Better than the Original Movie

Rating: 10/10 (19 August 2005)

So, this is an alien invasion movie. If you don't have expectations of what this could bring, I don't know how helpful my review will be. On the flip-side, since you're considering this movie, I'll assume you've seen some of these. The genre really dates at least back to the days of "Them," which isn't about aliens at all, but giant ants, but the idea is the same.
The basic formula is malevolent creatures wreak havoc on earth. You can also make a good case for many other sub-genres essentially sharing the same formula. Whether it's disaster films, or a mutant virus in "Outbreak," the asteroid in "Deep Impact," Godzilla in those films, or even zombie movies, like "Dawn of the Dead," we're dealing with Good v. Evil, where humans are always wear the white hat. I would argue these movies should be distinguished from the entirely psychological dramas that rely on similar threats, as in "The Day the Earth Stood Still," "Failsafe," or "War Games," but where humanity doesn't actually deal with the disaster occurring.
Movies traditional to this genre, "The Puppet Masters," is another example, the disasters do occur, and movie then focuses on dealing with the consequences (inevitably humanity wins). In all these cases, as in War of the Worlds, the evil is not understandable, it isn't reasonable, you aren't expected to sympathize with the bad guys. Really these films are about two things.
1. How would humans react to potential annihilation or destruction. Basically the human element.
2. Special Effects. How convincing is the destruction, i.e., how suspenseful is the movie.
Assuming you've seen a few of these kinds of movies, call them dystopian, you know most are truly terrible, take Dolph Lundgren's, "I Come in Peace," (so poor it becomes a comedy) or the "Critters" sequels as examples. Most in this genre are simply so bad you're sorry to have sat through them. War of the Worlds is not one of these. Instead, it is a nearly flawlessly executed.
The film goes beyond the typical disaster epic, personalizing the destruction metaphorically with Tom Cruise's character's own family disaster--divorce and alienated children. Cruise does a fine job as the typically flawed hero, who creates all his own problems but is able to shine when real danger threatens. The role doesn't require much of Cruise, but his performance is certainly better than run of the mill.
The special effects are incredible. Simply the best FX yet to come out of Hollywood yet. Some have complained about the whether the alien craft are menacing enough, they were for me.
The psychological aspects presented by potential human extinction are well done, but limited due to Spielberg's choice of using Cruise's family as symbolic of the greater world. There are the mob scenes and mass hysteria, obligatory, but well executed.
Without giving away the ending, I would say the movie's only flaw is its ending. The pacing of the story changes too abruptly and the close of the film isn't all it could be. But the movie was/is a blockbuster with millions of dollars of investment at stake...the general public wants, and gets, its focus-group tested ending. Some of you will be disturbed by this, others of you will understand, and still more will enjoy it. I'm in the camp of those that understand the practicalities, so the ending doesn't dissuade me from giving a 10 out of 10 rating.
Simply the best alien invasion movie ever made.