Well its not that its different from the book. That really doesnt bother me, the Pal film was radically different and I still think its better.
And yes, you have to suspend disbelief, but you should only be asked to do so for certain things, and for things that are to some degree possible.
Really, we need to consider that some of my favorite Sci-Fi is Battlestar Gallactica (Remake), The 4400 and Stargate SG1, and that my favorite is Firefly (I cant wait for Serenity, by the way. I went to the convention last year and it was amazing). And then consider that there all fairly plausable (Except some of the episodes of SG1) Sci-fi, and take into account that I just didnt find the way they arrived realistic.
Different opinions on whats realistic and all.
I just cant believe that in a film that tries to keep itself grounded in reality - sometimes to its own harm - can ask us to believe that they rode the lightening into the ground, to fighting machines that have been buried for millions of years, and then that they managed to do so and only make an hole about the side of my fist.
Yes, the million years is all conjuceture based on the talk of a lunatic (Ogilvy) but the tagline, the fact that we see nothing else to disprove this, and yes, the fact thats the only explination offered up, make this the one Ill bye. Make sense?
So yes, I just find it too far fetched to believe.
But that wasnt my only gripe with the film. There were other things.
Although the absence of cylinders, and the different explination for their arrival were given is so unrealistic did lower it somewhat.
My other problems on looking back were akin to the Editing, Ifound that some scene really didnt go anywhere, while other scenes kind of jumped about radically.
For example the entire Basement part of the film was good, but then it seemed to spread on far to long, with everything about the aliens crammed into this one bit. The Red Weed, the 'Red Mist', and the aliens themselfs.
While at the end we jumped from near death in the basket, to walking along to Boston.
And then, dont get me started on the characters. Yes, they were good for what they are, but they were still sterotypes.
Ray was the poor father who, through out the course of the film leans about his children, and how to be the hero. Oh, and hes devoiced while his wife has remarried and is pregnant.
Robbie was the rebelious young son, who doesnt obey his father. And then add to that the seemingly reasonly way he wants to fight, and he just turns into the movie sterotype.
Rachel, the young girl who is wise beyond her years. She helps her father as much he helps her, and by the end of it shes responsible for showing him how to be a good dad.
Their were other things I had problems with.
The first person narration of the film seemed to hurt it. Yes, Im not saying I want ID4, I hate that film. But really, no one can deny that a Thunderchild would have ruined the film, or that seeing oer the hill wouldnt have been a good pay off for the excellent build up they made to it.
Then we had the aliens, which, apart from looking like ID4 rip offs wernt very scary. And yes, I see why they would do this. Its the idea that something so seemingly 'cute' looking could do so much damage and chaos, but they just lacked any flair of design, and where akin to the usual alien nonsence we get. Compared to H. G. Wells' description, or even Otto, I thought they were poor, and the film never really recovered the sense of dread after seeing them just stood around looking at random things.
Then, the stupidity of the camera bugged me. Was it unable to hear? Yes. Of course it was, and why? Does this really make sense for an advanced race? Now, some people have aruged that they cant hear, and comunicate via their minds, like the book. Now this I could buy, but they can clearly hear the sound of the Tripod call them, rather convienently out of the basement.
They I had problems with it being baffled by a reflective surface aswell.
I had problems with the sheilds seeming like a lazy plot device as to why we cant beat them, and also the fact that, while birds cant make it through the sheilds, until their down, that the tripod can walk inbetween building, and trees, and water, without pushing it aside. Does that make sense? It does to me.
The entire film also, to me, lacked any sense of good direction, except for up to the scene in the parents house. This, I thought was the last really good part of the film, as, after that Speilberg just seemed to be going through the paces of it all. At no point after that did I go "Wow" from watching this film - again another example of how the first person adderance to the story ruined it for me.
The ending also I thought was terrible.
Now, let me tell you why -
Robbie. Yes, its like when the Narrator was reunited with his wife and all, but then, no it wasnt. The Narrators wife supposidly fled by sea, or atleast she didnt run into a major battle, only to have a flaming tripod lift itself up in the spot they were only secounds previously. It took out the feelings of loss in the film, of death and pain. And it all made it seem just a little too easy. What I wouldve prefered is to find Robbie in the basket, and for him to be crazy, like the Artilleryman, spend about half hour worth of the film in the basket, with Robbie telling his father the plans he has for a Utopian future and then have Robbie be the one who takes the grenades into the Tripod. This is off the top of my head, so it might not be very good.
Then, at the very end I woulve prefered a little more of a closing narration. Maybe one that showed celebrations and Ray and his family united properly.
Maybe have Ray and Rachel go through a destroyed Boston, the invaders dying around them, small battles between Tripods and the army, and then to have Ray find his ex and all the others in a refuge camp. Maybe a church, or school - whatever. But the ease at which he just walked up to their completly untouched street and found them seemed almost lazy.
Back to the narration... I wouldve prefered something more similar to Jeff Waynes. Maybe showing a Tripod made into a monument for the dead, almost like the WWII graveyard (Im sorry if thats an offensive name I dont know its actual one) with white crosses for thousands of dead on a massive feild.
And end with the Narration of - Does the future belong to us, or too the Invaders?
So, thats the reasons I didnt like it, Im sure theres more, like the rather poor way that people exploded into dust - which to me took away the horror of seeing the dead littering the street - which couldve been an equally powerful scene to the bodies on the river. The way that a few soldiers could hold back the crowd of people wanting to get on the ferry, when previously people had all but torn eachother apart for Rays car. The way Rays car was undamaged by the plane crash when everything else ws destroyed.
But there arguements that I feel dont need to be as explained as the others.
Sorry for the typos by the way, I know there will be hundreds
- Marcus