War of the Worlds (2005) User Reviews

A brilliant alien invasion film for the first two acts

[Nigel St. Buggering · 6/10 · 2 July 2005]

What Spielberg, Cruise, and Koepp accomplish here in the first two acts is nothing short of revolutionary. They've made a big-budget summer blockbuster about massive destruction and action that manages to studiously avoid every cliché and expectation of such films. It stays resolutely on the characters' points of view, showing us almost nothing they don't see, even to the point of coming tantalizingly close to a raging battle, then avoiding showing it. It keeps its focus on character instead of spectacle. The "hero" of the piece remains decidedly unheroic, wanting only to escape, and trying to talk others out of fighting back. The purpose of every piece of action is to frighten and disturb rather than thrill, making ingenious use of familiar 9/11 imagery. At the end of the second act, it is hands-down the best alien invasion film ever made, and perhaps one of the best sci-films of all time.

Then something strange happens. The filmmakers lose their nerve, and remember that this is an extremely expensive summer film financed by two studios. Or perhaps it was the fact that it stars Tom Cruise, who up to this point has spent almost two hours doing nothing but run for his life. Suddenly, and tragically, the film changes, violating not only its carefully established tone, but its own internal logic. Suddenly, Cruise begins to act like a hero, and summer action clichés force their way into the story like a worm into an apple. The transition is jarring, and it creates a serious disconnect from the story.

While it's true that Wells' original ending creates a problem for a movie, here they try to remain faithful to it, while still shoehorning moments of triumph into the conclusion. Unfortunately, these moments come off as alternately false, unbelievable, and meaningless, since it isn't mankind that defeats the invaders in the end.

Is it recommendable? Well, I suppose that depends on what kind of viewer you are. If you feel that 75% brilliant material overshadows the 25% that falls apart, then you'll enjoy it. If, however, you're the kind of viewer who feels that the final impression a movie makes is its ultimate stamp on your memory, you may be in for a crushing disappointment. On the other hand, if you're the kind of viewer who just likes the cliché of the boom-boom summer action spectacle, you're likely to be bored and frustrated with the first two acts, and only engage in the end. It is confused about what audience it's trying to reach, and consequently, isn't likely to satisfy any of them.

2 most annoying kid actors ever

[tiberijegrozni · 6/10 · 30 November 2019]

I love the book and overall theme of the movie but Tom Cruise acting is annoying which is probably because he had to work with 2 most annoying kid actors ever seen on the film. I mean almost every scene is ruined by hysterical yelling of the 3 main characters. Little girl is the worst but Tom and his movie son are not far behind.

I mean it's watchable but by the middle of the movie I was hoping aliens will take them down so we don't have to suffer this atrocity of acting

Plot holes like craters, but a scary ride anyway

[pbubny-1 · 7/10 · 4 July 2005]

"War of the Worlds" is Steven Spielberg's third movie in which extraterrestrials visit Earth, but the first in which their intentions are malevolent. It can't be coincidence that the arrival of the ETs is heralded with eerie lights flashing amid lowering clouds, as in "CE3K." From there, the similarity ends--no light show as friendly aliens come in for a closer look. These creatures (presumably Martians, as in the original H.G. Wells novel) aren't interested in making nice; nor is there any ambiguity about their ultimate objective (as there was for much of "CE3K"). They're here to wipe us off the face of the planet, plain and simple, a point we understand before the movie has played for even half an hour, and the giant walking tripods they deploy are remorselessly efficient. So, too, is the movie--at scaring the hell out of us, notwithstanding some gaping plot holes (what's up with that camcorder, anyway?) and a couple of sequences that are too reminiscent of other movies (particularly "Independence Day" and Spielberg's own "Jurassic Park").

That Spielberg uses imagery alluding to 9/11, the Holocaust, and perhaps the siege of London during World War II is, for me, less an exploitation than a reflection of how seriously he intends the audience to take the on screen mayhem. The atmosphere is heavy with threat, and the depiction of a populace numb with shock amid the devastation is chillingly convincing, despite a few moments of Hollywood cheese. We don't have Will Smith delivering snappy one-liners right after millions are massacred by the invading alien forces, a la "ID4." Nor is there much of a rah-rah, let's-kick-some-alien-ass mood as the outmatched Earthlings try fighting back. Even the ostensible protagonist (a low-key, effective Tom Cruise) crumples at one point under the enormity of what's happening.

I'm not really sure what the posters who complained of insufficient action and FX were talking about. Seems to me the tripods were pretty much a constant presence (if not always in the foreground) from about the 15-minute mark onward. And in fact the "war" of the title is waged from the beginning--it's just not on the level of humans vs. aliens combat that some viewers apparently were expecting.

Great CGI but there are problems

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 9 January 2014]

Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) is a divorced father with daughter Rachel (Dakota Fanning) and angry teenager Robbie (Justin Chatwin). Then a strange storm appears with numerous intense lightning. Suddenly machines rise out of the ground to destroy mankind.

Director Steven Spielberg uses all his tech skills to create great CGI of this H.G. Wells vision. It looks great. There are great individual scenes like the train. Tom Cruise is good as a father looking out for his family. But a couple of things keep coming back to nag at me. The kids are a bit too much to take. I'm willing to take Dakota Fanning screaming at everything, but I can't take the annoying rebellious teen. The constant fighting with the father is so petty and so childish. The family melodrama just diminishes the scale of the movie. Then there is the change of the origins of the alien machines. It is simply a stupid idea from Spielberg to be different. There is no reason for it. Worst it makes the movie questionable. And the blood idea just adds to the silliness of the story. These are changes for the sake of changing without improving anything.

Could have been a real classic but is an above average alien-invasion movie instead.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 7/10 · 19 November 2005]

This movie had huge potential. Everything to make this a science-fiction classic masterpiece were present; Spielberg's directing, a great concept, ILM special effects, Tom Cruise as the main character and lots of other professionals involved both in front and behind the cameras. Then where did it go wrong? The answer to that is the script. The story is very simple and lacks a real clear plot line. Basically the movie is only about Tom Cruise and his two children running and driving from city to city, from the aliens and their destructive Tripod-machines. Exactly why are we, out of all the people, following these persons? The character development is lacking, just as much as the story does. Both lack development and depth.

Of course the movie is by no means an horrible movie but it's just that the movie is a bit disappointing because of the fact that it had so much more potential. It still is a good and certainly spectacular movie to watch but it's not a movie people will still talk about in 5 or 10 years from now. The story makes this movie a bit of an easily forgettable movie that doesn't leave an huge impression afterward, even though the movie itself is pure eye-candy to watch.

There is no doubt about it that Spielberg is a great director. He directs his actors in this movie very well and everyone in the movie gives an amazing performance, especially Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning. Tom Cruise for once again doesn't play the action hero. He is an average Joe instead and I think he did this in a very good and convincing. Spielberg also uses the special effects very well. He doesn't use the special effects to impress the audience as much as possible, with lots of spectacular and action filled sequences, which he could had easily had done, he uses them as a tool to tell the story with instead. The movie is purely told from Tom Cruise and his family's perspective, because of this the movie gets a very realistic feeling. We don't get to see any close-ups of the Tripods and how they destroy entire cities and fight off the American army. I like this approach. It makes "War of the Worlds" different from many other alien-invasion movies. It because of this certainly is one of the most believable and realistic alien-invasion movies, along with "Signs".

Visually there also is absolutely nothing wrong with this movie. The special effects from ILM are very impressive and look extremely convincing. The cinematography by Janusz Kaminski is also simply phenomenal at times and is typically gritty, which certainly adds to the tense and realistic atmosphere of the movie.

Unlike others, to me the ending didn't came really abrupt. But perhaps this was because to me the ending was already spoiled, thanks to the movie it's soundtrack, which featured the final narration of Morgan Freeman explaining how the movie ended. So I already knew what to expect. To be perfectly honest I liked the ending and I couldn't think of any other, or better way to end this movie, without losing any of its realism and credibility. I can understand how it might seem lame and sudden to most though but for me it was satisfying enough.

It certainly is a movie that will receive one or two, most likely, technical Acedemy Awards. And it deserves to. There isn't an awful lot wrong with this movie but it truly is the simple story that prevents this movie from being a classic or masterpiece. I still regard this movie as one of the must sees of 2005 simply because of the movie its look and acting. You can tell by watching this movie that there was lots of talent involved, both in front and behind the cameras. Especially Spielberg's touch still makes this movie better than just the average alien-invasion movie but still not even he can prevent this movie from being a bit of a disappointment. Not his or anybody else his/her fault, simply blame it on the script.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Low Expectations = Pleasant Surprise

[ccthemovieman-1 · 8/10 · 10 September 2006]

It pays to have low expectations. Hearing nothing but negative remarks about this film, I never saw it until the other day when a friend offered the DVD for a free look. With nothing to lose, and being familiar with the story having seen the 1953 movie several times, I put it on.

Wow, I enjoyed it; the film was very entertaining. The only annoying thing to me was the bratty teenage boy, who needed some discipline and never got it. However, that type of kid seems to be stereotypical of teens among modern filmmakers. Other than him, and his little sister who I put with because it's Dakota Fanning, the film served its purpose beautifully, namely to 'shock and awe.' That it did.

The Martian tripods were awesome, particularly in the long scene when they first appear out of the ground. To really appreciate this film, you have to have a surround system because the sound is fantastic. In fact, earlier with the "lightning strikes," the sound gets attention in a big-way. In other words, special- effects-wise, it isn't just about visuals but the audio as well.

Although the story of the father (Tom Cruise) and his two estranged (is anyone pictured married in films nowadays?) kids is so-so at best, the film is all about the action. That "cute" family situation is just a sub-plot to give us some breaks from the intensity of the invasion.

Anyway, some of the action scenes were jaw-dropping good and, with the normal Spielberg garbage that always comes with the good stuff, too, it's still was a fun two hours. Now, I'll have to get the DVD because I would definitely watch this more than once.

Blue Collar Protagonist

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 3 November 2013]

Stephen Spielberg took the 1953 classic War Of The Worlds and remade it for modern times and the modern techniques of special effects. A lot of things that could not be done back in the 50s are done now to show the havoc that the invaders reek upon the world.

He also did something else that possibly might have offended science fiction purists but I think gave the audience a better identification with the protagonists of the story. Instead of having his protagonists be scientists as Gene Barry and Ann Robinson were in 1953, Tom Cruise is a blue collar divorced father who has his kids visiting him, but custody is with their mother Miranda Otto.

The kids are no prizes and are played by Justin Chatwyn and Dakota Fanning. And Cruise himself is no bargain either. But when danger develops it's his idea to take them from New York to Boston where their mother and maternal grandparents are. The film as it was in 1953 is mostly concerned with their efforts to avoid the terrible tripod machines that the aliens use in their destructive path.

The film does follow the Barry/Robinson escape scenario closely. The two had a scene avoiding the aliens while they were trapped in a cellar. To that Spielberg adds survivalist Tim Robbins. I think Stephen Spielberg feels the way I do that a lot of these survivalists pray for their doomsday fantasy to come true. That was sure the case with Tim Robbins who is quite mad on the subject of the invaders.

Cruise himself centers and anchors the film with his portrayal of blue collar America who just wants for him and his family to survive the holocaust. This classic may yet see a remake or three in the future.

War of the two halves

[TheLittleSongbird · 5/10 · 20 January 2017]

'War of the Worlds' had a lot going for it, considering the story, that it was directed by Steven Spielberg and a decent cast on paper. It turned however to be a frustratingly uneven film, with a good first half and a pretty lousy second half.

Starting with what's good, the film looks fabulous, the atmosphere that the cinematography and lighting evoked is just incredible and the special effects are without complaint too. John Williams can be relied upon to compose a good score and he does here, being both rousing and spooky. Spielberg does an impeccable job directing the first half of the film, giving a lot of the first half thrills, suspense and genuine scares.

Tom Cruise does a good job in the lead and Tim Robbins is eerily eccentric. As said, the first half has many great moments and is filled with unnerving suspense and scary chills. Truly imaginative details like the burning train, the birds/tripod scene and the river of the dead bodies burn in the memory for a long while after.

However, the human drama was not as transfixing as it should have been, being hurt by the dysfunctional family subplot being rammed down the throat with no subtlety at all with nothing relatable at all and especially by the kids.

Spielberg has demonstrated before that he is capable of directing great child performances, prime examples being Haley Joel Osment in 'AI' and Christian Bale in 'Empire of the Sun', but the performances of both Dakota Fanning and Justin Chatwin are incredibly irritating. Not sure which is more so, Fanning's constant screaming or brattiness or Chatwin made to act throughout the film but especially the second half like an indecisively written character who makes stupid decisions and acts rebellious in the most insufferable of ways. The dialogue is often insipid.

After a lot of promise in the first half, 'War of the Worlds' is let down significantly by the second half where the pace slackens (a notable example being that overlong scene in the basement) and the suspense dramatically wilts (such as when the aliens are introduced, and they are not menacing in the slightest) and is replaced by ridiculousness, frustrating character decisions and sentimentality. The Hollywood schmaltz kicks in and keeps assaulting the viewer at full throttle, while the ending is up there as one of film's most false, cloying and anti-climactic.

In conclusion, a frustratingly uneven film that starts off quite well and then completely falls apart. 5/10 Bethany Cox

A good take on the Wells story. Better than the 1953 classic in some ways

[mstomaso · 7/10 · 9 July 2005]

First - a quick rebuttal: The peanut butter sandwich which seemed to stick to the window impossibly. This was a very visually interesting scene. In fact, the scene was shot from inside the house, and Cruise was shot in reflection against the window - so there is no problem here other than the reviewer not thinking what they were seeing through.

Now on to the review...

This film follows Tom Cruise - playing a not-very-adult divorced father - and his two kids through the Wellsian version of The War of the Worlds. Despite the fact that the film focuses exclusively on the harrowing experiences of this somewhat dysfunctional family, in a very basic way it preserves the elements of the original novel. As with Wells' book, a science savvy viewer will pick up on the biological plausibility of the main plot and realize the brilliance of Wells original points. Scientifically educated viewers will also recognize the geological impossibility of it. Neither of these facts should detract from the entertainment value of this interesting and exciting film. After all, it is a testament to Wells' genius that a novel written nearly 100 years ago still holds our attention today, and is still regarded as an intelligent take on improbable events.

An alien species, about which nothing is really known, has been planning to take over and terraform earth for millenia, or perhaps much longer. Using unknown technology, they manage to emplace operatives in enormous tripod machines equipped with horrendous weapons that basically carbonize any life forms they take aim at. The tripods had been implanted deep in the earth long before the advent of our species. There simply is no stopping the invasion. Cruise, whose character is not really built for heroism, digs deep into his soul to protect his children as they attempt to make it to Boston to reunite with his estranged wife and her new family.

Before I discuss the technical merits of the film, and the lavish production values, I feel that I need to make a comment on Dakota Fanning. Ms. Fanning gives one of the best performances I have ever seen a sub-12 year old give in The War of the Worlds. She is a match for Cruise, and actually manages to steal several scenes from him. The acting in this film is uniformly good, but Fanning really stood out.

Spielberg and his team make seemingly impossible film visions come alive in a uniquely well realized manner. War of the Worlds is one of the most visually stunning films I have seen in a long time. Though I would not call the special effects innovative, they are, more importantly, convincing and never over-done. The nearly first person story telling technique is both original and effective, and the non-heroism of Cruise's character makes for a much more compelling plot than I expected to see. There are indeed some problems with believability, but let me ask - why would anybody go to this film expecting something more realistic than a fairy tale?

Recommended for Wells fans, fans of the original 1953 adaptation, and action sci-fi fans. Mildly recommended to the average cinema-goer.

A Nutshell Review: War of the Worlds

[DICK STEEL · 7/10 · 29 June 2005]

War of the Worlds marks the second collaboration between 2 of Hollywood's most influential figures, that of director Steven Spielberg and megastar Tom Cruise. In this updated adaptation of H.G. Well's classic, we revisit alien territory already familiar with Spielberg (with evergreens like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and E.T.), except that this time around, the aliens are not an iota friendly and wastes no time proving its point with its laser beams.

Cruise plays Ray, a middle class salaried worker whose ex-wife (Miranda Otto, in an underused role) leaves their estranged kids with for the weekend. Being the selfish carefree man that he is, it is no wonder why he doesn't get much respect, especially from his son. Before you can say move on with the melodrama, worldwide lightning phenomenon gets TV coverage, and soon enough, the horror begins, as the well known battle tripods rise from beneath the earth and annihilate everything on site.

The special effects are brilliant, and serves as an effective plot device for unspeakable, unexplainable horror. Spielberg teases you with indirect shots of the tripods, from mirrors and reflective surfaces, never letting you see from a first person's perspective for too long, keeping in pace with the initial suspense built.

Terrorist attacks were mentioned in conversation, and perhaps this movie also serves as a timely reminder of always being prepared, with emergency equipment, stashes of food, and familiarity with emergency procedures.

This film could take the easy way out and focus on the big explosions ala Independence Day, but since that was already done, we get to focus on the smaller picture, that of the survival of the family unit in crisis, and I applaud this approach. Conflicts arise and sometimes solved through unpopular decisions, and that's the way of life. Most times we do not have complete information, and need to make split second life determining decisions.

However, the pace slackens toward the end of the movie, and steers us back with reminders that this is after all a summer action blockbuster, with predictable endings, some plot loopholes and worse, rushed explanations.

Tom Cruise doesn't get to flash his pearly whites so often here, as we see a transformation from irresponsibility, and in his son's opinion, cowardice, to courageous dad whose children are his first priority. I'd dare say Cruise is in his element here, saving the day (in a not so direct manner).

Dakota Fanning shines as Ray's daughter Rachel, bringing forth a sense of vulnerability with her fear of enclosed spaces, and her love for her father and brother. Being the little damsel in distress, who wouldn't want to save her and ensure that she survives this horrible onslaught? Serves well as a Hollywood summer blockbuster, but not the "most anticipated" for this year as claimed by some.

Unnatural Disaster

[ptmcq05 · 6/10 · 29 June 2005]

The first half hour it leaves hour breathless. The characters don't know what hit them, but we do. We know all about it, a world of the worlds is about to take place, with nasty creatures from outer space. This elementary rule, we, the audience are a few steps ahead of the characters on the screen. It makes our anticipation of their realization an spectacular thrill. Then, of course, it's all downhill from there. Well, not all. Tom Cruise is in it. I have to hand it to him. Looking at his name in the poster, lots of useless but unavoidable information came to mind. Katie Holmes and Brooke Shields and L Ron Hubbard, Oprah, Matt. The lot. And I'm one who doesn't watch much television, imagine someone who does! In any case, much to Tom Cruise credit, I completely forgot all that nonsense as the movie started and I was able to concentrate on the nonsense at hand. He is really good. I took him seriously. I felt for him. He's playing a loser with an empty refrigerator and I believe it. Totally. The problems in the movie are of a different kind. The same way that you can't mix Kubrick and Spielberg and A.I was a blatant example of that. In War of the Worlds we discover H G Wells and Spielberg don't go together either. Wells, H. G as well as Orson Welles played with our inner fears without computer generated images. I imagine that playing with the intellect would have been too frightening to Spielberg, Paramount, Amblin and Dreamworks. So I guess that part of the master plan was to give us something of what, they imagine, audiences the world over expects of them. But, it doesn't work like that. It should be the intellectual wallop of H G Wells or the sentimental pyrotechnics of Steven Spielberg. Together, they do not go. Okay, I've unburden myself of my thoughts, now, I recommend you to see it and make up your own mind. Within the sad desolation of the film going summer of 2005, there is enough solace within the horrors of War of the Worlds to make you feel you haven't wasted your afternoon.

Underrated

[rrella · 8/10 · 21 June 2022]

I feel like this movie is beyond underrated and gets voted down due to people not liking how different it is from the novel. This is a great sci fi film. Looks great, well acted, good story and a unique take on the original. 7.5/10.

Tom Cruise's Kids are Worse than the Martians

[chas437 · 6/10 · 6 March 2023]

I've never seen such petulant spoiled- rotten kids. The world is ending, and they scream and whine about every little detail. The older boy is the worst, he wants to fight the invaders...who have forcefields that can block ballistic missiles. These kids need a good spanking.

The Martians devouring those brats and spraying their remains all over the place would've redeemed this mediocre effort.

Aliens bury their ships underground. I'd like to know who came up with that nonsense. Like Humans who build tunnels and huge mines would never stumble on to these gigantic tripod machines. Spielberg what were you thinking?

War of the Worlds

[sunman210 · 10/10 · 22 January 2006]

Always a bit of trepidation going to see a remake of a major movie - The original was quite good (for its time).

I think part of it is the "I know what's going to happen" feeling and so I approached War of the Worlds in this light.

However I was entirely delighted with the movie, the updated story line, and the excellent special effects. I think it totally blows away the other big Sci Fi remake of 2005 (King Kong) in no small part because of the "reality" feel to it. Kong was a fantasy pure and simple where as Worlds felt as if you were there with Tom Cruise about to get zapped with the other citizens.

The children's performances were excellent and Tom did a suburb job of it.

Second version H.G.Wells novel as spectacular and thrilling as the first one

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 20 July 2005]

The picture talks about Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) a divorced docks discharger (ex-wife : Miranda Otto) and no an exemplary daddy . He must fight an alien invasion by invading machines war in the shape of walking tripods . No matter how much armaments are utilized facing them , the lethal long arms flying aircrafts are invincible and impassive . Neither army , tanks , air force or bombs arrange to vanquish the imperturbable and unalterable invasion alien . The destroyed urbanizations , the abandoned villages with the citizens going away and the aliens themselves , are brought to life and created in state-of-art special effects , delivering eerie highlights . It's based on the H.G. Wells notorious novel that remains as landmark in the sci-fi history , but has been changed the location of original novel from London , 1890 , to United States in year 2004 . The film concerns upon the survival of human specie , the fundamental theme results to be the humanity confrontation and the main enemy : an alien invasion at an exceptional world happening .

It's a fabulous story , and very well narrated , about a deadly alien attack , a father who wants to save his children : Dakota Fanning and Justin Chatwin , at whatever cost . The yarn is developed in the ordinary world, out of Pentagon and White House . Screenwriter David Koepp film regards about issues don't include : Neither generals reunited on a map with miniature figures , nor famous buildings , no Manhattan shots , no Martians . The motion picture is really spectacular and fantastic ; but being also an enjoyable story of a beloved family. There's a sub-plot concerning a father whose greatest thoughtfulness turns out to be the children's security, his hard struggle for the family protection .

Cruise and Spielberg told the film being dedicated to their children and the intimate feeling among themselves . It is an awesome treatment of the science fiction's classic by the great director Steven Spielberg , carrying out fulfilment justice to the nightmarish observations of an interplanetary war , his direction is extremely stylish and very well paced . Overwhelming and impressive FX , including fantastic war machines and destruction executed by aliens were made by expert Dennis Muren in Computer Generator 3D . Adding a rousing and moving musical score by the prolific maestro composer John Williams , Spielberg's regular . There appears unbilled (almost extras) Gene Barry and Anne Robinson , protagonists of the Byron Haskin and George Pal first version , 1953 . The flick'll appeal to science fiction enthusiastic . Rating : Very good . Well worth seeing.

Should've won the 3 Oscars it was nominated for!

[UniqueParticle · 27 November 2019]

I kind of remember seeing in the theater, that was fun! Visually striking and masterful sound extravaganza. War of the Worlds is highly under appreciated, thought provoking and very engaging. Tom Cruise did great, I'm blown away this film even got hate really doesn't deserve it. Steven Spielberg is a legendary filmmaker and always will be no matter what he's artist with great vision.

Failed to hold up

[trails2112 · 6/10 · 29 June 2005]

Nice and entertaining first hour. It built up nicely and created an atmosphere of intrigue and suspense. However, there were a couple of extremely annoying characters (son and Tim Robbins) doing insanely stupid things, and one scene (in Tim Robbins basement) near the end that went on far too long. A bit too much of Dakota Fanning screaming, but she did a nice job of piercing my eardrum. Virtual non-existent explanation of the entire ending (which really made the movie a huge downer). It was something about microscopic cells and God, but it was done far too quickly in a voice over narrative by Morgan Freeman and just completely left me and everyone else in the theater with a look of "what did they just say??" and "that's it??". Nice effects, but the rest of it just didn't hold up, especially for the final 45 minutes or so, which in the end really left me disappointed.

Needs tighter directing and a better screenplay

[indianmotorcyclechris · 6/10 · 29 June 2005]

I was anxiously anticipating the release of this feature. My wife, friends and I walked away today very disappointed. When Steven Spielberg is on his game, he's brilliant. When he lets down his guard and loses focus he runs to excess and banality. The FX are truly superb...murky and terrifying...evoking the mood of the 1898 novel. The screenplay, lackluster dialog, poor editing and Tom Cruise crying out incessantly, "Rachel, Rachel, Rachel", however, left our 11:30 A.M. audience restless, silent and apparently bored. The mood coming out of the show was NOT good. Spielberg blew the chance to make a definitive version of the H.G. Wells classic. Why in the world he lets himself get bogged down on these occasions is beyond me. If you're a Wells fan and Spielberg fan then it's worth seeing, if only out of curiosity. Be advised, however, that you may well leave with an empty feeling. Shame on you, Steve....you didn't give us your "A" game.

There's More to the Movie Than Meets the Eye.

[idavem · 10/10 · 15 July 2014]

Spielberg and company created a wonderful film that's incorporated some of H.G. Wells' original novel, and the 1953 film.

It took me a few viewings to spot some of the clever parts of the film. For example, when Tom Cruise's character shakes the white dust of disintegrated humans out of his hair, it's an homage to the part of the novel in which the hero's hair turns white (from fear).

Cruise's character (Ray, as in ray gun) is introduced to as as a person who operates a crane that lifts up truck trailers. The invaders have similar cranes - their scary, giant tripods - that can walk and lift up humans. And yes, the aliens have ray guns.

Ray's ex-wife admonishes him to make sure her son completes his school assignment by the end of the weekend, which is a paper about the occupation of Algeria by the French. Over the course of the weekend, which is the timeline in which the movie unfolds, Ray's son definitely completes his assignment, learning all about the occupation of earth by an alien force.

And of course, the grandparents glimpsed at the end of the film were the stars of the 1953 film.

I'm sure there's more allusions to the book and the earlier film, and homages to both. What I have picked up makes the movie even more satisfying for me.

This is a Good Remake...See it for what is is

[LAKERS34 · 8/10 · 6 March 2006]

My Lord...We go out of our way to hate Tom Cruise because he's fallen in love with a younger, attractive, successful actress and lets the world know about it... We disagree with his religious principals and think he's a nut... We're jealous because he's 40 something, wealthy, and on top of the world... So let's vote this film Worst of 2005...I don't think so...

This is an exciting, scary, action-packed film... Cruise's performance as a dead-beat dad who gets it together was not over the top; had he made this film 10 or 15 years ago it no doubt would have been received very differently. This is Science-Fiction/Horror/Fantasy at its best and an original spin on classic material. Orson Welles would have been proud of this effort; Every important point in his original radio play in 1938 is addressed here and a truly stark film showing Man at the mercy of Martians is what we have. Excellent special effects also! Bravo! I suppose Cruise's upcoming Mission Impossible III will be voted Worst of 2006...

Cool effects, annoying characters

[Calicodreamin · 6/10 · 3 May 2022]

This movie would be a whole lot better if the characters weren't so annoying *ahem* Fanning. The effects look great and the storyline is interesting. The characters lack depth and are so bad that you end up not caring if they live or die.

Chilling and suspenseful

[amytudorin · 6/10 · 30 September 2019]

Overall this is a pretty good movie, it's got a good storyline, some decent special effects and some chilling scenes. The movie is about the protagonist, Tom Cruise, and his two kids who try to survive a mysterious and confusing alien invasion. Although it doesn't have the most original storyline, finding out what the aliens do with the humans they capture is the creepiest and most original scene.

Seemed Like A Cross Between Independence Day And The Day After Tomorrow.

[BigHardcoreRed · 2 July 2005]

War Of The Worlds was a science fiction flick that far exceeded my expectations. To be honest, I had no intentions of seeing this movie. I have never read the book or seen the original. In fact, the only reason I saw the movie was because the large line at the theater piqued my curiosity. That and the fact that I had family in town to see the movie with. I was not disappointed. The beginning of the movie (and at various points throughout), was very similar to The Day After Tomorrow, with all the scenes of storms and people running away en masse. Later, Independence Day came to mind because of the way the humans were trying to figure out how to kill the invading aliens along with other little details. Other movies also came to mind but those were the two major ones.

The plot is almost too simple. Earth is attacked by aliens after millions of years of planning. Upon the attack the humans run away and eventually, figure out they have to find a way to overcome the unsurmountable odds or be wiped out completely. One of the major differences between this movie and Independence Day is that ID had many stories and families being tied together by this one story. War of the Worlds focuses on one family, The Ferriers.

Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) has just picked up his kids from his divorced wife for the weekend and has no major plans until this unusual storm starts to brew. In what seemed like an instant, all hell broke loose and aliens which were transplanted into these ancient war machines buried under the Earth and started wreaking havoc. That is the movie in a nutshell, folks. The rest of the time The Ferriers are running from their attackers and along the way, getting closer and bridging the gaps that have apparently formed between Ray and his kids. The story is actually a bit more complicated but I do not want to go on too long about it.

Dakota Fanning is an amazing little actress to be able to tackle a role like this and to be so convincing. I found Justin Chatwin, the actor who played Robbie Ferrier, to be annoying. Every movie usually has an annoying character and Robbie was it. Also, Tim Robbins stood out as the scared stupid Ogilvy.

The special effects, although I have read to the contrary, were top notch. The close-ups of the war machines, especially the eye things, were pretty cool, along with the explosions, etc. Spielberg did a good job of keeping most of the special effects, especially the aliens and their machines, out of the trailers and ruining the surprises. I feel I enjoyed the movie more without knowing anything about it beforehand.

This is what The Day After Tomorrow should have been like and would recommend this over "Day After" anytime. As I mentioned before, I have not read the book so I am not sure how the ending is meant to be. If the ending of the movie is just being true to the book, then that's cool. If not, it left a little something to be desired. Without adding spoilers, I can not really get into why, but it just seemed a little unfulfilling. However, that is just a small portion of the film that I happened to dislike. Overall, I felt Steven Spielberg did an excellent job and I salute him. 8.5/10

The Anti-ID4

[bartrenethiel · 7/10 · 27 June 2005]

My oh my, I've seen the biggest blockbusters this year and frankly I'm dog tired. So when I sat down for another popcorn flick, it got me worried a bit: 'Do I still love films, or should I just throw in the towel and call it a day?' Right of the bat, I felt relieved. There's still hope and his name is: Spielberg. So what else is new, you might ask. Nothing, would be my answer. Because in the last twelve years (from Jurassic Park and Schindlers List in 1993, threw Saving Private Ryan and A.I.) there's only one big name director who really got better with age. Scorcese and Lynch and all the other 50 plus directors never adapted to the modern times. Spielberg does that and remains classic at the same time.

What about this new film of his? It's just unbelievable that such a big movie got such a big heart at the center of it all. War of the Worlds story centers around a struggling man and his two estranged kids. Ray (Cruise in top form) has never really committed himself to be a good father and role-model and his kids dread to visit him on the weekends, which they rarely do. So far WotW is a great drama and I could've watched it for another hour and a half, but the invaders from outer space have different plans. And faster than you can say 'holy crap, there goes my house' the family drives away from there home, fleeing from the nasty aliens.

On their drive to Boston a lot of stuff happens to the family that really scared the living daylights out of me. Not because of what you see, but (here it comes Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich) because of what you NOT see. You don't see an alien-vessel every ten seconds or ten minutes for that matter. The whole movie you don't see anything the family doesn't see. That's why you give a rat's ass if something would've happen to them, and that's what makes a great movie. YOU CARE ABOUT THE CHARACTERS!

War of the Worlds minus the kids equals a lot better movie

[view_and_review · 7/10 · 16 February 2007]

This movie sure did pull me in different directions. I loved the main story, that being the aliens invading and just totally annihilating everything and everyone (very much like Independence Day). The CGI was excellent, you got the full feeling of the destructive power of the aliens and their war machines. There was also a good display of the sheer pandemonium and fear that overcame everybody.

Now, as for the underlying story, that being Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) and his relationship with his kids, I didn't care for that at all. It actually dragged the movie down a bit. For the most part "War of the Worlds" was a high octane suspenseful movie, except when it was bogged down by Ray and his kids. OK, so Ray has divorced his wife and he doesn't have that great of a relationship with his kids... can't that crap be put to the side in a crisis? I mean it is a crisis situation, even enemies get along a little bit during a crisis. And the boy running off to join the army when things are getting destroyed left and right and his father and sister are trying to reach another destination entirely... what was that about? Like I said, the main story: great... the underlying story: a drag.