think of Spielberg's adaptation of War of the Worlds as his darker relative of Close Encounters

Rating: 7/10 (29 June 2005)

Upon a first viewing of Steven Spielberg's latest big-action/suspense summer blockbuster War of the Worlds, I can say without a shadow of a doubt that this is what I love about going to see science-fiction thrillers. In the vein of Spielberg's best thrillers (Jurassic Park, Jaws, even Duel in some circles) not only is the story not predictable like the other dumbed down, less satisfying actioneers, but one can sense who is the real star of the film. Despite the fact that the director has a mega-star (as nutty as he may be off camera at times, Tom Cruise is dependable in good hands, better in great ones), and some supporting players who stand-out (Tim Robbins and especially Dakota Fanning), Spielberg's total control over his medium is without a missed mark. For better or sometimes worse, when one sees a film directed by him, it's not going to be standard stuff on the screen. Like Hitchcock or Kubrick or Scorsese, there's a personality coming through the storytelling, acting more often than not as a manipulator, but not in a way that cheats too much like in films that become forgotten.
Examples of Spielberg's mastery of set-pieces of destruction and of stylized horror film-making can be found in, admittedly, greater Spielberg films (Jaws comes to mind, but also Jurassic Park and Minority Report too), but he's not just playing old tricks here, but still making his mis-en-scene and build-ups/pay-offs work well, very well. A prominent example to give from War of the Worlds isn't one involving the hundreds of extras on the run from the aliens, but one in an enclosed space. In one scene, which I won't reveal the circumstances to how it comes to this, Cruise, Robbins, and Fanning's characters are in a basement, and a sinister presence is surrounding them, searching, at every corner following their beats. This is the kind of scene that might be in a slightly different permutation in some of those films I mentioned before, but it doesn't lose any of its impact. The harder work- getting to care about the characters- is placed in so strongly that its hard for the scene not to work. That the pay-off in this scene, and several others, don't flounder is not just a credit to him, but to his team (i.e. editor Michael Kahn, the great cinematographer Janusz Kaminski, and of course John Williams).
Truth be told, some elements of the film are almost too good or too expectable at times (such as a rather Spielbergian ending, though this may be similar to the H.G. Wells novel, un-read by me), and it is aside from Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan the most violent and riveting action-wise (as un-real as it is, somehow believable at the same time) and probably will act as more of an adrenaline rush to the younger ones. But for one who has grown up on Spielberg's films, who understood really what a director does from first watching his films, this is another fine touch to the lot. Even if you're not much of a Cruise fan it's entertaining- in fact, at the core, that's what the film wants to do with its continuous sense of urgency, to entertain the hell out of anyone, young, old, any race or creed....
Having said this though, just know, it might be slightly less effective on repeat viewings, as I've come to see. 8/10