8mm Forum: War of the worlds.What the Hell???

8mm Forum

my profile | my password | search | faq | register | forum home

next oldest topic

next newest topic

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » War of the worlds.What the Hell???

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: War of the worlds.What the Hell???

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted June 26, 2005 01:59 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Has any one noticed what the small print says on the poster for this re-make? By the way, i am looking forward to seeing,(not so sure now).
Its rated in the UK as a 12Pg. Normally this would state that the film contains moderate bad language or moderate violence.
Now (speilberg films always seem top for this)The Tosser's from the PC world have got hold of it and i couldn't believe my eyes, i hope its a joke for this film only,
It states, "contains menace and threats!! [Mad]

[Mad]

I repeat this is the small print after the rating. Would some one over the pond please check the posters on your side and tell us if its the same. What jerk decided that wording?

| IP: Logged

Alan Rik
Film God

Posts: 2211
From: New York City, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted June 26, 2005 02:07 PM

Email Alan Rik

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Maybe its a Scientologist thing... [Embarrassed]

[Embarrassed]

| IP: Logged

Douglas Meltzer
Moderator

Posts: 4554
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted June 26, 2005 02:22 PM

Email Douglas Meltzer

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Tom,

In today's 2 page ad in The New York Times, the rating box states "PG-13 Parents Strongly Cautioned. Some Material May Be Inappropriate For Children Under 13. Frightening Sequences Of Sci-Fi Violence And Disturbing Images."

I'll have to see the new George Romero film before I check out the menace and threats!

Doug

--------------------
I think there's room for just one more film.....

| IP: Logged

Paul Adsett
Film God

Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted June 26, 2005 04:27 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

It will be interesting to see how this film compares with the classic 1951 George Pal version (starring Gene Barry). I suspect the new version will be loaded up with endless CG effects which will drag out the movie and may make it less effective than the original version. Anyway, I am looking forward to comparing the two (opens in Orlando on Wednesday).

--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted June 26, 2005 04:55 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Well that sounds like the dorks over hear have got hold of the poster. Oh well, i see gene Barry makes a cameo appearence in the new version so look out for him. [Wink]

[Wink]

| IP: Logged

Kevin Faulkner
Film God

Posts: 4071
From: Essex UK
Registered: Jun 2003

posted June 26, 2005 04:57 PM

Edit/Delete Post

I for one cant wait to see it. I think the original was great and as for the Jeff Wayne/Richard Burton version...Awesome [Smile]

[Smile]

Now wouldnt this be good film to have on super 8. Maybe if this film lives up to all the hype then we should get Derann to release some clips or maybe the whole feature [Smile]

[Smile]

Kev.

--------------------
GS1200 Xenon with Elmo 1.0...great combo along with a 16-CL Xenon for that super bright white light.

| IP: Logged

Paul Adsett
Film God

Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted June 29, 2005 08:25 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Today's headlines in the entertainment section of 'The Orlando Sentinel':
"Bore of the Worlds"
The Sentinel's film critic Riger Moore is totally unimpressed with this film, calling it "Close Encounter's of the dullest kind". Apparently this is H.G.Wells's classic novel padded out with CGI and accompanied by a typically boring American 'family-in-crisis' sub plot. Tom Cruise apparently walks through the whole movie with a blank expression on his face. As Moore says " where is Jeff Goldblum when you need him?". Looks like Spielberg has lost his touch again on this one, and the film does not hold a candle to the 1953 George Pal classic. George Pal's special effects were done on a shoe string compared with the CG in the new version. But the effect of Pal's green swan shaped Martian spacecraft and the impulse sound of the death rays is simply unmatched and unforgettable by anyone who has seen the 53 version.
I'm sorry to hear this as I thought this film might be something really special. I'm going to see it anyway, but then I'll come home and put on the 1953 classic to remind myself how good movies used to be.

--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj

| IP: Logged

Tim Drage
Film Handler

Posts: 32
From: Harrow, London, UK
Registered: Nov 2004

posted June 29, 2005 08:55 AM

Author's Homepage

Email Tim Drage

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

My favorite (don't remember what film) was "Contains Moderate Emotional Intensity" ! [Eek!]

[Eek!]

Glad they warned me about that! [Roll Eyes]

[Roll Eyes]

--------------------
Tim Drage
Animator & Director
Spite Your Face Productions
http://www.spiteyourface.com

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted June 29, 2005 11:52 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Blimy, who's the weirdo on the BBFC? Paul i also read a review on that line, the trailer on the telly does look good but then, teasers are meant to sell arnt they. I shall go and see it although as i understand it the aliens are tri-pods like on the record album. The re-make should have been in the style of the original film. Sadly many re-makes are just special effects against dull movies and unforunatly too many hollywood films do like there "lovely perfect families" as story backgrounds, (quite odd considering todays true life high divorce rates and violence within fanilies + a gun in most households over there) Still as Kev said, its a movie to see and long awaited and i shall take myself to see it and then next day play back my 3x400 version, well edited, no padding and full of action.
Speilberg is a top gun as far as movies go so fingers crossed. [Wink]

[Wink]

| IP: Logged

David Roberts
Master Film Handler

Posts: 405
From: Suffolk. England
Registered: Apr 2004

posted June 29, 2005 02:50 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I love the 1953 version of War of The Worlds .I have the 1x400 and3x400 versions and find they get looked at more often than just about anything else in my collection.Very good picture and sound as well.

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted June 29, 2005 03:18 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Dave, does the 400 ft contain additional scenes to the 3 x 400ft?

| IP: Logged

Jean-Marc Toussaint
Film God

Posts: 2392
From: France
Registered: Oct 2004

posted June 29, 2005 05:38 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Jean-Marc Toussaint

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Saw the film today. It's not that bad. It's OK.

(Doug: I saw "Land of the Dead" last week and really enjoyed it).

Catching "Willy Wonka" tomorrow. Although it's directed by Tim Burton, I'm not expecting too much.

--------------------
The Grindcave Cinema Website

| IP: Logged

Jan Bister
Darth 8mm

Posts: 2629
From: Ohio, USA
Registered: Jan 2005

posted June 29, 2005 09:44 PM

Email Jan Bister

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I can't wait to see WOTW myself. Saw the 1953 version long ago, so long ago I barely remember it - except for the alien eyes, which curiously were made up from triple red/green/blue pupils which always reminded me of the early years of color TV for some strange reason. [Smile]

[Smile]

In the meantime, I'm gonna have to decide whether I want to listen to the MP3 version of Jeff Wayne's musical off my computer, or put on the double vinyl album that I happen to own. [Big Grin]

[Big Grin]

--------------------
Call me Phoenix. *dusts off the ashes*

| IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003

posted June 30, 2005 03:42 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Jan, are you kidding? Always the vinyl! [Smile]

[Smile]

| IP: Logged

Jan Bister
Darth 8mm

Posts: 2629
From: Ohio, USA
Registered: Jan 2005

posted June 30, 2005 07:26 PM

Email Jan Bister

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

You're right, of course! The convenience of MP3 just tempted me momentarily, that's all. [Big Grin]

[Big Grin]

--------------------
Call me Phoenix. *dusts off the ashes*

| IP: Logged

Paul Adsett
Film God

Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted July 12, 2005 10:00 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Went to see War of the World's tonight. I thought the movie was quite good, and appreciated that the depiction of the Martian tripods was true to the original H.G.Wells novel. I also liked Spielberg's 'tip of the hat' to the 1951 version with the nice cameo shot of Gene Barry at the end of the picture.
Was it better than George Pal's 1951 version? No, I don't think so. Tom Cruise and his dysfunctional family are a constant irritation which detracts from the film, and Pal achieved everything that Spielberg did in capturing the terror of the Martian machines, at a fraction of the cost. But it's definately worth seeing just for the special effects.

--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj

| IP: Logged

Jan Bister
Darth 8mm

Posts: 2629
From: Ohio, USA
Registered: Jan 2005

posted July 12, 2005 10:24 PM

Email Jan Bister

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Maybe WOTW2005 would be the perfect feature for Derann to make an extract from - once you take everything with Tom Cruise & kids out and leave only the scenes depicting the Martians attacking, you got your 400ft. digest right there [Big Grin]

[Big Grin]

--------------------
Call me Phoenix. *dusts off the ashes*

| IP: Logged

Mike Peckham
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1461
From: West Sussex, UK.
Registered: Jun 2003

posted July 13, 2005 01:05 AM

Email Mike Peckham

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I also went to see it at the weekend and have to agree with Paul, the special effects were excellant - very much reminiscent of 'Independence Day' in parts, and the movie was very scary - several times I was bracing myself in readiness for a big scary moment [Eek!]

[Eek!]

!

But the story line seemed muddled to me, Tom Cruises family was little more than a distraction and there were one or two inconsistencies too. For me the mark of a really good sci - fi movie is actually believing it no matter how unbelievable the story is, I'm afraid I just couldn't let go with WOTW2005 and believe I was there.

Great film, well worth seeing - but maybe just the once.

Mike [Cool]

[Cool]

--------------------
Auntie Em must have stopped wondering where I am by now...

| IP: Logged

Paul Adsett
Film God

Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted July 13, 2005 08:33 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I totally agree with Jan, this movie could be edited into a really super 400 or 600 footer and still retain the essential elements of the film. All it would need is the opening sequence with Morgan Freeman's brief prologue and the scenes where the tripods initially break out of the ground, some mid sequences possibly including the underground cellar scenes where the martian remote camera is scanning around, and of course ending with the tripods keeling over with the final Morgan Freeman voive-over epilogue. Keep Cruise and his obnoxious family totally out of the digest.
Maybe Derann will consider doing this. In the meantime, of course, the 1951 version with Gene Barry on Super 8 is hard to beat.

--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted July 13, 2005 11:27 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Ive actually got to see this film now, and despite the ridiculous wording,(politicaly correct nonsense)of the poster, it was much better than anticipated. The original opening with the narrator,(what a pity they didnt get to use Richard Burtons voice from the album) was very good. Special effects are top notch, this is one area of movies that mix the digital technology of today and the big screens of cine to make an awesome partner. Clearly the family was there for us to follow through there own experience. Theres always the Hollywood "Great feeling" bit that makes you want to vomit but all in all a good film.
It would make a brilliant 2 x 600ft mini feature.
Nothing will beat the original. [Wink]

[Wink]

| IP: Logged

Jan Bister
Darth 8mm

Posts: 2629
From: Ohio, USA
Registered: Jan 2005

posted July 13, 2005 10:11 PM

Email Jan Bister

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I love classic movies dearly, but somehow the 1953 version of WOTW just didn't do it for me. It's a good film... but it seems to be held in very high regard around here and I can't really say that I thought it was THAT good. The Martian ships didn't even look anything like what H.G.Wells envisioned in his novel, or what you can see on the cover of Jeff Wayne's musical album (the giant tripod machine). Steven Spielberg sure got that part down pat in his 2005 version, though... but in the 1953 film, it was just little gliders shooting heat rays. Somehow they didn't seem menacing to me. [Eek!]

[Eek!]

--------------------
Call me Phoenix. *dusts off the ashes*

| IP: Logged

Paul Adsett
Film God

Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted July 14, 2005 09:05 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Jan I totally agree with you that Spielberg's special effects team did an awesome job on the Martian tripods, but did you notice that the relative scale of the tripods (in relation to surrounding buildings and landscape) varied enourmously? I estimated the height of the tripods in different shots anywhere from a couple of hundred feet to a couple of thousand feet!
The thing about the 1951 version is the brilliant depictions of the heat ray, simultaneously accompanied by the resonant pulsing sound, and somehow the gliding green machines are very menacing. I think Spielberg was clearly influenced by the 1951 film, as he copied quite a lot from it.

--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj

| IP: Logged

David Roberts
Master Film Handler

Posts: 405
From: Suffolk. England
Registered: Apr 2004

posted July 14, 2005 03:01 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Tom,
Sorry i havnt replied to you question about WOTW but ive just come across it!
I dont think the 1x400 has any additional scenes over the 3x400,so you cant edit the two together .I tend to watch the short version more simply because of time constraints.
Its the special effects i like,i just cant get excited about the modern digital effects you get today,although ive not seen the new version of WOTW.

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted July 14, 2005 03:05 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I would assume in 1953 the effects team were very limited and with that were certainly ahead of its time. Certainly the SFX in the Spielberg versin make the film what is is. The best way to sum i think is that they are both excellent films in there own rights. I'd say as an 8mm release for arguments sake of a 3x400ft the Speilberg film would be hard to beat. On a TV screen it would lose all of its impact.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Move Topic

Delete Topic

next oldest topic

next newest topic

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2