march9hare

For reasons best known to themselves, Martians suddenly attack a post-911 Earth in this big budget, hyped-to-the-hills Spielberg film. While it's true that virtually any movie can be nit-picked to death, this loser has plot holes big enough to drive a starship through. See, when we see a film, we like it to be consistent and to make some sort of sense. This one does neither. Consider: The Martian machines were buried a very long time ago, yet suddenly pop up in Jersey City, Boston, Chicago, and a host of other cities. If they were buried that long ago, how did the Martians know in advance where we going to build our cities? Now that cities have been built, we're expected to believe that when foundations have been dug, gas, water, sewer, and electric lines have been buried, subway tubes installed, that no one ever stumbled across one of these machines, even by the sheerest accident? Hmmm. . . If these machines were left here thousands, if not millions, of years ago in preparation for a surprise attack, why wait? Are we being told that the Martians won't attack when the worst they can expect to face are clubs and flint knives, but will attack when the worst they will face are 100 megaton thermonuclear bombs? What? Hmmm. . . EMP can and has fried electronic circuitry and, if it is powerful enough, short out electrical power grids - this has already happened in Canada. So, no cars and no electric service. Okay. So, would someone please explain to us just how digital cameras and camcorders still work, when nothing else does? Hmmm. . . Then there's the Martian death ray, or whatever it is. It can vaporize human beings but not their clothes? And how about that ridiculous scene in the nutball's basement: does Spielberg seriously expect us to believe that the Martians are going to be flummoxed by a mirror? Our dog isn't fooled by one, so we guess that, intellectually, the dog has a leg up (sorry) on the Martians. Finally, there's Tom Cruise. Obviously, he was cast in this movie for box office draw. Other reviewers have described his performance as "powerful", "moving", or "one of his best". We disagree; his performance was, at best, uneven. In some scenes, he did well, such as the close up of his "I'm scared out of my mind and praying to God" sequence in the basement. But, as for his attempted portrayal of a Joey Lunchpail blue collar working stiff - it was all we could do to stop from laughing. While we're on the subject, why did Spielberg find it necessary to include this syrupy "I'm a terrible father/Days of our Lives" subplot? Wells didn't use one when he wrote the book, and his story turned out rather well. Not to mention the mawkish ending of Cruise reuniting with his family in Boston: the world has just gone to Hell in a handbasket, yet the rest of his family come out of an untouched Brownstone without so much as a hair out of place and all of whom look like they're on their way to dinner and a show. There are many more examples (the totally superfluous crashed airliner, the wrecked jet engine that keeps on going and going, the carnival-like ferry scene) but you probably get the idea by now. Bottom line: this one's a renter, not a keeper. Eye candy score:9 Coherent script score:3

Yet another retelling of the famous Wells novel, only this time featuring a no-name, summer stock cast and amateurish CG work. This is the sort of movie you would expect to see on the Hallmark channel were it not for the fact that the whole production looks like it was shot on somebody's videophone. Even with a million-dollar budget, this film has little, if anything, to commend it. Poor directing, poor editing and continuity, poor acting, and really poor FX, the whole thing comes across as little more than a freshman film school project. Avoid it. Getting back to the budget for a moment, it should be remembered that "Silent Running" was made for $997,000.00 which, even by 1970 standards, was pocket change and featured fewer actors. This version of "War" is a hopeless mess - rent the George Pal version and watch a really good movie.