|
|
Post by almichev on Feb 24, 2007 1:38:32 GMT 1
Thanks for this post wastedyuthe, am always interested to know what else was filmed.
Am wondering what the "interacting with atmospheric fog effects" were. I guess signalling with lights.
@ Lensman - some people don't like the film so end of story please. I felt let down especially after the first trailer, the one with people coming out of their houses followed by everything exploding. It suggested a very different film to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scifishocks on Feb 24, 2007 2:18:43 GMT 1
I have to agree, the trailer was amazing. Not quite what we ended up with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Feb 24, 2007 2:47:03 GMT 1
Rob: "Camelot!" Lensman: "It's only a deleted scene." Wastedyuthe: "SHH!" ROTFLMAO!!  Oh, *very* clever NervousPete! (And another Monty Python fan, I see!) Right now I wish Nerfy hadn't removed the Smite/Exalt option from this board-- I'd give you points for that one, yes indeedy! |
|
Wastedyuthe
Been Here a while!
Here hare, here.
Posts: 215
|
Post by Wastedyuthe on Feb 24, 2007 8:54:14 GMT 1
Thanks for this post wastedyuthe, am always interested to know what else was filmed. Am wondering what the "interacting with atmospheric fog effects" were. I guess signalling with lights. @ Lensman - some people don't like the film so end of story please. I felt let down especially after the first trailer, the one with people coming out of their houses followed by everything exploding. It suggested a very different film to me. Yes Almichev, this scene could have been a winner from what I have heard. The only reason why I think it would NOT benefit the film is I don't think it advances the story- it's merely there to be scary. What actually happens is Ray and co spot several tripods advancing through the city, and hide behind a car (their van?) while one tripod is scouring through windows with it's feelers, picking out hiding humans, and putting them in it's basket. Then it turns on the vehicle for some reason (perhaps Rachel screams (you know, for a change)), but I am not sure what happens after that. If you watch the making of documentaries on the second dvd disk, you will see sections of the scene in a basic format on one of the computer clips. And obviously from the photo, we know they completed at least some of the scenes effects. |
|
FALLINGSTAR
Been Here a while!
Zippy, George, Geoff and Bungle....Hey everyone...it's RAINBOW!
Posts: 222
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Feb 25, 2007 0:18:01 GMT 1
They should just release a dvd of the special effects and lose Cruise, his obnoxious bratz and the rest of the film . Might be worth watching then!
|
|
|
|
Post by rusti on Feb 25, 2007 0:47:38 GMT 1
They should just release a dvd of the special effects and lose Cruise, his obnoxious bratz and the rest of the film . Might be worth watching then! yeah 1 1/2 hours worth of Ryan Chrche's tripods. I can live with that. |
|
|
|
Post by Commandingtripod on Feb 25, 2007 1:13:16 GMT 1
I felt let down especially after the first trailer, the one with people coming out of their houses followed by everything exploding. It suggested a very different film to me. I didn't even get the first trailer.  I found the trailers coming after it to be better (And in my eyes, understandable). My thoughts of course. |
|
Wastedyuthe
Been Here a while!
Here hare, here.
Posts: 215
|
Post by Wastedyuthe on Feb 25, 2007 12:09:10 GMT 1
Yes the first trailer was a bit pump.
|
|
|
|
Post by almichev on Feb 25, 2007 13:11:28 GMT 1
Yes the first trailer was a bit pump. Heh heh. I think all the trailers are pump - exploding bridge, attacked ferry, cruise running from tripod stompers etc etc. Suggests a completely different type of film. Anyway, the best bits are on youtube - ;D |
|
Wastedyuthe
Been Here a while!
Here hare, here.
Posts: 215
|
Post by Wastedyuthe on Feb 25, 2007 13:54:40 GMT 1
To be fair to the film, I think it still gives a decent impression that there is no where to hide. And there is plenty of horror in the film, just not necessarily on screen. To think that all that red weed is from sprayed human blood! The dock scene was particuarly well done I feel. In it, not only do we see the tripods rounding up humans with the heat rays on the dock and on the far bank, but we also see the tripods collecting people from the water ready to fertilise the land with their blood. Amongst all of this, we also see in the distance yet another lightning strike- a sign of more impending doom to come. This film does have it's moments.
|
|
Jonatan
Newbie!
"Naval guns speak loudly, indeed"
Posts: 32
|
Post by Jonatan on Feb 25, 2007 18:20:12 GMT 1
All I know is that since that snakelike tentacle scene in that basement, I haven't been able to sleep properly and have many nightmares waking in a cold sweat.  /Jonatan |
|
Wastedyuthe
Been Here a while!
Here hare, here.
Posts: 215
|
Post by Wastedyuthe on Feb 25, 2007 18:25:12 GMT 1
Yes I often dream I'm getting attacked by snakelike tentacles, but then I wake up and find out it's just my missus.
|
|
|
|
Post by almichev on Feb 25, 2007 22:39:58 GMT 1
Lol. Try doing a tripod impression  |
|
|
|
Post by sledgeka on Feb 26, 2007 9:02:34 GMT 1
They should just release a dvd of the special effects and lose Cruise, his obnoxious bratz and the rest of the film . Might be worth watching then! I kinda of agree with about losing Mr Cruise where does he have to be in such a classic novel because the producers want to attract a wider audience and pay him 20 million. The Plot is confusing and center around Mr Cruise's efforts and he will win the day and ride off into the sunset. His Acting is crap! Do you know he was nominated for a Golden Raspberry Award for worst actor in this film? but unfortuately he did not win!  I did not bother watching it on the cinema as all my friends said 'It was crap!' they were right. the only things I liked about this film was the Visual Effects; Sound and John Williams Soundtrack and the Martians were effective also. Could have been better without Mr Cruise!  |
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Feb 26, 2007 9:25:54 GMT 1
I did not bother watching it on the cinema as all my friends said 'It was crap!' they were right. And yet what you characterize as a "crap" film got a 73% percent positive review from the critics' survey at Rotten Tomatoes dot-com. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/war_of_the_worlds/Now that doesn't mean you're "wrong", because people's reactions to films are subjective, never objective. But perhaps it *does* mean that others saw things in this film that you and your friends missed. Art should communicate, and if it didn't communicate to you what Spielberg was trying to say, then that's a failure on the movie's part. But on the other hand, if someone failed to see beyond the surface of the movie to what makes it a meaningful and thoughtful film, perhaps it's because they just weren't looking for it. Communication is interactive, both the "sender" and "receiver" must understand each other for communication to work. Failure can come from either direction, or both. |
|
