|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Jun 9, 2005 18:19:33 GMT
This thread is a companion thread to the Movie Reviews Only thread.
Here you can comment on other's reviews.
Please state clearly which review you are talking about and above all, keep this on topic. As with the other thread, OT comments will be removed.
|
|
|
|
Post by neuronomad on Jun 9, 2005 18:49:30 GMT
I would like to agree with Wargasm when he said in regards to the Thunderchild scene: "
here is the scene when the ship is sinking and two Lego men are sliding down the railings! This whole sequence will have you laughing so much you'll forget the next 30 minutes of the film"
When I saw the Lego men (as Wargasm call them) falling (or better yet floating) down the railings of the Thunderchild I thought I was going to wet my pants. I hadn't had a good laugh in a long time.
I think this movie's classification should be move from Sci-Fi to Comedy, because it sure is comical.
|
|
|
|
Post by neuronomad on Jun 9, 2005 18:53:09 GMT
Quoting Lensman's review:
"But all this truly pales in comparison to the grade-Z "special effects" (...or not-so-special effects). Most of the CGI shots in this movie-- and there are a lot of them-- are unfinished, untextured, and monochrome, and lacking the level of detail usually seen in CGI shots."
You are right Lensman, clearly they didn't either care or try to finish most of the CGI effects. Another think that hasn't been mentioned is how bad the shadowing is, or the lack thereof.
I honestly thought one of the scense with the worst CGI in it was right after we see the Curate for the first time and the Narrator is pointing out the British camp. It does truely look like something a ten year old would make with Microsoft Paint.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 9, 2005 19:36:26 GMT
I would like to agree with Wargasm when he said in regards to the Thunderchild scene: "
here is the scene when the ship is sinking and two Lego men are sliding down the railings! This whole sequence will have you laughing so much you'll forget the next 30 minutes of the film" I only spotted one "Lego man" (aptly named!) floating down the deck of the sinking ship, and it was so vague that even looking closely at my TV I couldn't be sure that's what it was supposed to be, so didn't mention it in my review. Perhaps it's clearer on a computer monitor. |
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Jun 9, 2005 22:21:58 GMT
What was the music like anyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 9, 2005 23:17:23 GMT
Very good in the opening, and never bad, but it did become repetitive in places, and there were sequences with no music at all. I would guess that Hines couldn't afford a full-length score (surprise, surprise). Others have complained that at times the music was too loud to hear the dialogue. I didn't have that problem, but then I have an audiophile-quality set of speakers in my home theatre system. I wonder if those who couldn't hear it properly were playing it on their computer and listening to small computer speakers.
|
|
|
|
Post by recumbentrider on Jun 10, 2005 0:44:10 GMT
One common idea that permeates most of the reviews is that this movie looks very 'unfinished'. Based on this view, I would like to ask the group a serious question; if this movie were 'finished', would it be any good? Could the film we saw on the DVD be salvaged, and if so, what would it take? And if the movie can be salvaged, do any of us think that Tim Hines' has the will and the means to do it?
For my part, I did not think very highly of much of the acting. This would be very difficult to 'fix' without filming much of the movie over again, which I don't think will happen. However, if the movie were edited properly, and if the effects were completed, I think this could be turned into at least a "B" movie. From the 'Chrome' trailer, we can see that Mr. Hines at least has some access to people who can do special effects and CGI properly. And although the music may have seemed out of place at times, I thought this movie at least had decent music. Finally, this movie does have one strength: it does follow H.G. Wells' original story better than George Pal's film (which I have enjoyed immensely, incidentally), or what we have seen of the Spielberg/Cruise film.
Since I personally know very little about film making and CGI, I don't know how scenes filmed in daylight can be fixed to look like they are taking place at night (or if this is even possible!), or how much time and money is involved with creating proper computer generated scenes such like the Thunderchild battle. I just cannot help buy wonder: is Mr. Hines' done with this movie, or will he try to fix it and release it again? And if he does, who will he work with?
|
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Jun 10, 2005 1:27:00 GMT
That's what puzzles me. Why put something out that's blatantly so unfinished especially when the Chrome trailer seemed to have some decent fx.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 10, 2005 2:39:11 GMT
For my part, I did not think very highly of much of the acting. This would be very difficult to 'fix' without filming much of the movie over again, which I don't think will happen. This is, indeed, the problem with any plan to turn this sow's ear into a silk purse. Is there really enough good material there that even a halfway-decent "B" picture could be salvaged? I think if one were to remove the more glaring faults, it would merely make some of the lesser faults more apparent. More than one reviewer has mentioned the out-of-period costumes and military uniforms. It's also been mentioned that when people are hit by the Heat Ray, they barely move around. And I had to laugh at the "poor orphan waif" refugee the Elphinstones picked up, who was neat as a pin and wearing a spotlessly white apron. Not exactly what a bedraggled, abandoned refugee waif should look like! What about Piana's mustache? Didn't you get tired of how fake it looked long before the 3 hours was up? I did. And what about the scenes left out? Can you imagine that Hines would make a 3 hour movie and we don't get to see and hear the haunting "Ulla! Ulla!" scene? And speaking practically, how likely is it that Hines would be willing to let go of his "baby"? Because clearly if it were to be re-done properly, Hines could not be allowed any creative control. Oh sure, wave enuff money under his nose and I'm sure he'd give it up. But who would want to re-do this film badly enuff to pay Hines' asking price? No, I think it best to consign Mr. Hines' laughable effort to the rubbish bin, and look forward to something new. What this picture *has* accomplished is that it has demonstrated there are a lot of people interested in seeing a decent period production of WotW. Hopefully someone will step up to the plate on that. And hopefully we won't have to wait until the European Union copyright runs out in... what is it, 2017? |
|
|
|
Post by timeship2 on Jun 10, 2005 2:45:54 GMT
One common idea that permeates most of the reviews is that this movie looks very 'unfinished'. Based on this view, I would like to ask the group a serious question; if this movie were 'finished', would it be any good? Could the film we saw on the DVD be salvaged, and if so, what would it take? And if the movie can be salvaged, do any of us think that Tim Hines' has the will and the means to do it? For my part, I did not think very highly of much of the acting. This would be very difficult to 'fix' without filming much of the movie over again, which I don't think will happen. However, if the movie were edited properly, and if the effects were completed, I think this could be turned into at least a "B" movie. From the 'Chrome' trailer, we can see that Mr. Hines at least has some access to people who can do special effects and CGI properly. And although the music may have seemed out of place at times, I thought this movie at least had decent music. Finally, this movie does have one strength: it does follow H.G. Wells' original story better than George Pal's film (which I have enjoyed immensely, incidentally), or what we have seen of the Spielberg/Cruise film. Since I personally know very little about film making and CGI, I don't know how scenes filmed in daylight can be fixed to look like they are taking place at night (or if this is even possible!), or how much time and money is involved with creating proper computer generated scenes such like the Thunderchild battle. I just cannot help buy wonder: is Mr. Hines' done with this movie, or will he try to fix it and release it again? And if he does, who will he work with? This was my view. It will never be a movie worthy of the theater, but if the CGI had been properly finished and they had not done so much bluescreening, I actually think it would have been an acceptable DVD for the money. As to the acting, while not great, I can get over that. It is as if he got bored with it, and it wasn't the labor of love that he would have us believe. |
|
|
|
Post by BrutalDeluxe on Jun 10, 2005 4:37:17 GMT
Perhaps in a year or so we may see the director's cut, which has finished CGI and is better editing. It seems clear to me that Hine's made a rod for his own back by making promises he couldn't keep. Once the heat of this travesty dies down he may revisit the film, tighten it up and re-release it as a solid B-movie, if it really is his baby. Personally I think any true fan of WOTW would not risk tarnishing it's legacy with a substandard homage. Then again it could be just wishful thinking.
|
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Jun 10, 2005 10:01:23 GMT
Wishful thinking.
Anyone who thinks that Hines will ever go back and smarten up this travesty of a film is living in cloud cuckoo land. It would just be so out of character for a man who has demonstrated consistently for some years just how unreliable, incompetent, and untrustworthy he is.
Face it, PP's WotW is all it ever will be, end of story.
|
|
|
|
Post by recumbentrider on Jun 10, 2005 16:56:18 GMT
And speaking practically, how likely is it that Hines would be willing to let go of his "baby"? Because clearly if it were to be re-done properly, Hines could not be allowed any creative control. Oh sure, wave enuff money under his nose and I'm sure he'd give it up. But who would want to re-do this film badly enuff to pay Hines' asking price? No, I think it best to consign Mr. Hines' laughable effort to the rubbish bin, and look forward to something new. What this picture *has* accomplished is that it has demonstrated there are a lot of people interested in seeing a decent period production of WotW. Hopefully someone will step up to the plate on that. And hopefully we won't have to wait until the European Union copyright runs out in... what is it, 2017? I agree that there is no chance that anyone else will pick up this movie to 'finish' it; I think if anyone does it, it would have to be Mr. Hines. In my opinion, whether he does it or not depends mostly on what it would cost to 'finish' the movie, and how much money the 'finished' movie could make. (You pointed out in your post that this movie proved there is some interest in a period movie version of War of the Worlds. This fact might provide some financial incentive.) If (the amount of money to be made)>(the amount of money needed to finish the movie) then I think there would be a good chance he would do it. Otherwise, just stick a fork in this turkey, because it is done. I do agree with you that this movie has problems that no amount of 'fixing' will solve. But at the same time, I wonder if a substantially improved version of this movie were to be released, how many of us would buy it? Obviously, we would all need solid proof that any re-released version of this film were indeed 'substantially improved'. But I have to say, if such a re-release were to happen, I would probably be crazy enough to buy it. |
|
|
|
Post by recumbentrider on Jun 11, 2005 2:51:50 GMT
From another thread.. Not being an *sshole or anything, but when do we get a review by anyone who's been here longer than 2005? Charles? Johan I'm very new to posting here, but I too am very much looking foward to hearing what you 'vetrans' that have been following this project for years will have to say about this movie. I think it is a shame that the so far this movie is available only in the US right now, and many fans in other parts of the world have to wait for it. I am sure this is hard for all H. G. Wells War of the Worlds fans, but it must be particularly difficult for the British fans; after all, that is where this war as we know it happened! Incidentally, I expect this board will become a very busy place in the next three weeks, with the release of the Asylum and Spielburg versions. I would also expect the membership of the board will grow considerably. |
|
Gray
Full Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by Gray on Jun 13, 2005 20:13:27 GMT
I've really been the victim of bad timing here. Work and travel took me away just as news was coming in that people were finding the Pendragon movie at Walmart. Was able to read the first review before I left (Tony?) but have been off the grid for over a week and missed out on all the fun. Just dropped into an internet cafe and read a few reviews. Ouch. I'll have an amazon copy waiting for me when I return home in another week, but it'll all be old news by then.
Damn.
|
|
|
|
Post by DaveJames on Jun 13, 2005 20:39:53 GMT
God, can you just imagine seeing this on the big screen? If you think the FX look cheap now... ;D
Actually I got my copy yesterday and watched about half of it. And honestly, as bad and amateurish as it clearly is.... part of me kind of admires it at the same time. When you consider that even your average, serial killer movie of the week probably has three times the budget that Hines had, it's quite an achievement to produce ANY faithful version of the book.
And it's obvious a lot of work went into this. In fact, for the most part I was able to overlook the shoddy FX (the same way I used to while watching Doctor Who as a kid), but for me the real problem is the editing. It's just slow and repetitive and all the different filters that were used kept getting on my nerves. If he had picked one and stuck with it the movie would have been much more bearable, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by obiwanbeeohbee on Jun 14, 2005 22:46:31 GMT
I watched the whole thing on the night of 6-Jun and kept thinking, "This could be a very good movie with some re-worked effects and tighter editing." It was obvious that nothing was left on the cutting room floor. Now that I've had a week to reflect and listen to the others in this forum, I think most are correct. It was a fair try, but stick a fork in it, cause this one is done. It would take some more live action shooting and a budget bigger than any self-respecting studio would be willing to shell out to fix all that is wrong with it. I think I'll just try and enjoy the parts I thought were good (there were some) and live with it, as is. I doubt that I will ever sit through the whole thing again, even on a bet.
|
|
|
|
Post by RossH on Jun 15, 2005 19:28:29 GMT
After watching the whole movie all the way through last night, I think my harshest comment about the movie is that it is just deadly dull. The acting is hit and miss and there are some cringeworthy effects, but if the story itself is compelling then as someone who grw up watching Dr Who in the early 70's (and quite enjoy watching them again today) I'm quite able to ignore those aspects.
But basically what we have here is a 3hr movie about 2 men (or 1 man and 2 women) in a nondescript forest, wandering about aimlessly with no real destination or purpose. I never once got the feeling the main characters were in any small villages, never mind towns or cities.
Sure, if all the 'fill' was cut out (there is no reason why this movie needed to be 3 hrs) and the effects redone then it would be more entertaining but, just as the actors needed some more direction, the effects in most cases could've been stock footage- they bore little if any relationship to what the actors were reacting to.
But for anyone to attempt a 'special edition' of this movie, they would pretty much have to recomposite every scene from the source material to fix some of the technical sloppiness (such as dropped frames or strobing when the camera pans- bad field order?) and tints that seem to have been done on a per shot basis, rather than consistantly over a scene.
It's too much work even to THINK what you'd have to do to make a better version...
|
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Jun 16, 2005 9:08:55 GMT
It's too much work even to THINK what you'd have to do to make a better version... Strangle Tim Hines, burn every copy of his DVD and start again. |
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Jun 16, 2005 9:48:34 GMT
Bit extreme McTodd, dontcha think?
Lets keep this thread On Topic please. It's for comments on reviews only, not how much you loathe Tim Hines.
Save that kind of thing for the other threads, if you really must do it.
|
|
