A very good adaptation of a classic novel

Rating: 8/10 (30 June 2005)

As this film is set in the modern day, it is by default, an adaptation, so there should be no complaints that it does not exactly follow the book. I was actually quite impressed as they managed to create scenes that reminded me of parts of the book.
these parts include, the panic in the streets from the book/ the appearance of the tripods, the mass exodus from London/ the wave of people leaving.
Also, I think that merging the characters of the artilleryman, the parson Nathaniel and Ogilvy the astronomer was good seeing as how short the film is. I think the way he portrayed the insanity of the parson, the delusions of the artilleryman and certain qualities of Ogilvy was the best choice for a movie of this length.
people have complained about the movie following one person, the reason it does is because that is what happens in the book. I also read someone saying that "the script writers ran out of ideas and stuck them in a basement for the rest of the movie" (the main characters), this was in the book and was one of the most tense parts of the original novel. Also, the reason that the son of tom cruises character came back is that he probably was not at the area that exploded, so he arrived at Boston with the other survivors of the offensive.
I closing, even though it was not exactly like the book, it was still a good movie,I recommend that people read the novel (or even listen to Jeff Wayne's musical version as it is basically a retelling) before they complain about certain story elements. Also, they should remember that this is an adaptation so it does not need to be exactly like the book.