Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Jun 17, 2024 11:07 am



Reply to topic  [ 299 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
 War of the Worlds (2005) 

What grade would you give this film?
A 54%  54%  [ 59 ]
B 30%  30%  [ 33 ]
C 9%  9%  [ 10 ]
D 3%  3%  [ 3 ]
F 4%  4%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 109

 War of the Worlds (2005) 
Author Message
Mod Team Leader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:00 pm
Posts: 7087
Location: Crystal Lake
Post 
bradley witherberry wrote:
Okay. War of the Worlds review time. Hmmmm...

Damn it, but that Spielberg dude is the master of set pieces! He can create a moving tableau like no other director. I loved that bit where the church cracks in half! He can even sustain it for almost an hour when he's at his best (qv: opening battle sequence of Private Ryan).

But give this guy a whole movie (as the carte blanche he has been given since the 70's), and look at him slide...

Spielberg couldn't tell a whole two-hour story if his life depended on it. As a matter of fact, I gave up on caring about Spielberg and his characters at just about the one hour mark, and decided then and there to just enjoy the scenery. What a lame second half! The air just came rushing out of this hot air balloon and the whole flaccid enterprise came settling to the ground in a heap of tawdry folds. Yikes!

The one thing good I can say about it, is that the marketing campaign was superbly orchestrated. From Tom Cruise's so-called crazy outbursts, to the reminders of Scientology that somehow tied so well into the film - WOW! - whoever directed that campaign should be given the reigns in the next blockbuster summer flick - it'd go boffo deluxe!

I even felt bad for Dakota Fanning in this mess - gawd, she is capable of so much more - what a freakin' waste of talent - not to mention Tim Robbins - poor bastard...

This is a bad movie.

2 out of 5 (D+)


YHou cannot say that Spielberg cannot tell a 2 hour story. Look at every one of his films besides this one. Even taking away his 70's films, Raiders, E.T., Jurassic Park and his newer ones like SPR and Catch Me if you Can are all more than 2 hours and they are masterful. I think the mistake Steven made is that he followed the film right from the book and there were very little changes made. Not SS's fault, but that is Koepp and his ideas.

_________________
Brick Tamland: Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.
Ron Burgundy: Brick, I've been meaning to talk to you about that. You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:31 am
Profile WWW
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post 
baumer72 wrote:
YHou cannot say that Spielberg cannot tell a 2 hour story. Look at every one of his films besides this one. Even taking away his 70's films, Raiders, E.T., Jurassic Park and his newer ones like SPR and Catch Me if you Can are all more than 2 hours and they are masterful.

ET, Jurassic Park, and Saving Private Ryan would all be top examples, imho, of his inability to tell 2 hour stories. Even Raiders of the Lost Ark and Catch Me If You Can, while better told stories than the first three you suggested, once again depended on a series of strong set pieces to carry them...

Just thinking of Saving Private Ryan irritates me! Spielberg opens with the best combat sequence ever filmed, and then follows up with the most boring, meandering, sloppy stew of a war story ever directed...

War of the Worlds is more of the same.

I realize many people enjoy Spielberg's work, and the guy does know how to techniquely produce a movie, but I'm just a sucker for a well told tale. Story rules.


Last edited by Bradley Witherberry on Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:06 am, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:02 am
Profile
Mod Team Leader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:00 pm
Posts: 7087
Location: Crystal Lake
Post 
bradley witherberry wrote:
baumer72 wrote:
YHou cannot say that Spielberg cannot tell a 2 hour story. Look at every one of his films besides this one. Even taking away his 70's films, Raiders, E.T., Jurassic Park and his newer ones like SPR and Catch Me if you Can are all more than 2 hours and they are masterful.

ET, Jurassic Park, and Saving Private Ryan would all be top examples, imho, of his inability to tell 2 hour stories. Even Raiders of the Lost Ark and Catch Me If You Can, while better told tales than the first three you suggested, once again depended on a series of strong set pieces to carry them...

Just thinking of Saving Private Ryan irritates me! Spielberg opens with the best combat sequence ever filmed, and then follows up with the most boring, meandering, sloppy stew of a war story ever directed...

War of the Worlds is more of the same.


Well, I can't debate your opinion. E.T. is one of my fave films and Raiders is flawless....my opinion of course.

_________________
Brick Tamland: Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.
Ron Burgundy: Brick, I've been meaning to talk to you about that. You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:05 am
Profile WWW
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:18 pm
Posts: 1638
Location: Alderaan
Post 
bradley witherberry wrote:
Just thinking of Saving Private Ryan irritates me! Spielberg opens with the best combat sequence ever filmed, and then follows up with the most boring, meandering, sloppy stew of a war story ever directed...


What makes me mad about that scene is it's so historically innaccurate it's insulting. Sure, I am young but I still KNOW for a fact George Marshall did not send 8 or whatever men to save one guy on D-Day, I KNOW that battle was not them running and blowing up a fence in 30 minutes. If he wants to make a movie about D-Day, he should.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:50 am
Profile YIM WWW
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:18 pm
Posts: 1638
Location: Alderaan
Post 
I've been thinking lately and maybe the plot holes aren't so bad. And the ending, although short, and too "happy" of one, was still OK. For all we know the bacteria that killed them could've mutated the first second they came on earth and they didn't know. The movie was actually pretty tense through out and it's a Sci-Fi film so I will ignore some plot holes. I am raising my grade from a D + to a C.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 11:33 am
Profile YIM WWW
La Bella Vito
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 11:56 pm
Posts: 9146
Post 
baumer72 wrote:
bradley witherberry wrote:
baumer72 wrote:
YHou cannot say that Spielberg cannot tell a 2 hour story. Look at every one of his films besides this one. Even taking away his 70's films, Raiders, E.T., Jurassic Park and his newer ones like SPR and Catch Me if you Can are all more than 2 hours and they are masterful.

ET, Jurassic Park, and Saving Private Ryan would all be top examples, imho, of his inability to tell 2 hour stories. Even Raiders of the Lost Ark and Catch Me If You Can, while better told tales than the first three you suggested, once again depended on a series of strong set pieces to carry them...

Just thinking of Saving Private Ryan irritates me! Spielberg opens with the best combat sequence ever filmed, and then follows up with the most boring, meandering, sloppy stew of a war story ever directed...

War of the Worlds is more of the same.


Well, I can't debate your opinion. E.T. is one of my fave films and Raiders is flawless....my opinion of course.


I agree, they are both phenomenal films.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 11:36 am
Profile YIM WWW
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:18 pm
Posts: 1638
Location: Alderaan
Post 
Vincent wrote:
baumer72 wrote:
bradley witherberry wrote:
baumer72 wrote:
YHou cannot say that Spielberg cannot tell a 2 hour story. Look at every one of his films besides this one. Even taking away his 70's films, Raiders, E.T., Jurassic Park and his newer ones like SPR and Catch Me if you Can are all more than 2 hours and they are masterful.

ET, Jurassic Park, and Saving Private Ryan would all be top examples, imho, of his inability to tell 2 hour stories. Even Raiders of the Lost Ark and Catch Me If You Can, while better told tales than the first three you suggested, once again depended on a series of strong set pieces to carry them...

Just thinking of Saving Private Ryan irritates me! Spielberg opens with the best combat sequence ever filmed, and then follows up with the most boring, meandering, sloppy stew of a war story ever directed...

War of the Worlds is more of the same.


Well, I can't debate your opinion. E.T. is one of my fave films and Raiders is flawless....my opinion of course.


I agree, they are both phenomenal films.


Raiders is but E.T. is crap.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 11:39 am
Profile YIM WWW
Rachel McAdams Fan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am
Posts: 14544
Location: LA / NYC
Post 
This is my new favorite film of the year. Brilliant in every single way possible.

10/10 (A+)


Fri Jul 01, 2005 1:19 pm
Profile YIM
The Original
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 10:19 am
Posts: 9808
Location: Suisse
Post 
After some thinking I higher my grade to 6.9/10 (Nah it wont get 7). As I said some aspects are brilliant but then there is also such mediocre stuff. But I start to like the movie a bit more.

_________________
Libs wrote:
FILMO, I'd rather have you eat chocolate syrup off my naked body than be a moderator here.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:24 pm
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm
Posts: 8626
Location: Syracuse, NY
Post 
I didn't think it was a terrible film but I didn't think it was a good film either. I loved the first half of it, I thought that was great. Then when Tim Robbins came into the picture, I thought it got really stupid and boring. The aliens looked like shit too, the acting wasn't good at all, spare for Dakota and the guy. It was a fun time waster, not something I'd watch again. I say THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW is the better disaster movie, though I gave them the same rating.

5/10 (C-)

_________________
Top 10 Films of 2016

1. La La Land
2. Other People
3. Nocturnal Animals
4. Swiss Army Man
5. Manchester by the Sea
6. The Edge of Seventeen
7. Sing Street
8. Indignation
9. The Lobster
10. Hell or High Water


Fri Jul 01, 2005 6:55 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Commander and Chef

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 12:56 am
Posts: 30505
Location: Tonight ... YOU!
Post 
nothing about the film's look was bad. i thought for the first time, aliens were made to look good .. more than stupid faceless monsters ... when they showed their face, you could see some personality and each alien looked different from each other facially to some extent .. i thought that was good.


Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:24 pm
Profile WWW
Site Owner
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 1:09 pm
Posts: 14631
Location: Pittsburgh
Post 
They should have had different races of aliens ... you know ... like teletubies.

_________________
Image


Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:01 pm
Profile WWW
Sbil

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48626
Location: Arlington, VA
Post 
I loved it. It doesn't have the world's best screenplay and the ending is a bit flawed and nonsensical, but I found most of this film to be absolutely terrifying. The fear, paranoia and anxiety created in the original story are well presented here. The film also has some haunting imagery that many will find disturbing, which I can't say I was really expecting. This is actually more of a horror movie than anything else. Tom Cruise is fine as deadbeat dad Ray Ferrier. It won't go down as one of the actor's best performances, but he fills the role admirably. Uber-talented Dakota Fanning is given the shaft by the script; we've seen what she's capable of before (such as turning an absolutely horrendous movie like Hide and Seek into a passable one), but Rachel mostly just sits around and screams. I suppose Fanning does this well, but she is unfortunately not given that much to work with. Justin Chatwin makes little to no impression as Robbie. Tim Robbins supplies some very brief comic relief but the whole section in his basement felt somewhat unnecessary. Miranda Otto is vastly underused. Anyway, War of the Worlds' strength is not in its acting. Steven Spielberg effectively builds tension to heart-stopping levels during certain moments and many of the special effects are breathtaking. Terrific film. A-


Sat Jul 02, 2005 12:08 am
Profile
Hot Fuss

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:46 am
Posts: 8427
Location: floridaaa
Post 
Okay.

That's War of the Worlds. Okay. I felt like I was watching clips from dozens of other movies. I saw hints of Independence Day, Deep Impact, Signs.... dozens of movies.... I guess WotW was a fun action movie, with plently of tension, but not enough meat. It felt sort of lifeless, like Sky Captain (but that was popcorn fun, this was a little more serious). The acting is fine. Except Tim Robins. He spoiled the last act for me. The direction works. Everything works. But nothing stands out. Well, maybe that cool belch the aliens make does, but... meh.

I liked most of the action sequences, especially the look and feel of the ferry scene. Very cool. It had a great vintage feel to it. And the music was perfect during most of the movie.

I want to give the film an A for recreating the feel of those cheesy 50s SciFi Thrillers. I want to give it a D for the lack of substance and inability to be original. So, I'll settle for a B. What was the perfect SciFi movie was spoiled by it's own roots, really. For decades films have been inspired by vintage scifi, especially war of the worlds. It makes this true adaptation seem dull and ordinary, like the rest. Shame.


Sat Jul 02, 2005 12:10 am
Profile YIM WWW
The French Dutch Boy
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:28 pm
Posts: 10266
Location: Mordor, Middle Earth
Post 
Libs wrote:
I loved it. It doesn't have the world's best screenplay and the ending is a bit flawed and nonsensical, but I found most of this film to be absolutely terrifying. The fear, paranoia and anxiety created in the original story are well presented here. The film also has some haunting imagery that many will find disturbing, which I can't say I was really expecting. This is actually more of a horror movie than anything else. Tom Cruise is fine as deadbeat dad Ray Ferrier. It won't go down as one of the actor's best performances, but he fills the role admirably. Uber-talented Dakota Fanning is given the shaft by the script; we've seen what she's capable of before (such as turning an absolutely horrendous movie like Hide and Seek into a passable one), but Rachel mostly just sits around and screams. I suppose Fanning does this well, but she is unfortunately not given that much to work with. Justin Chatwin makes little to no impression as Robbie. Tim Robbins supplies some very brief comic relief but the whole section in his basement felt somewhat unnecessary. Miranda Otto is vastly underused. Anyway, War of the Worlds' strength is not in its acting. Steven Spielberg effectively builds tension to heart-stopping levels during certain moments and many of the special effects are breathtaking. Terrific film. A-


I'm very happy to hear you enjoyed it! I value your opinion a lot, as I find you have very similar tastes as me, and it's nice to hear the opinion of a female on here. I agree with pretty much everything except on Dakota Fanning. Yes, she was underused, but yet again I thought she did incredible. She nailed exactly how a girl that age would react; scream for mommy and nag, and Fanning continues to act more real than a lot of adult actors, in my opinion. No hints of fake/forced acting on her part, like most child actors. I think she is brilliant in that respect. Anyways, thanks for the comments. :)

PEACE, Mike ;)


Sat Jul 02, 2005 12:26 am
Profile
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 12:52 am
Posts: 25990
Post 
Can you imagine the aliens having sex with humans?

Kinda gives the term "foot up your ass" a whole different meaning.

And Libs, oh dear Libsina, you're so crazy. :roll: :fishing:

_________________
In order of preference: Christian, Argos

MadGez wrote:
Briefs. Am used to them and boxers can get me in trouble it seems. Too much room and maybe the silkiness have created more than one awkward situation.


My Box-Office Blog: http://boxofficetracker.blogspot.com/


Sat Jul 02, 2005 1:19 am
Profile WWW
Sbil

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48626
Location: Arlington, VA
Post 
Box wrote:
Can you imagine the aliens having sex with humans?

Kinda gives the term "foot up your ass" a whole different meaning.

And Libs, oh dear Libsina, you're so crazy. :roll: :fishing:


Sorry I didn't think it was a mediocre mess like you did. :razz:


Sat Jul 02, 2005 1:58 am
Profile
Award Winning Bastard

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am
Posts: 15310
Location: Slumming at KJ
Post 
I still think you'll drop your grade once you've reflected on it some more. :down:


Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:01 am
Profile
je vois l'avenir
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Posts: 3841
Location: Hollywood/Berkeley, CA
Post 
WOW. I just got back from the film and this is amazing. I was fine with the ending because every diaster film has a cheezy and stupid ending. I loved the special effects. Some of the best. I can see myself watching this over and over again. This ties with Batman Begins for the best of the year.

A

_________________
"Voici mon secret. Il est très simple: on ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux."

----Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (Le Petit Prince)

A Lonely Person is at Home Everywhere.


Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:31 am
Profile
je vois l'avenir
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Posts: 3841
Location: Hollywood/Berkeley, CA
Post 
MikeQ. wrote:
Yes, she was underused, but yet again I thought she did incredible. She nailed exactly how a girl that age would react; scream for mommy and nag, and Fanning continues to act more real than a lot of adult actors, in my opinion. No hints of fake/forced acting on her part, like most child actors. I think she is brilliant in that respect. Anyways, thanks for the comments.



I agree 100%. I think that Fanning was great in the film. that is exactly what someone in that situation would do. I love her. First noticed her in I Am Sam which was a great film btw.

_________________
"Voici mon secret. Il est très simple: on ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux."

----Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (Le Petit Prince)

A Lonely Person is at Home Everywhere.


Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:33 am
Profile
The Greatest Avenger EVER
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 18501
Post 
Maverikk wrote:
bABA wrote:
hmm ... i'm reading these reviews and i'm getting some vibe. maybe you guys can help me out.

The grades you all are giving seem good ... B and above ... yet i'm detecting disappointment? Is it safe to say that most of you considered it a good movie but didn't live up to the expectations that one was lead to believe? Thanks.


This is nowhere near as good as Independence Day. There is no sense of joy that the aliens are defeated, because it's too poorly executed to celebrate. I gave it a B because I love the subject matter, and there was good stuff throughout, but there was also bad stuff. For instance, it wasn't too bad that Cruise just happened to get lucky and find the only car in the world that wasn't a military vehicle that would still run, but it was dumb that he also found one that didn't require gasoline, no matter how far he traveled. What the hell was that about? Sloppy stuff like that isn't my bag, and Spielberg is better than that.

The ending was pretty lame and anticlimatic. I would say that my fears about this film being rushed so they could make the July 4th date were confirmed.


Yeah, but when you point flaws out in this movie like this, hell, look at ID4 for a moment: Will Smith pulls the hatch off the Alien ship and punches an Alien in the head and says "Welcome to Earth" no more than just 2 scenes earlier when this thing was flinging Brett Spiner around the lab by his neck head 1st into the glass window in mid air??? :-k This thing would've ripped Will Smith in half not to mention the Quarantine factor would've ben in question after coming in contact with this thing.. Oh and here's another classic ID4 Nitpick moment: Will Smith and Goldblum crash this Alien ship into the desert, the military races toward the crash to see if they were Ok and Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum are seen through the Binoculars swaggering as they walked like nothing ever happened to them.. Not a mark, blemish or even a cut or bruise.. :laugh: So enough of the WOTW nitpicks.. Both movies are Sci-Fi action and like with any Sci-Fi movie, there will always be disbelief, but it's the job of the moviegoer to suspend it long enough to enjoy it..

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dmXF3CE04A


This kills TDKR At the box office next summer.. Get used to this


Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:05 am
Profile WWW
Mod Team Leader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:00 pm
Posts: 7087
Location: Crystal Lake
Post 
Maverikk wrote:
I still think you'll drop your grade once you've reflected on it some more. :down:


The funny thing is, I am thinking of increasing my grade the more I think of it. I think wht casued me to drop my grade so much is the rushed ending. But is that really enough to drop the grade based on the first hour. Because that is some of the best film making I have ever seen. I am going to see it again, and make up my mind then.

_________________
Brick Tamland: Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.
Ron Burgundy: Brick, I've been meaning to talk to you about that. You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.


Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:32 am
Profile WWW
Mod Team Leader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:00 pm
Posts: 7087
Location: Crystal Lake
Post 
BKB_The_Man wrote:
Maverikk wrote:
bABA wrote:
hmm ... i'm reading these reviews and i'm getting some vibe. maybe you guys can help me out.

The grades you all are giving seem good ... B and above ... yet i'm detecting disappointment? Is it safe to say that most of you considered it a good movie but didn't live up to the expectations that one was lead to believe? Thanks.


This is nowhere near as good as Independence Day. There is no sense of joy that the aliens are defeated, because it's too poorly executed to celebrate. I gave it a B because I love the subject matter, and there was good stuff throughout, but there was also bad stuff. For instance, it wasn't too bad that Cruise just happened to get lucky and find the only car in the world that wasn't a military vehicle that would still run, but it was dumb that he also found one that didn't require gasoline, no matter how far he traveled. What the hell was that about? Sloppy stuff like that isn't my bag, and Spielberg is better than that.

The ending was pretty lame and anticlimatic. I would say that my fears about this film being rushed so they could make the July 4th date were confirmed.


You do know that when Will Smith smacks the aline, the alien had just crash landed and pretty much incapaciatated.

Yeah, but when you point flaws out in this movie like this, hell, look at ID4 for a moment: Will Smith pulls the hatch off the Alien ship and punches an Alien in the head and says "Welcome to Earth" no more than just 2 scenes earlier when this thing was flinging Brett Spiner around the lab by his neck head 1st into the glass window in mid air??? :-k This thing would've ripped Will Smith in half not to mention the Quarantine factor would've ben in question after coming in contact with this thing.. Oh and here's another classic ID4 Nitpick moment: Will Smith and Goldblum crash this Alien ship into the desert, the military races toward the crash to see if they were Ok and Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum are seen through the Binoculars swaggering as they walked like nothing ever happened to them.. Not a mark, blemish or even a cut or bruise.. :laugh: So enough of the WOTW nitpicks.. Both movies are Sci-Fi action and like with any Sci-Fi movie, there will always be disbelief, but it's the job of the moviegoer to suspend it long enough to enjoy it..

_________________
Brick Tamland: Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.
Ron Burgundy: Brick, I've been meaning to talk to you about that. You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.


Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:34 am
Profile WWW
Mod Team Leader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:00 pm
Posts: 7087
Location: Crystal Lake
Post 
baumer72 wrote:
BKB_The_Man wrote:
Maverikk wrote:
bABA wrote:
hmm ... i'm reading these reviews and i'm getting some vibe. maybe you guys can help me out.

The grades you all are giving seem good ... B and above ... yet i'm detecting disappointment? Is it safe to say that most of you considered it a good movie but didn't live up to the expectations that one was lead to believe? Thanks.


This is nowhere near as good as Independence Day. There is no sense of joy that the aliens are defeated, because it's too poorly executed to celebrate. I gave it a B because I love the subject matter, and there was good stuff throughout, but there was also bad stuff. For instance, it wasn't too bad that Cruise just happened to get lucky and find the only car in the world that wasn't a military vehicle that would still run, but it was dumb that he also found one that didn't require gasoline, no matter how far he traveled. What the hell was that about? Sloppy stuff like that isn't my bag, and Spielberg is better than that.

The ending was pretty lame and anticlimatic. I would say that my fears about this film being rushed so they could make the July 4th date were confirmed.


You do know that when Will Smith smacks the aline, the alien had just crash landed and pretty much incapaciatated.

Yeah, but when you point flaws out in this movie like this, hell, look at ID4 for a moment: Will Smith pulls the hatch off the Alien ship and punches an Alien in the head and says "Welcome to Earth" no more than just 2 scenes earlier when this thing was flinging Brett Spiner around the lab by his neck head 1st into the glass window in mid air??? :-k This thing would've ripped Will Smith in half not to mention the Quarantine factor would've ben in question after coming in contact with this thing.. Oh and here's another classic ID4 Nitpick moment: Will Smith and Goldblum crash this Alien ship into the desert, the military races toward the crash to see if they were Ok and Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum are seen through the Binoculars swaggering as they walked like nothing ever happened to them.. Not a mark, blemish or even a cut or bruise.. :laugh: So enough of the WOTW nitpicks.. Both movies are Sci-Fi action and like with any Sci-Fi movie, there will always be disbelief, but it's the job of the moviegoer to suspend it long enough to enjoy it..


You do know that when Will Smith smacks the aline, the alien had just crash landed and pretty much incapaciatated.

_________________
Brick Tamland: Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.
Ron Burgundy: Brick, I've been meaning to talk to you about that. You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.


Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:35 am
Profile WWW
Post 
BKB, I meant to point this out when you posted it in different thread. The scene with the alien attacking in the Area 51 lab is after Will Smith knocks it out (it's the same alien after all). It's later in the film, 30 minutes or so.

Doesn't make it any less crazy.


Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:36 am
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 299 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.