What could have been

[Wastedyuthe]

Honestly, I don't know what it is about the Cruiser- I have never thought there is anything wrong with his acting, in any of his films. Sure, some are a little corny, which is why he adjusts his acting to suit (MI2 anyone?). But just look at other films like Interview with the Vampire- superb job from him there. Likewise in WotW, I thought he did the trick. His emotion when he was trying to sing a lullaby to his daughter was spot on.
Each to their own opinion I suppose.

[almichev]

I thought Tom Cruise (whose intellectual close friends get to call TC) was good in WotW. It's the gaping plot holes and boredom that got me.

Wish we could find out whether any other scenes were filmed - such as the aliens home planet at the start. Not that it would cover one of the holes, but would be great to see.

[Wastedyuthe]

I very much doubt the home planet was filmed. The intention of the film was to follow the invasion from an every-man's point of view. As well known as the Cruiser is, I very much doubt he was invited to a fairwell party at the home planet before the invasion began

As to the plot holes. Well some will argue that it was laziness on the scriptwriters parts. Maybe some holes might have been filled with the missing scenes, maybe not. But like I said, the point of the film was to follow an every-man caught up in the invasion. If this happened in real life and you wanted to escape with your family etc, do you think you'd know all the answers? Do you think the aliens would come up to you and say 'Oh, I do beg your pardon old chap- sorry to barge in. We thought we'd come and take over your planet because we've buggered up our own!'

The boredom thing- well each to their own. I certainly wasn't bored.

[almichev]

Not everything i type needs to be commented on y'know ;-)

I think you're right about the home planet not being filmed. I think there's also a scene where TopCat plants the object he put in his pocket. Not sure though.

[Wastedyuthe]

Sorry, Almichev- another comment

Yes, that's one bit I commented on earlier on this thread, when he takes the artefact out of his pocket- I just wasn't sure what he did with it. There was a piccy somewhere of him doing so, but I'll be damned if I can find it now.

[rusti]

lensman said:

I guess Rusti/Mr Fibble saw a different version of the movie than I did. The version I saw wasn't at all aimed at a younger audience. It was a frightening and sobering film, which left its audience remarkably quiet and thoughtful at the end. And I know that's not just my personal observation-- I just read a review the other day from a film critic who also remarked on how unusually quiet people were when leaving the theatre.

I think Spielberg accomplished his goal much better than those slamming this film realize. He wasn't making a popcorn movie. He wasn't making "Independence Day II". He didn't put in the "over the hill" battle scene because that's not the kind of film he was making!

But the battle scenes FIVE OF THEM are in the book ALL FROM A FIRST PERSON VIEW he didnt show ONE NOT BLOODY ONE!
Not the film he was making, so in other words he used someone elses work to make his own story... i thought that was called Plagrism

Im sick of people making excuses for this bloody usless cop out of a film that isnt worth washing my arse with the case.

And Jurassic park was 10 times more scary that this film.

I Hope Spielberg doesn't ever go within 100 miles of a remake/adaptation ever again.

[Ashe Raven]

www.transformersmovie.com/

Too late

[rusti]

asheraven said:

www.transformersmovie.com/

Too late

damn, i forgot about that.

[Wastedyuthe]

"Im sick of people making excuses for this bloody usless cop out of a film that isnt worth washing my arse with the case."

Aren't you kind of being a bit vindictive there. We are all entitled to our opinions. Please don't let this thread go down the usual Pendragon-argument route. If you don't like seeing peoples positive opinions, then don't read them. There's no need to attack them.

If you meant to attack the film rather than the people (who include myself) defending it, then perhaps you should have worded it differently.

[Lensman]

wastedyuthe said:

Honestly, I don't know what it is about the Cruiser- I have never thought there is anything wrong with his acting, in any of his films.

I can't figure this out, either. Sure he's done some stupid offscreen antics, and what he's said about psychiatrists indicates he's been brainwashed by Scientologists.

But that has nothing to do with his acting ability. I wonder if some are jealous of his success.

OTOH certain actors do just rub me the wrong way, and I can't give any logical reason for it. Perhaps Cruise affects some that way.

[Lensman]

almichev said:

Not everything i type needs to be commented on y'know ;-)

Yes it does. ;D

[Lensman]

[Moderators-- if any part of the following is considered inappropriate for this forum, please feel free to edit or delete as needed.]

rusti said:

Im sick of people making excuses for this bloody usless cop out of a film that isnt worth washing my arse with the case.

Hey Rusti/Mr Fibbles, don't beat around the bush-- tell us what you *really* think! ;D

Seriously, you've been slamming this film from the first we heard about it, long before it was released. Surely you'll agree you had your mind made up to hate it before you ever saw it. So it's hardly surprising that you were unable to enjoy the film or appreciate its good qualities.

And despite your repeated hammering of this very good film, you can't deny that the *majority* of critics gave it a positive review. You're entitled to your opinion-- but your opinion is in the minority.

rusti said:

he used someone elses work to make his own story... i thought that was called Plagrism

Did Peter Jackson commit "plagiarism" when he made his LOTR movies? An adaptation isn't plagiarism. It's only plagiarism when you take someone else's work and present it as your own, without giving them credit.

Admit it, Rusti, you're just ticked off because you wanted an authentic period adaptation, and that's not what Spielberg made. I'd have preferred a story true to Wells' novel too, but when all is said and done THIS IS ONLY A MOVIE. Is it really so important that you have to keep slamming it over and over, even tho it's been more than a year and a half now since the movie came out?

Honestly, it seems as though you think somehow this movie has made Wells' classic less than it was. Wells' WOTW is every bit as good as the day it was written. No movie, not even the Pendragon rubbish can detract from that by the slightest amount.

So I hope you won't think I'm being unfriendly when I suggest you consider that perhaps you're taking this too seriously. Again, IT'S ONLY A MOVIE.
.

[almichev]

Not sure if this can be counted as a deleted or unfilmed scene but whatever - hoh oh yes!!

[almichev]

wastedyuthe said:

Sorry, Almichev- another comment

lensman said:

Yes it does. ;D

Honestly, the pair of you...... ;D

[Wastedyuthe]

almichev said:

Not sure if this can be counted as a deleted or unfilmed scene but whatever - hoh oh yes!!

Erm, no it doesn't count. Concept art, that's all. Stop cheating