A Travesty of a film

Rating: 2/10 (4 July 2005)

First; this isn't a rethinking (a word I'm totally sick of) of the original film, nor is it a true adaptation (even updated) of the classic novel. What it is, honestly, is a post 9/11 mish-mosh that plays on peoples fears as well as lifting the best parts from the book and the 1953 film, while adding a silly and contrived sub-plot.
So where do we start? Like this:
The Good: The SFX was spectacular. The destruction was absolutely beautifully done. The War machines were awesome (and a bit of a nod to the old Classics Illustrated version); the aliens were somewhat original, but reminded me of the creatures from ID4 for some reason, and they had the hands of the Martians from the 1953 version. One of the end scenes is a homage to the end of the original film.
Other good: The lifting of the Ferry getting flipped by the Tripod as it crosses the Hudson was right out of the novel. Of course in the Novel the Steamram, Thunderchild destroys that Tripod by ramming it. Also earlier in the book a Martian capsule is destroyed by artillery fire. (See the bad for more on this).
The Bad: David Koepp and Steven Spielberg should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this crappy story to see daylight. The 9/11 references are way too
plentiful. As someone who watched in unfold from my home and had to wash the ash off my car, I found this irresponsible and unnecessary. Can't one simply make a great SF movie (see original War of the Worlds for an example) without beating the audience over the head with symbolism reminding us of a real event? Another thing, the whole Tom Cruise as divorced dad was so damned contrived as to be silly. What, a single person isn't going to want to survive this kind of horror as much as a married person? Also the kids had no personality. The son was a bland, anti-Dad kind of guy, all Dakota Fanning did was stare and scream. This whole aspect of the plot just bored me. If Koepp was adapting/updating the book, then why did the aliens have shields, ala the 1953 version? In the book the Tripods are tough, but two of them are brought down with 19th century weapons. Also the scene where Gene Barry chops off one of the aliens spy devices (on a long neck) is lifted for this film. Hey dudes, that didn't happen in the book, OK? Finally, if these aliens had been here for millions of years, having planted their war machines, why the hell didn't they think to test our air and water? Yes, the ending is right out of the book with the aliens dying of Terran bacteria, but it makes no sense. In the original film and book, there was no preparation time, the aliens landed and started blasting us out of existence. So these aliens, who have some kind of Transporter technology, didn't have the brains to check things out first? Were these cousins to the morons from Signs, who came to a planet 70 percent water so they
could die?
The Ugly; At the beginning, when the aliens are riding lightning down to Earth, all electrical power shuts off. How was this one guy able to freaking take pictures with his camcorder? Also, can someone explain the physics of a heat ray that dissolves human beings but doesn't destroy their clothing? This was a very heavy handed parallel to the deaths on 9/11, which was unnecessary. A
further point, Cruises son goes to watch the military take on the aliens, the entire brigade is wiped out - yet his son survives to make it to an untouched (mostly Boston). In fact at the very laughable end, Cruise and his daughter make it to Boston, see the machines start to topple and fall. Cruise notices birds sitting on the one machine (another homage to the book, where the
astronomer sees the birds feeding on the dead Martians), yet trained military men don't? He notices the shield is down? And when he gets to his ex-wife's parents home, the block is untouched. Looks like a Sunday morning. And his son is there, it looks like they've all been wakened from breakfast! This was just a silly excuse for a 'message' film, that failed to give me any message at all, other than Steven Spielberg shouldn't be allowed to do SF. A.I. stunk, Minority Report was a joke and if I never see this again, well I'll be pretty damn content. The original film was much better and probably had
1/100th of the budget. The difference is the original film and book both entertain without beating a reader/watcher over the head, while this ham-handed
mistake of a film doesn't.
Finally, save yourself some money and wait and rent this one out.