Search
Search results
Awix (3310 KP) rated War of the Worlds: Global Dispatches in Books
Feb 3, 2020
Diverse collection of short stories all revisiting the Martian invasion of 1898 (as originally detailed by H.G. Wells). Most (but not all) of the stories are narrated by notables from the period, most (but not all) of these are famous writers: Henry James, Samuel Clemens, Rudyard Kipling, and so on. The collection kind of overlooks the implication that the Martians only actually invade southern England in Wells' novel, but then most adaptations do the same thing, and the stories here aren't even consistent with each other (the fate of Paris varies significantly in the Jules Verne and Pablo Picasso entries).
A bit of a mixed bag, to be honest: some of the stories just restage elements of Wells with a different backdrop, others treat the Martians as a backdrop for more introspective tales, still others indulge in literary pastiche. Unlikely juxtapositions and in-jokes abound - Rudyard Kipling meets Gandhi, Tolstoy meets Stalin, Samuel Clemens (d. 1910) makes reference to John Christopher (b. 1922). The best stories are mostly the ones which recognise the political/satirical subtext powering the Wells novel and attempt to do something similar - so Barbara Hambly's story concerns British imperialism in India, and the effect of the Martians on the situation there, while another looks at the consequences for pre-revolutionary Russia. That said, Connie Willis' Hugo-winning contribution sends the whole conceit of the novel up with a predictable mixture of tongue-in-cheek drollery and sheer absurd silliness, as the unlikely effect of a Martian encounter on the poetry of Emily Dickinson is revealed (especially considering Dickinson died twelve years before the coming of the Martians). The good stories are very good indeed, the less good ones merely a bit tedious. A worthy and worthwhile tribute to the original novel.
A bit of a mixed bag, to be honest: some of the stories just restage elements of Wells with a different backdrop, others treat the Martians as a backdrop for more introspective tales, still others indulge in literary pastiche. Unlikely juxtapositions and in-jokes abound - Rudyard Kipling meets Gandhi, Tolstoy meets Stalin, Samuel Clemens (d. 1910) makes reference to John Christopher (b. 1922). The best stories are mostly the ones which recognise the political/satirical subtext powering the Wells novel and attempt to do something similar - so Barbara Hambly's story concerns British imperialism in India, and the effect of the Martians on the situation there, while another looks at the consequences for pre-revolutionary Russia. That said, Connie Willis' Hugo-winning contribution sends the whole conceit of the novel up with a predictable mixture of tongue-in-cheek drollery and sheer absurd silliness, as the unlikely effect of a Martian encounter on the poetry of Emily Dickinson is revealed (especially considering Dickinson died twelve years before the coming of the Martians). The good stories are very good indeed, the less good ones merely a bit tedious. A worthy and worthwhile tribute to the original novel.
Awix (3310 KP) rated War of the Worlds (2005) in Movies
Mar 25, 2018 (Updated Mar 25, 2018)
Here's the paradox: H.G. Wells' original novel is an absolute classic. The 1953 film version is not particularly faithful to the book, but still really a classic. Spielberg's film kind of tries to split the difference between the two and ends up not being a classic. (Maybe he should have kept the definite article in the title.) Belligerent aliens whose technological mastery is oddly lacking when it comes to getting their vaccinations embark upon slightly eccentric invasion scheme; Tom Cruise spends most of the film running away, bravely.
Still, it's not all bad: looking back on it, this is yet another of those films which attempts to use SF as a device to try and process the September 11th attacks and ends up not being nearly as profound as it thinks it is, and the way it's structured so that, hey, cities are smashed and thousands slaughtered by the Martians (look, they could be Martians, it doesn't say they're not), but at least Cruise gets to become a better dad, so it's not all bad news, is quite fatuous. But it does get closer to Wells' original intent, just about, it looks very good, and there's always Spielberg's casual mastery of the genre to enjoy. A decent stab at a book which probably isn't as easy to adapt as it first appears.
Still, it's not all bad: looking back on it, this is yet another of those films which attempts to use SF as a device to try and process the September 11th attacks and ends up not being nearly as profound as it thinks it is, and the way it's structured so that, hey, cities are smashed and thousands slaughtered by the Martians (look, they could be Martians, it doesn't say they're not), but at least Cruise gets to become a better dad, so it's not all bad news, is quite fatuous. But it does get closer to Wells' original intent, just about, it looks very good, and there's always Spielberg's casual mastery of the genre to enjoy. A decent stab at a book which probably isn't as easy to adapt as it first appears.
Awix (3310 KP) rated The War of the Worlds in TV
Dec 2, 2019
Grisly non-adaptation of the immortal H.G. Wells story retains the same basic premise and the very occasional moment, but essentially scoops out the innards of the actual novel and replaces them with indescribably turgid attempts to (I would guess) update the story and make it relevant to the modern world.
Part of a grim tradition where BBC attempts to adapt SF, fantasy and horror classics operate to different standards than when they are tackling Austen or Dickens. If the team who perpetrated War of the Worlds got their hands on Pride and Prejudice, it would end up being a lesbian romance between the Bennets' maid and one of the minor daughters, performed on ice, with a frame story concerning the Boer war. It's not just that it does the book badly, it genuinely doesn't seem interested in it at all. Someone gets a leaden, clumsy speech articulating the subtext of the novel (how to adapt a great book for the hard-of-thinking) but as to what this version of the story is supposed to be about or why we should care at all... It takes real skill and determination to screw up a classic piece of literature quite this badly.
Part of a grim tradition where BBC attempts to adapt SF, fantasy and horror classics operate to different standards than when they are tackling Austen or Dickens. If the team who perpetrated War of the Worlds got their hands on Pride and Prejudice, it would end up being a lesbian romance between the Bennets' maid and one of the minor daughters, performed on ice, with a frame story concerning the Boer war. It's not just that it does the book badly, it genuinely doesn't seem interested in it at all. Someone gets a leaden, clumsy speech articulating the subtext of the novel (how to adapt a great book for the hard-of-thinking) but as to what this version of the story is supposed to be about or why we should care at all... It takes real skill and determination to screw up a classic piece of literature quite this badly.
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Island of Dr. Moreau (1977) in Movies
Jun 16, 2020 (Updated Jun 16, 2020)
Interesting if not entirely successful adaptation of H.G. Wells' classic piece of Gothic SF. Michael York get washed up on Burt Lancaster's private island and discovers he's been doing genetic experiments on animals, trying to instil human characteristics into them. Well-mounted, and with decent performances from most of the cast, even if it's never quite as thought-provoking or disturbing as you'd probably like it to be, while most of Barbara Carrera's scenes feel like they've been grafted on from a different film, not entirely comfortably (an attempt at a twist ending involving her character was abandoned when Michael York refused to film it on taste and decency grounds).
The film-makers seem to have noticed the theoretical issues with the plot of the book - the main character has no real agency and is merely an onlooker - and fixed this by introducing a subplot in which Moreau experiments on him, thus setting up a reasonably elegant action-adventury sort of climax complete with happy ending. This does put the film rather at odds with Wells, though, and gets in the way of exploring the book's actual themes - its somewhat problematic subtexts about social control and the different sort of uplift attempted by the British Empire are still there if you look for them, seemingly by accident. Enough of the book's imagery and ideas survive to make this worthwhile viewing and probably the most rewarding adaptation, but really - read the novel as well.
The film-makers seem to have noticed the theoretical issues with the plot of the book - the main character has no real agency and is merely an onlooker - and fixed this by introducing a subplot in which Moreau experiments on him, thus setting up a reasonably elegant action-adventury sort of climax complete with happy ending. This does put the film rather at odds with Wells, though, and gets in the way of exploring the book's actual themes - its somewhat problematic subtexts about social control and the different sort of uplift attempted by the British Empire are still there if you look for them, seemingly by accident. Enough of the book's imagery and ideas survive to make this worthwhile viewing and probably the most rewarding adaptation, but really - read the novel as well.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Invisible Man (1933) in Movies
Mar 4, 2020
Universal Monster
This movie is such a classic, it came out after dracula, frankenstein and the mummy. Out of all the universal monster movies, i like this one the most. It combines sci-fi, horror, psychological espects, and overall the invisible man just being a dick/asshole to everybody in his pathway. This classic movie is based off of a H.G. Wells novel, and if you dont know who that is, look him up..."The War of the Worlds".
The plot: While researching a new drug, Dr. Jack Griffin (Claude Rains) stumbles on a potion that can make him invisible. When he reveals his new ability to his old mentor (Henry Travers) and his fiancée (Gloria Stuart), it's clear that a side effect of the potion is insanity. Jack goes on a violent rampage, and the police struggle to hunt him down, unable to see their target, while his mentor and his former partner (William Harrigan) desperately try to devise a plan to capture him.
You have Claude Rains playing "The Invisible Man", he is excellent in this film. Cause like i said his charcter is just a dick/asshole to everybody in his pathway but has a heart of gold for his love.
If you havent seen this film, i would highly recordmend it, cause it is fantasic and phenomenal.
The plot: While researching a new drug, Dr. Jack Griffin (Claude Rains) stumbles on a potion that can make him invisible. When he reveals his new ability to his old mentor (Henry Travers) and his fiancée (Gloria Stuart), it's clear that a side effect of the potion is insanity. Jack goes on a violent rampage, and the police struggle to hunt him down, unable to see their target, while his mentor and his former partner (William Harrigan) desperately try to devise a plan to capture him.
You have Claude Rains playing "The Invisible Man", he is excellent in this film. Cause like i said his charcter is just a dick/asshole to everybody in his pathway but has a heart of gold for his love.
If you havent seen this film, i would highly recordmend it, cause it is fantasic and phenomenal.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated War of the Worlds (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In a summer season of grand blockbusters, War of the Worlds” is perhaps the biggest dud in years, and is a failure of epic proportions. The film is a remake of the classic 1953 film of the same name which like the new one is inspired from the H.G. Wells novel of 1898.
The new version is directed by Steven Spielberg, and stars Tom Cruise as Ray Ferrier, a divorced dockworker who is spending some time with his estranged children, Robbie (Justin Chatwin), and Rachael (Dakota Fanning), while his ex-wife and her new husband take a trip.
The children are very cold to Ray as they feel they were dumped on their mother as Ray only cares about himself. When a series of freak electrical storms hits various cities around the world, Ray attempts to comfort his children who are disturbed by the storm as well as the fact that all electronic devices have ceased to function.
Ray leaves the children at home and ventures into the neighborhood and is soon facing a waking nightmare as giant machines burst from the ground laying waste to everything in their paths.
Ray gathers his family and flees in a working vehicle trying to stay one step ahead of the alien machines in an attempt to find safety and reunite the children with their mother in Boston.
As basic as the above plot outline is, it is pretty much the entire plot of the film. There is little else to it aside from a few interruptions such as the family seeking shelter in a couple of houses or facing an angry mob as they attempt to reach a ferry.
While a thin plot can be excused for many action films, what cannot be excused are the painfully bad lack of any excitement in the film and the lack of any compelling action or suspense.
We are supposed to believe that the world is being destroyed by the alien’s but aside from a few blasted bridges, and small buildings, we see a surprising lack of carnage. There are no sequences of classic landmarks being reduced to rubble, there are no scenes of vast armies locked in a desperate struggle against the invaders.
Instead, we get a sequence of helicopters firing, and a line of soldiers firing, but they never show us what they are shooting at, nor do we see the alien retaliation behind a bright explosion and a few vehicles emerging on fire. This is particularly frustrating when you consider that the 1954 version at least showed a few tanks being blasted outright.
Another issue I had with the film was the painfully obvious superimposed backdrops as during the films limited action scenes; the background was clearly inserted into the shot as it was so fuzzy that it did not fit in with the events in the foreground.
While I am willing to dismiss this as stylistic nitpicking what cannot be ignored is that for most of the films running length, the cast does little more than stand around waiting for something to happen.
There are no great segments of character development, no insight into why the aliens waited all this time to attack when they could have done so centuries earlier, why they want the planet, and numerous other plot holes, some of which are so glaring. One of my favorites was the guy who was able to use a video camera to record the opening attacks when it was clearly shown that all electronic devices were rendered useless.
Much has been made of Cruise’s recent off screen actions and I must say that those have been far more interesting and engaging than his performance here. Cruise spends the majority of the film in a wide-eyed gaze or frantically moving and yelling. His character like his annoyingly bratty daughter are so unsympathetic, I found myself hoping that the aliens would take them out and end our suffering.
I hate stated prior that I thought this film may have problems as in light of films such as “ID4”, the story would seem bland to modern audiences unless the action was increased and there was a dynamic story with interesting characters. Sadly all of those are missing from a film that also has one of the worst endings in recent history.
There is no build up, no final confrontation, no moment of high tension to get to the payoff; it just ends with a whimper. One would think that a grand battle or an effects royale is in store instead, it plays out in a very matter of fact fashion with shockingly little action or suspense.
I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that between the weak acting, tired, thin plot, and infrequent and underwhelming action and effects, this is a film that exists only due to the talents of Cruise and Spielberg., That being said, I have to wonder how and why they could not have picked a better product than this stale offering.
The new version is directed by Steven Spielberg, and stars Tom Cruise as Ray Ferrier, a divorced dockworker who is spending some time with his estranged children, Robbie (Justin Chatwin), and Rachael (Dakota Fanning), while his ex-wife and her new husband take a trip.
The children are very cold to Ray as they feel they were dumped on their mother as Ray only cares about himself. When a series of freak electrical storms hits various cities around the world, Ray attempts to comfort his children who are disturbed by the storm as well as the fact that all electronic devices have ceased to function.
Ray leaves the children at home and ventures into the neighborhood and is soon facing a waking nightmare as giant machines burst from the ground laying waste to everything in their paths.
Ray gathers his family and flees in a working vehicle trying to stay one step ahead of the alien machines in an attempt to find safety and reunite the children with their mother in Boston.
As basic as the above plot outline is, it is pretty much the entire plot of the film. There is little else to it aside from a few interruptions such as the family seeking shelter in a couple of houses or facing an angry mob as they attempt to reach a ferry.
While a thin plot can be excused for many action films, what cannot be excused are the painfully bad lack of any excitement in the film and the lack of any compelling action or suspense.
We are supposed to believe that the world is being destroyed by the alien’s but aside from a few blasted bridges, and small buildings, we see a surprising lack of carnage. There are no sequences of classic landmarks being reduced to rubble, there are no scenes of vast armies locked in a desperate struggle against the invaders.
Instead, we get a sequence of helicopters firing, and a line of soldiers firing, but they never show us what they are shooting at, nor do we see the alien retaliation behind a bright explosion and a few vehicles emerging on fire. This is particularly frustrating when you consider that the 1954 version at least showed a few tanks being blasted outright.
Another issue I had with the film was the painfully obvious superimposed backdrops as during the films limited action scenes; the background was clearly inserted into the shot as it was so fuzzy that it did not fit in with the events in the foreground.
While I am willing to dismiss this as stylistic nitpicking what cannot be ignored is that for most of the films running length, the cast does little more than stand around waiting for something to happen.
There are no great segments of character development, no insight into why the aliens waited all this time to attack when they could have done so centuries earlier, why they want the planet, and numerous other plot holes, some of which are so glaring. One of my favorites was the guy who was able to use a video camera to record the opening attacks when it was clearly shown that all electronic devices were rendered useless.
Much has been made of Cruise’s recent off screen actions and I must say that those have been far more interesting and engaging than his performance here. Cruise spends the majority of the film in a wide-eyed gaze or frantically moving and yelling. His character like his annoyingly bratty daughter are so unsympathetic, I found myself hoping that the aliens would take them out and end our suffering.
I hate stated prior that I thought this film may have problems as in light of films such as “ID4”, the story would seem bland to modern audiences unless the action was increased and there was a dynamic story with interesting characters. Sadly all of those are missing from a film that also has one of the worst endings in recent history.
There is no build up, no final confrontation, no moment of high tension to get to the payoff; it just ends with a whimper. One would think that a grand battle or an effects royale is in store instead, it plays out in a very matter of fact fashion with shockingly little action or suspense.
I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that between the weak acting, tired, thin plot, and infrequent and underwhelming action and effects, this is a film that exists only due to the talents of Cruise and Spielberg., That being said, I have to wonder how and why they could not have picked a better product than this stale offering.