VHS and 1 DVD version of the 1953 George Pal/Cecil B. DeMille movie (Yes, I said Demille. Check out the full credits at IMDB), a cassette recording of the Hollywood Radio Theater version from 1954 starring Dana Andrews, the Classics Illustrated comic and the Holmsten/Lubertozzi encyclopedia of all things WOTW. I know I will see the Spielberg/Cruise movie on the opening night and I will buy the Asylum version as soon as it is available. I have been looking forward to a true to the novel version for 35 years or so. I have played the scenario in my head dozens of times, usually in B&W and with Malcolm McDowell and David Wayne as the Writer and Ogilvie. The Hines version isn't quite what I'd hoped for, but it comes pretty close. It is a shame that the effects and green-screening are so poorly done. I hope that somebody bankrolls a project (Sci-Fi Channel/Studio Canal, are you listening?) that takes the Hines film and cleans up the effects and re-edits it into a mini-series. This version deserves a chance to be seen, and collected, by true War of the Worlds fans, but those of us who have been waiting this long for a true to the novel movie deserve a better showing. I liked this film and will probably watch it many more times, but like so many here are saying, the lousy CGI and green-screening are quite distracting.
As I watched the first 20 minutes or so, I started to imagine Sci-fi Channel grabbing this and showing it over a couple nights. I predict it will happen soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Kellogs on Jun 7, 2005 9:10:01 GMT
no way i just noticed that i am a junior member never mind, it will grow with vigorous exercise... |
|
|
|
Post by HTT on Jun 7, 2005 9:41:29 GMT
[glow=purple,2,300]That's what I'm resigning myself to - Fun, laughable tripe!
I don't think the DVD reviewed are promos - I'm open to the idea that they were sample prints to test the menus/chapters etc, and some fool sent 'em out the door (or sent the wrong print for pressing). Whatever the case, the DVD WILL be worth buying for:
# A curio in the WOTW collection
# #Something you can bung on the PC and finish the FX off to your liking
# Good for a laugh and entertainment
# It's only $10.49 - it's not like it's expensive!
You never know - it could be so bad it becomes a cult classic - inspiring others to remake it. After all, Attack Of The Killer Tomatoes in currently being considered for a remake!! [/glow]
|
|
|
|
Post by jackson on Jun 7, 2005 10:17:29 GMT
either way Hines will make his money (for old rope) at leaast he's given us the gift of laughter.
|
|
alabaster
Full Member
Watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's...
Posts: 112
|
Post by alabaster on Jun 7, 2005 11:07:30 GMT
I think everyone's missing a fundamental point here.
If, when travelling through some forgtten Midwestern corn town, we stumble upon a travelling carny, the paint peeling in tracks from the ancient billboards, their monstrous images fading into the rain-stained wood, do we really trust the man in the dusty black cape and battered top hat as he informs us that the funhouse we are about to enter is the next level in terror, a descent into the blackest pits of hell, the greatest experiment ever in controlled mass hysteria? Do we storm out and shout we were robbed when we find out it's a collection of broken mirrors set against a scratchy tape of emphesimatic 30-year-old houswives trying to pass off their hacking of last week's tar from their lungs as horrified screaming?
Of course we don't. We accept it with the same leap of faith that encourages us to crave the prize at the coconut shy, even when we know it will be in the jumble sale next week- it's all about the dream, reality ultimately doesn't matter.
So why the dissapointment now? One thing that has astounded me about the fans' expectations for this movie is that they seem to have mistaken the carny's dream for reality. They honestly believed this would be some kind of epic blockbuster, a masterful fusion of Merchant/Ivory and James Cameron, the vision of HG Wells resurrected, when it was fairly obvious from the get-go that this was going to be a low-budget genre effort from an unknown director/producer, with a completely novice cast, working in a dialect most of them are obviously unfamiliar with.
By the standards of low-budget sci-fi, it actually looks rather good; by any other standard, it looks like a dull, turgid, badly acted school play. Why would you expect it to be anything else?
|
|
|
|
Post by tinckelly on Jun 7, 2005 11:47:40 GMT
If I go into a burger bar, pay £1, and get served a nuts-burger, then I get what I deserve.
If I go into what I'm told is a 5 star restaurant, pay £10, and get a nuts-burger, then I have been had.
This is the point that some people here have never got. It's not about knocking some guy who none of us have ever met. Why would we do that? It's about trying to draw attention to the fact that people are being had.
Those of us who want a great period WOTW have lost out, and Hines will walk away with a good chunk of money.
What I'm waiting for now is the excuses. I suspect those will be more entertaining than the film itself.
|
|
SEAN
Full Member
Posts: 146
|
Post by SEAN on Jun 7, 2005 12:38:19 GMT
Do you think that if Mr Hines had said originally that he was working on a next to nothing budget, with a cast with little experinece, and that he hopes to make a film that represents the story as best as he possibly could that peoples opinions of the film/or of him would be much different?
As far as I can tell, and this is probably old news, the worst thing he appears to of done (not counting dodgy effects etc), is that he has alienated the fan base which he set out so early on in the project to please.
|
|
|
|
Post by HTT on Jun 7, 2005 12:42:37 GMT
[glow=purple,2,300]Alabaster: The main reason that we're disappointed is because the film is unfinished on release. All the reviews have said that the thunderchild sequences are more pre-viz: Flat, unshaded textureless pre-renders. The Carny may say "See the bearded lady" - but we know the Carny will have made some effort to stick hair on a chin, however unconvincing. The equivalent with Pendragon is seeing the bearded lady holding a piece of triangular piece of black card over her chin.
Tink is correct - Despite Hines big promises on the FX, we expected (at most) a duff low-budget film with adequate FX - not brilliant, but passable to make the movie work. The reviews infer the Thunderchild FX are not even remotely passable.
When you see the trailer for Mirrormask, on a budget of $4 million - there is simply no excuse for not completing a simple Ship render! THAT's why we're disappointed. [/glow]
|
|
|
|
Post by HTT on Jun 7, 2005 12:58:03 GMT
[glow=purple,2,300]Vastly! We would have been much more supportive. We may have concerns that a next-to-nothing budget could create the FX required, but a lot more people would have been behind it for the honesty factor alone. Some would even volunteer to help out!
However, all this would not change peoples opinion of the finished film - you do NOT expect a finished film to contain pre-textured CGI in one of the iconic moments of the movie.[/glow]
|
|
|
|
Post by Balrog on Jun 7, 2005 13:00:50 GMT
Do you think Hines really had such a huge budget but decided to get wasted instead and when he woke up from his drink/drug filled binge he thought, damn I've got to make a film out of this but we only have $5 left...
Is Antony Pirahna or whatever his name is more the equivalent of Oliver Reed then Al Pacino?
Maybe we should all get drunk before we watch it, it might be much more enjoyable.
New drinking game: Take a swig of lager everytime you see a crap effect...
This post was sponserd by Stella Artois - feeding Mr Hines imagination for months..........
|
|
|
|
Post by tinckelly on Jun 7, 2005 13:03:03 GMT
I agree.
It's incredible the level fan films have reached.
I for one, would have been totally supportive if his attitude had been, "I've got really limited funds, and I'll do the best job I can, but don't expect miracles for 500K". Instead he went on and on about $10m masterpieces, conspiracies by the studios, definitive Wellsian version, matrix-level effects etc.
That gave me the hump.
|
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Jun 7, 2005 13:05:11 GMT
I agree. It's incredible the level fan films have reached. I for one, would have been totally supportive if his attitude had been, "I've got really limited funds, and I'll do the best job I can, but don't expect miracles for 500K". Instead he went on and on about $10m masterpieces, conspiracies by the studios, definitive Wellsian version, matrix-level effects etc. That gave me the hump. exactly. |
|
