Friday, December 28, 2018

SCI-FI WAR MOVIE: War of the Worlds (2005)



                This is the first in my series of reviews of war movies in a sci-fi setting.  “War of the Worlds” was Steven Spielberg’s attempt to balance the alien ass-kissing of his “Close Encounters” and “E.T.”.  He was determined to make a scary aliens movie.  But with typical Spielbergian feel-goodies, of course.  He thought H.G. Wells’ novel was perfect for this redemption.  Screenwriters Josh Friedman and David Koepp made the wise decision to place the movie in the present.  That allowed them to tap into the 9/11 vibe.  Spielberg used five different sound stages for the film.  He also used cutting edge computer technology for the effects.  The movie was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Visual Effects (losing to “King Kong”). 

                The movie centers on Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) and his children. Since he is played by Cruise, he has to be a charming asshole.  He is divorced and immature.  His relationship with his kids will need a major crisis in lieu of family counseling.  Lucky for him, aliens invade on cue.  Well, they don’t really invade.  Spielberg did not want the cliched spaceships hovering.  Instead the aliens arise from pods buried underground for God knows how long.  Just like the terrorists of 9/11.  They have death rays that turn people to ash.  The ash reminds of the debris from the Twin Towers.  Ferrier and his kids escape NYC in the only functioning auto and vamoose on an interstate that is conveniently not blocked by stalled vehicles, allowing them to go 80 MPH.  This is the beginning of the head-scratching moments that will populate the film.  They head for Boston to return the kids to their mom.  Along the way they encounter the chaos of a greatly superior enemy pillaging America.  The Army (including the first cinematic use of real M1 Abrams tanks) cannot do anything against the alien tripods (a nice reimagining of Wells’ crafts) because of their force fields.  This does not stop civilians (including the son) from running toward a battle site in a particularly ludicrous scene.  The big reveal of the icky aliens occurs when Ferrier and his daughter are holed up with a lunatic survivalist (Tim Robbins).  His son has gone astray, as teenage boys are wont to do.  The aliens are worth the wait, as is what they are doing to people.  All seems lost for mankind since the aliens cannot lose.  But do you think Spielberg would let that happen?

                This is a stupid, stupid movie.  The fact that it was a blockbuster tells you a lot about the movie-going public.  People must have been attracted to the special effects, which are very good.  And Cruise was at his most charming with a cute little girl (Dakota Fanning) to protect.  These elements do not overcome the silliness of the plot.  Everything is predictable, especially if you know it’s a Spielberg movie aimed at a wide audience.  No significant character dies.  The family is reunited in one of the most treacly endings in sci-fi movie history.  The characters are all stereotypes, especially Ferrier.  His redemption arc is not exactly ground-breaking. 

                Since this is a war movie review, allow me to point out that the movie comes up way short in its depiction of war.  The military has no intelligent answer to the enemy.  Nukes are not used (even thought they probably would not have worked) and the only effective weapon is grenades in the hands of a father desperate to rescue his cute daughter.  The “combat” consists mainly of the aliens blowing shit up.  That’s cool, but it’s not exactly a fair fight.  As in many sci-fi war movies, mankind’s balls are pulled out of the fire by pure luck.  If we ever have a real alien invasion, don’t be confident based on what you have seen in movies.

GRADE  =  C-

10 comments:

  1. If you really, really think about it, aliens that have the capability to cross the space between the stars wouldn't NEED anything from earth. Unless How To Serve Man really is a cookbook. LOL

    The orginal WOW is much superior to this movie. Still has plot holes, but other than the wires that can be seen in the remastered copy, the effects hold up surprisingly well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's been decades since I saw the original, but even if I had never seen it I would be sure it is better than the remake!

      Delete
  2. I personally love it, though that is probably because it was the first version of WOTW I saw. I thought it fitted in with the post 9/11 world; besides, it is far better than the utter tripe that was the BBC British War of the Worlds that had a social justice warrior female character and an anti-British and anti-male subtext.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Pfft, you think this film was bad, you should watch the recent BBC version, which is the first British production of the story. It is so bad, you will be begging to watch the Cruise film instead (and this is coming from someone who loved it).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Spielberg's portrayal of the army in this is one of the best I have ever seen; using actual servicemen willing to risk their lives in an alien invasion. In the making of the features, it is wonderful seeing them acting friendly off-camera and poignant knowing that they were going to back to a real war happening elsewhere

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You haven't seen a lot of war movies, have you?

      Delete
    2. Pfft, you think this film was bad, you should watch the recent BBC version, which is the first British production of the story. It is so bad, you will be begging to watch the Cruise film instead (and this is coming from someone who loved it). The BBC British War of the Worlds had a social justice warrior female character and an anti-British and anti-male subtext.

      Delete
  5. Can't wait to see you tear apart the BBC War of the Worlds TV series.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya'll must think I have all the time in the world.

      Delete

Please fell free to comment. I would love to hear what you think and will respond.