not Spielberg's best but still delivers

Rating: 8/10 (2 July 2005)

Let's get a couple of things straight.
I wouldn't say "War of the Worlds" is Spielberg's best movie, but there were lots of things I liked about it.
1) It is NOT just another "Hollywood disaster epic".
2) The humans don't come up with a way to vanquish the aliens at the last second.
3) The special effects (though EXCELLENT) are not allowed to overwhelm the story of one family, which is what it's really about.
4) BECAUSE its about one family, and Spielberg allows us to get to know them, we actually CARE about what happens to them, unlike the characters in "The Day After Tomorrow", who were distinctly underdeveloped for the sake of the action.
5) Spielberg's use of pacing; he knows just when to let the viewer breathe, and when to ramp the tension up again; movies like "Charlie's Angels II" leave me feeling numb because there is no letting up on the action and eventually you get to the point where you can't respond any more.
6) Creative use of shots and attention to detail; Spieberg can tell us so much in a short amount of screen time. The beginning sequence, of the drop of water on the leaf, turning into our earth, turning into Mars, which turned into the red traffic light, for one; beautifully done. His use of mirrors, and framing shots through broken window panes. Also his use of the birds; as soon as Rachel sees the birds flying away in a panic in the boat scene, we KNOW the boat won't be making another trip without a word being said!
7) No famous landmarks getting demolished.
8) Dakota Fanning's acting.
Granted, the ending felt rushed; it is however faithful to the ending of the book, if less developed.
I trusted Spieberg to make this movie far more than another "Independence Day" or "The Day After Tomorrow". As far as I'm concerned, he delivered, even if he didn't do so perfectly.