Even Spielberg isn't too perfect with remakes.

Rating: Null/10 (27 January 2007)

I just rented this movie recently. I'm familiar with the story, so I knew what it's about. Only thing is this movie seems 100% different from it's original content.
It starts with a narration like in the original W.O.T.W. about Mars planning to invade earth. Ray, a family man who works at the docks. Has a slacker son, and a daughter. He was an ordinary father till one day when an unusual storm occurred and lighting struck more than twice on the same spot. Ray and the locals went to investigate the spot. Right until the ground started to crumble and a large alien machine came out of the ground. It was gigantic, with tripod legs and tentacles. With a large scourging raw, it starts to disintegrate every living thing there is.
And Ray starts running for his life, and do all he can to protect his family and run as far as they can from the invaders.
Sadly this remake fails to be as thrilling as the original story it was based off of. I don't have the heart to place it in the category of "Best Sci-Fi films". But more worthy to be in the "Less Admirible but made fun of Remakes" section right next to "Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes" and "Poseidon (2006)".
I completely related this movie to Poseidon. As they're both remakes of a successful film, both modernized, both have flaws, and both have misguided directions in the script.
Besides this movie being a less lovable remake. It does have a good use of special effects. Just the flow of the story and differences is what the problem is. I've only seen a handful of Tom Cruise's films, but I can tell you that he's only done an OK job in this movie. I think the story could of worked out better if Cruise portrayed as a Scientist instead of a family man, so that way it would feel more close to the classic.
Dakota Fanning is one of my favorite child-star actresses, but she's portrayed as the "kid who seems to know more than the adults" part in this film. Those kind of roles can really make a film go down hill. Dakota did a much more impressive role in "Hide and Seek" instead of this film.
Finally the one thing this movie doesn't have is use of character pointer view of the action. In other words this film only focuses on one set of people. When it could of been more interesting to see at least 2 different sides of this story such as the National Guard or the other victims of this tragedy. If that was present in the movie, we could of seen more scenes of the Martians destroying buildings and mayhem. But since after the 9/11 thing, I guess they didn't think it be wise to show any of that. That I find understandable, but "War of the Worlds" is a work of fiction.
To wrap up my review on this remake. A lot of famous and less well known directors have had their successes and their mistakes in life. I've quite a few of other Spielberg films that were winners, and I know that this one ain't his best effort. Since "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" & "E.T." were grade A winners. Because they were original and not remakes of any form of cinema.
This, Poseidon(2006), Burton's Planet of the Apes, and many other infamous remakes are prime examples of Hollywood's usage on making more money on redoing movies that were too great to get make overs. If World of the Wars was a little more faithful to it's original form, then it could of been as successful as Peter Jackson's "King Kong"(as that one was a great remake cause it stick to it's originality and not modernizing).
My advice is to rent it first before thinking about buying it without knowing whether you'd like it or not. It does have a few parts you'd find recognizable in the original. But I don't think the fans of the novel will be at all proud at how different they've made it. For me it's something to watch like every now and then to make fun of or to criticize over the flaws presented in the film.