War of the Worlds: Spielberg Mutilates His Own Masterpiece (SPOILERS included)

[Dr Strangelove]

What was so heroic about Robbie's actions? He had no weapons, he could have been no more than a hindrance to the troops. Cruise could not have gone charging of over the hill, he had his daughter to take care of. In fact he risked the daughter by lingering to try to talk some sense into Robbie.
I don't see Cruise as a coward either. He uses his head to do his utmost to guard the safety of his children. He eventually risks his life first to go up into a machine to get his daughter and then by putting himself deeper into the machine to plant the grenade that puts it out of action.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by JohnT
Your quote:

"no kid character is ever harmed in a spielberg movie" rule...

Nothing about death, nothing about the kid character being major, just "no kid character is ever harmed..." You made a blanket assertion and I countered it with facts. Simple, eh?

Supposedly, Speilberg has said he won't harm any kids in his movies.

I was rather displeased about the son surviving.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
He had no weapons, he could have been no more than a hindrance to the troops.

that's the classic american movie hero
run into battle with nothing except your fists and end up saving the world

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Allowing him to live is the greatest vindication of that choice. It means much more when we know he lives.

I disagree very much. Choices have consequences, and if you make a bad choice, you need to suffer the consequences. Robbie made the choice to run over the hill just to see the battle, not even to take part in it. What were his last words? "I need to see this." He risked his father and his sister because of his selfish need to see the battle, when everything that they'd seen up to that point should have told him that it wasn't a battle but a slaughter.

By allowing Robbie to live you make the points that: choices don't have consequences, you can discard your parents rules for safety, you can put other people in jeapody without risk, etc.

Yes, Robbie made a choice, several of them, and he paid for none of them.

I also disagree with you saying that Cruise's chracter didn't stick his neck out for anyone. Several times he tried to help other characters: the mechanic, his neighbors, etc. He just didn't do so foolishly.

[faded glory]

Those tripods were buried millions of years ago. Wait..what?

That would mean that was the best technology the martians had to deploy. Hell, the tripods were way better than what we had. But it seems more and more like they are in fact the intergalatic version of the Ford Pinto.

The plot didnt make sense Unless we accept the fact the aliens had conquered there home and ceased technologically to advance.

Ok I have a difficult time in making points like these in writing. But here goes... It would be equivlant of us Burying Spears and Wooden clubs on Jupiters moon Europa cause in a few billion years there will be thriving life there (if not today?)

My conculsion is that the martians were absolutely inferior to us. They were allowed to exist in bacteria free enviroment, which is probably a freak occurence in the scheme of the universe . Having no microbial nemesis. They didnt evolve normally. The concept to them was unimaginable. Kind of like the Flu/measels carried in blankets was to the indians.



Great movie. Great action. Damn I hate Dakota Fanning.

[JohnT]

Those tripods were buried millions of years ago. Wait..what?

That is a totally unwarranted assertion made by a character who had absolutely no idea what had happened. Why so many movie-goers accept it as "truth" is totally beyond me.

[Wiglaf]

To allow his character to die vincicates the father. At the end of the movie viewers will say "Cruise was right, if you stick your neck out to help someone, you're just going to end up getting killed. Cruise never helped anyone, and his approach worked. Robbie's didn't." That I feel is a bad message and one Spielburg didn't want to send.

Allowing Robbie to live made the point that helping others isn't stupid, reckless, foolish, idealistic or naive.

Because of that I am very happy Robbie lived.

Allowing a character to live has nothing to do with legitimizing his position. A mass murderer who eludes police in the end is not necessarily sanctioned by the director.

On the other hand, If Robbie had been killed trying to get people on the evacuation boat, we would all know he died doing the right thing.

Getting lost wanting to watch a battle is just idiotic, and the fact that you somehow believe this as a brave act further goes to show what a nut you are about this youth advocacy front. That you buy his miracle survival from a dramatic standpoint isn't encouraging either.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by JohnT

Those tripods were buried millions of years ago. Wait..what?

That is a totally unwarranted assertion made by a character who had absolutely no idea what had happened. Why so many movie-goers accept it as "truth" is totally beyond me.

OK, you do have a point. I mean after all, it's Tom Cruise saying it and he's a Scientologist.

Hey wait! Maybe this movie is all about Scientology! Could these be the same aliens who implanted bad engrams in our heads? Maybe they returned because Scientology was making headway towards removing the bad engrams?

[Theben]

Originally posted by MarkG
it's one thing showing someone shooting someone else, even if that man is not shown, and another showing a closed door with no understandable sounds.

if spielberg wanted to cast any blame on cruise for the killing he would have to show a bit more than a closed door....

But he did. Before the door was closed you saw the darkened silouette of Cruise standing in the doorway, and Robbin's character looking nervously behind him. When he closed the door there were no illusions in my mind what was going to happen.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Theben
When he closed the door there were no illusions in my mind what was going to happen.

is it the same for you if you see a headline "50 people killed in bomb explosion" and actually seeing images from the site?

[Theben]

apples vs. oranges...

[MarkG]

apples vs. oranges...

well, after that argument i can only agree with you

[Pyrodrew]

Originally posted by Theben
But he did. Before the door was closed you saw the darkened silouette of Cruise standing in the doorway, and Robbin's character looking nervously behind him. When he closed the door there were no illusions in my mind what was going to happen.

Same here, I knew Cruise would start to preach scientology to him, the evils of psychology/drugs, and then jump around about his love for Katie. Robbins was trapped.

I didn't buy Robbins' transformation to raving nutcase. Cruise was able to keep him quiet and passive when the alien probe was searching his place & only a few feet away, yet a few minutes later he starts screaming about his "tunnel to the city" and how they won't get his blood?

Great special effects. Yet, I didn't care if a tripod stepped on Cruise & kids at all. And the ending with Robbie made it worse. Overall, I was disappointed. I wanted to see Batman Begins, but I was outvoted.

[Pyrodrew]

Originally posted by Theben
apples vs. oranges...

I prefer oranges, but apples are ok.

[Pyrodrew]

Originally posted by JohnT
Btw, I've seen this film four times already and will likely go again this weekend.

Check out the scene where Cruise tells the guard to look at the tripod with the shield down because of the flock of birds around it. How many birds naturally clutter (trying to land?) around a large loud moving metal machine? I know it's sci-fi, but if they do that they might as well had Tom Cruise be beast master and tell the birds to attack while Aquaman had the sea creatures secure the oceans.