A good movie, but Spielberg's version of Wells' ending leaves a bad aftertaste.

Rating: 6/10 (3 July 2005)

Nobody makes a summer blockbuster better than Steven Spielberg. With "War of the Worlds" he attempts to show the other boys (namely Roland Emmerich and Michael Bay) how it's done  and for about seventy minutes, he succeeds. Whereas "The Day After Tomorrow" relied solely on special effects, and "Armageddon" was downright boring, "War of the Worlds" spends time dealing with its characters, then moves on to the action; I felt a connection with them, and even as human carcasses are zapped into dust particles by attacking alien tripods, there were basic human emotions at stake that translated well across the screen.
Unfortunately, the last twenty minutes of the movie are rushed, sloppy, insulting and oh-so-typical of Spielberg. Even in his evil-alien movies he isn't satisfied with a grim conclusion. Everything has to be wrapped up all nice and peachy.
The movie stars Tom Cruise as Ray Ferrier, a dock worker in a small Northern US town who is left to care for his estranged children when their mother and her new husband pick up and leave to head for her parents' in Boston.
At first everything is normal  his teenaged son and 11-year-old daughter, both of who are less than enthused to be spending time with their biological father, ignore Ray. However, strange occurrences in the weather  violent thunderstorms and enormous earthquakes -- mark the appearance of a huge machine that rises from underneath the ground and begins to tear apart the town, killing everyone in sight, destroying buildings, and tearing apart the roads.
Running scared, Ray manages to find a working vehicle and escapes with his two children; further north they find similar attacks under way and narrowly avoid death many times, continuing their search for Ray's ex-wife  or shelter, whichever comes first.
"War of the Worlds" is clearly a product of the times. Whereas ten or twenty years ago alien attacks in a Spielberg movie would have surely elicited no response from children, or at most a self-reference to other Spielberg films (had Elliot from "E.T." seen "Close Encounters"?), the first thing Ray's daughter (Dakota Fanning) presumes during the initial onslaught is that terrorists are attacking America. The movie also deals indirectly with the Bush administration and the war in Iraq; Ray's son leaves to join the resistance and fight with the Army. "I know you feel like you have to do this," Ray yells, "but you don't! You don't have to!" There are numerous such references, with Tim Robbins' fanatical underground patriot the epitome of the disillusioned, naïve gung-ho American.
The movie marks Spielberg's second collaboration with Tom Cruise; their first was 2002's Philip K. Dick-inspired sci-fi adventure "Minority Report." Cruise and Spielberg share similar traits  both are tremendously popular in their fields and have been around long enough to know what works. The first hour of "War of the Worlds" shows promise because of how well Spielberg and Cruise manage to bounce off each other  Cruise keeps the human elements under control while Spielberg ups the mantle on the SF/X and disaster. Scriptwriter David Koepp keeps the story rooted in reality while maintaining a science-fiction edge. John Williams' score evokes the rhythm and patterns of B-budget 1950s sci-fi, and he's clearly having a lot of fun with his orchestra for this soundtrack.
But then it all falls apart. The ending is like a hazy dream sequence, illogical and unbelievable. Rarely have I seen a movie so belittled by its finale.
I am not referring to H.G. Wells' ending, of course, but rather Spielberg's tacky additions - the closure is simultaneously insulting and underwhelming.
Is "War of the Worlds" a good film? That's hard to say. As I mentioned above, the setup and first few attacks in the film are great fun. The stark realism and rather gratuitous violence is a nice addition to an otherwise highly unbelievable story; like this year's "Batman Begins," the ideas are ridiculous, but the movie treats them as if they are not, and manages to do so without coming across as pretentious and insulting.
As it is, this is an entertaining picture, and exactly the sort of film that most people will go into the theater expecting to see  something to help pass a couple hours and overwhelm the viewer with spectacular visuals and pretty faces.
But I can only imagine how much better this would have been if they had taken a risk on the ending. "War of the Worlds" could have been a masterpiece, the disaster movie of all disaster movies  instead it's just another summer Spielberg flick, and it's disappointing to see a director of his caliber resorting to mediocrity. Spielberg has proved in the past that he's got what it takes with daring projects such as "Duel," "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan." This is not one of those movies.