The OFFICIAL Unofficial Achewood Message Board

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

@achewood Jumping jacks, flinging myself off of low decks, yelling into an empty bottle of carrot juice. Trying to get in writing mode.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: War of the Worlds  (Read 14121 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

pmcd9

  • Moderator
  • Dude since Knucklehead times
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 608
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 12778
  • The Kid is up to no good
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #30 on: July 14, 2005, 01:53:56 pm »
Just so you know that i'm not a Tom Cruise sychophant I want to inform you that I watched Minority Report last night and it was terrible.  Laughably bad.

~Paul
Logged
I hope I never have to refer to a scone in spoken conversation.

andalucia

  • Onstad's Left Shoe
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1680
    • View Profile
    • http://www.awesomeblurry.com
War of the Worlds
« Reply #31 on: July 14, 2005, 02:17:31 pm »
Quote from: "pmcd9"
Just so you know that i'm not a Tom Cruise sychophant I want to inform you that I watched Minority Report last night and it was terrible.  Laughably bad.

~Paul


Really?  I recall quite liking it, and I'm usually pretty picky about movies.  It's probably the Philip K. Dick quotient.
Logged
goose means greedy

jough

  • God's Own Dick
  • Administrator
  • Philippe is standing on it.
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 948
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6871
  • If you've got the time, we've got El Guapo.
    • View Profile
    • poetry archives
War of the Worlds
« Reply #32 on: July 14, 2005, 04:47:35 pm »
But you liked the laughably bad recycled War of the Worlds?

Minority Report is one of Spielberg's (and Cruise's) best films.  Think about what you're saying.
Logged

pmcd9

  • Moderator
  • Dude since Knucklehead times
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 608
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 12778
  • The Kid is up to no good
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #33 on: July 14, 2005, 05:37:09 pm »
Yeah, Minority Report sucked.  So we are supposed to believe that Tom Cruise character can jump off of a car speeding down [literally] the highway into the window of a highrise apartment and come out unscathed?  So these precogs have been floating in this sensory deprivation chamber for 6 years and yet they look like models.  And... And the one, Agatha, can still walk.  That's pretty amazing.  I would think she would need months of physical therapy before she took her first step.  Ok sure she can predict the future and all, but still it's way too convenient that everything falls perfectly into place for them when they were evading the precops [a giant bouquet of ballons, the umbrella].  Also, the other time Cruise is evading the cops is just totally ridiculous.  It was worse than a Stallone film.  So they gas up the cars before they even leave the assembly line?  Nonesense!  And in 2055 the Lexus is really ugly.  Ok that's just some of the nitpicky stuff, lets talk about the basic plot itself.  So there are these minority reports.  Why does that flaw kill the pre-cop program?  I can understand that the corruption and cover up would, but why not just throw out any judgement where a minority report occurs?  Otherwise the system worked, right?  Why the need to hide it?  And why was Cruise set up?  What was there to gain?  He was on board with the program, it was set to go national and nothing was standing in the way.  What did I miss?  Was it because he was a dope fiend?  Couldn't they simply have fired him for that?

It wasn't entirely bad though.  There were some suspenseful parts.  I felt empathy for the precogs.  How did they get away with basically enslaving them?  That wasn't really covered.

~Paul
Logged
I hope I never have to refer to a scone in spoken conversation.

mudokon

  • Scrambles the Dog
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #34 on: July 14, 2005, 05:48:34 pm »
What, like "War of the Worlds" was any better about that? Do you mean to say that it made more sense when the aliens used their CGI ray on every single person that Tom Cruised passed by on the way back to his house, while inexplicably avoiding Cruise himself? Or that he couldn't take the time to explain to his friend WHY he was stealing his car, but instead had 30 seconds to aimlessly argue with him over it? Or that Cruise didn't feel the need to overpower his son when he insisted upon following the aliens over the hill? etc
Logged

pmcd9

  • Moderator
  • Dude since Knucklehead times
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 608
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 12778
  • The Kid is up to no good
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #35 on: July 14, 2005, 06:04:24 pm »
Yes on all counts.  In MR he was the only one being targeted and they kept missing, in WOTW everyone was being targeted and he was one of the lucky ones.  About arguing with his mechanic friend.  I've been in that situation where time is critical and you don't feel you have the time for an explanation, you want to be taken at face value, yet you do get pressed for an explanation and it ratchets up the anxiety because there is a panic situation going on.  This has happened to me, exactly.  Not with aliens chasing me, but almost.  He let his son go because his daughter was being carried away by the helpful people, he had to save her.  And he had been fighting his son the entire movie and he was worn out.  It struck me as being very real that.

~Paul
Logged
I hope I never have to refer to a scone in spoken conversation.

AugustWest

  • Over Easy
  • Moderator
  • Dude since Knucklehead times
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 774
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 10549
  • Bulbous, also tapered.
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #36 on: July 14, 2005, 06:10:43 pm »
Quote from: "pmcd9"
This has happened to me, exactly.  Not with aliens chasing me,


Well, Thank God for that!
Logged
Infinitely vast, infinitely detailed.

pmcd9

  • Moderator
  • Dude since Knucklehead times
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 608
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 12778
  • The Kid is up to no good
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2005, 02:32:22 am »
Quote from: "jough"
Minority Report is one of Spielberg's (and Cruise's) best films.  Think about what you're saying.

Yeah I guess i'm out of phase.  You and I have pretty similar tastes in movies.  I remember looking at your wishlist and thinking it could be my wishlist.  So I consulted Roger Ebert who I almost always agree with and he didn't like War of the Worlds very much and he loved, LOVED Minority Report.  Some of the things he liked were scenes that really turned me off.  He did point out a few things I did like about the movie, but still I must be way off.  Hell that Wedding Crashers movie looked pretty good to me.  I didn't say anything because y'all all dismissed it.  What is wrong with me?  Is this is a cry for help?

~Paul
Logged
I hope I never have to refer to a scone in spoken conversation.

jough

  • God's Own Dick
  • Administrator
  • Philippe is standing on it.
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 948
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6871
  • If you've got the time, we've got El Guapo.
    • View Profile
    • poetry archives
War of the Worlds
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2005, 02:53:16 am »
I still believe Spielberg is one of our great cinema directors, regardless of whether one project fires on all cylanders or not.

Also, I think Wedding Crashers looks like it will be very funny.  I wasn't such a big fan of Anchorman or Dodgeball (or heck, even Old School) and generally I think Vince Vaughn would be improved by being beaten with a lead pipe (I think he didn't get that Swingers was MOCKING his character and he seemed to really internalise that kind of pseudo hipsterism - but he does play a good jackass, I'll give him that).

What was I saying?  Oh yeah, I predict I'll find Wedding Crashers really fun and enjoyable.

I also really really enjoyed Vin Diesel in "The Pacifier."   I thought it was a cute little movie and was not deserving of the critical thrashing it received.
Logged

jough

  • God's Own Dick
  • Administrator
  • Philippe is standing on it.
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 948
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6871
  • If you've got the time, we've got El Guapo.
    • View Profile
    • poetry archives
War of the Worlds
« Reply #39 on: July 15, 2005, 04:02:49 pm »
This is how Ebert starts his review of "Wedding Crashers":

Quote from: "Roger Ebert"
"Wedding Crashers" is all runway and no takeoff. It assembles the elements for a laugh-out-loud comedy, but it can't make them fly. There are individual moments that are very funny. But it takes a merciless focus to make a good comedy, and the director, David Dobkin, has too much else on his mind.


Now, in general I enjoy reading Ebert's reviews because he's a good writer and he has a lot of good things to say about film, even (or perhaps especially) those he dislikes.  But in general I won't take his or anyone's word as gospel.  I mean, Fantastic Four looked like it was going to be crappy from the trailers, and the critics just showed me that I was correct in my original assessment.

And granted, nothing really made me laugh in the Wedding Crashers trailer, which is unfortunate because they usually put the funniest things in the trailers, but still... there was something there... that made the movie seem like it may be enjoyable.

So I'm going to see it anyway.  I'm sure as hossSHIT not going to give money to see a remake of a classic that didn't need to be remade (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory).
Logged

V-Adore

  • Guest
War of the Worlds
« Reply #40 on: July 15, 2005, 05:42:23 pm »
My gut instict with "Wedding Crashers" is that they have a moderately funny concept but that that concept can't really support an entire film. I mean, what do you do with it? A series of skits? The trailer makes it look like most of it is just about the one wedding, and that seems like a recipe for not-terribly-interestingness.

I'm also glad I'm not the only one totally apathetic about "Chocolate Factory." The only draw appears to be Johnny Depp, an actor I find mildly amusing but not worth the hysteria. Is there any pressing reason for this movie to exist besides "profit?"
Logged

pmcd9

  • Moderator
  • Dude since Knucklehead times
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 608
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 12778
  • The Kid is up to no good
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #41 on: July 15, 2005, 05:54:14 pm »
When are they gonna get around to remaking The Wizard of Oz?

~Paul
Logged
I hope I never have to refer to a scone in spoken conversation.

AlohaDawg

  • Mod Squad
  • LAZARUS, Tasseled Loafer of the Powerful
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 79
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4184
  • Crawlin' back to prosperity
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #42 on: July 15, 2005, 06:02:05 pm »
Quote from: "V-Adore"
My gut instict with "Wedding Crashers" is that they have a moderately funny concept but that that concept can't really support an entire film. I mean, what do you do with it? A series of skits? The trailer makes it look like most of it is just about the one wedding, and that seems like a recipe for not-terribly-interestingness.

I'm also glad I'm not the only one totally apathetic about "Chocolate Factory." The only draw appears to be Johnny Depp, an actor I find mildly amusing but not worth the hysteria. Is there any pressing reason for this movie to exist besides "profit?"


Gene Wilder made a public statement to that effect as well - that the remake was made for profit purposes only. Johnny Depp responded to the statement asking Wilder if the original wasn't made for the intention of making money. It's a good point: Why else would a studio make a huge, expensive movie? Artistic Vision is a good thing but you will never get people to invest 100 million dollars in it unless they think it will make tons of money. Period. I'm sure some of the most artistic and awesome visions presented to Hollywood die because the accountants think they won't profit.

Did anyone here see What Dreams May Come? That could be the poster movie for taking a chance on an artistic vision. I don't think it did very well but it was damned pretty.
Logged

AlohaDawg

  • Mod Squad
  • LAZARUS, Tasseled Loafer of the Powerful
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 79
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4184
  • Crawlin' back to prosperity
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #43 on: July 15, 2005, 06:05:42 pm »
Quote from: "pmcd9"
When are they gonna get around to remaking The Wizard of Oz?

~Paul


They did. Michael Jackson, Diana Ross and Nipsy Russell were in it. Richard Pryor too.
Logged

CortJstr

  • Mod Squad
  • Philippe is standing on it
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 338
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 9820
  • Which gives us AN EXCUSE TO DRINK!
    • View Profile
War of the Worlds
« Reply #44 on: July 15, 2005, 06:44:13 pm »
I've read a couple places that Wilder retracted his statement. Here's one.
Quote from: "[url=http://www.411mania.com/movies/columns/article.php?columns_id=4124
The Sunday Punch[/url]"]Gene Wilder, Hollywood funnyman and star of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, has retracted his statements where he said that Tim Burton's remake was nothing more than a "pointless" financial decision. His previous criticisms of Johnny Depp in the role he made famous were now sung to this tune:

If I were going to cast the movie, I would cast Johnny Depp as Willy Wonka because I think he is wonderful. Mysterious - always - and magical.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
« previous next »