[go: up one dir, main page]

    Release calendarTop 250 moviesMost popular moviesBrowse movies by genreTop box officeShowtimes & ticketsMovie newsIndia movie spotlight
    What's on TV & streamingTop 250 TV showsMost popular TV showsBrowse TV shows by genreTV news
    What to watchLatest trailersIMDb OriginalsIMDb PicksIMDb SpotlightFamily entertainment guideIMDb Podcasts
    EmmysSuperheroes GuideSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideBest Of 2025 So FarDisability Pride MonthSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAll events
    Born todayMost popular celebsCelebrity news
    Help centerContributor zonePolls
For industry professionals
  • Language
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Sign in
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Use app
  • Cast & crew
  • User reviews
  • Trivia
  • FAQ
IMDbPro

Invasion des mondes

Original title: The War of the Worlds
  • Video
  • 2005
  • Unrated
  • 2h 59m
IMDb RATING
2.7/10
2.3K
YOUR RATING
Invasion des mondes (2005)
ActionAdventureSci-Fi

In one of the most faithful adaptations of HG Wells' science fiction masterpiece, Martians launch a ruthless assault on an unsuspecting Victorian England, in an attempt to escape their dying... Read allIn one of the most faithful adaptations of HG Wells' science fiction masterpiece, Martians launch a ruthless assault on an unsuspecting Victorian England, in an attempt to escape their dying planet.In one of the most faithful adaptations of HG Wells' science fiction masterpiece, Martians launch a ruthless assault on an unsuspecting Victorian England, in an attempt to escape their dying planet.

  • Director
    • Timothy Hines
  • Writers
    • H.G. Wells
    • Timothy Hines
    • Susan Goforth
  • Stars
    • Anthony Piana
    • Jack Clay
    • James Lathrop
  • See production info at IMDbPro
  • IMDb RATING
    2.7/10
    2.3K
    YOUR RATING
    • Director
      • Timothy Hines
    • Writers
      • H.G. Wells
      • Timothy Hines
      • Susan Goforth
    • Stars
      • Anthony Piana
      • Jack Clay
      • James Lathrop
    • 127User reviews
    • 18Critic reviews
  • See production info at IMDbPro
  • See production info at IMDbPro
  • Photos4

    View Poster
    View Poster
    View Poster
    View Poster

    Top cast56

    Edit
    Anthony Piana
    • The Writer…
    Jack Clay
    • Ogilvy
    James Lathrop
    James Lathrop
    • The Artilleryman
    Darlene Sellers
    Darlene Sellers
    • Mrs. Elphinstone
    • (as Darlene Renee Sellers)
    John Kaufmann
    • The Curate
    Susan Goforth
    Susan Goforth
    • The Wife
    Jamie Lynn Sease
    • Miss Elphinstone
    W. Bernard Bauman
    • Henderson
    Edwin Stone
    • The Potman
    Tom Fouche
    • Newspaper Boy
    Mark Wilt
    • Gregg the Butcher
    Erik Barzdukas
    • Butcher's Son
    E. Leonard Helland
    • Lord Hilton's Butler…
    Barbara Bauman
    • Mary - Writer's Servant
    Daniel Somerfield
    • Stent
    Donovan Le
    • Shop Clerk…
    Andy Clawson
    • Nextdoor Neighbor
    • (as Andrew Clawson)
    • …
    Eric Rands
    • Sapper #1
    • Director
      • Timothy Hines
    • Writers
      • H.G. Wells
      • Timothy Hines
      • Susan Goforth
    • All cast & crew
    • Production, box office & more at IMDbPro

    User reviews127

    2.72.2K
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10

    Featured reviews

    1brianlindstrand

    Wow...

    Wow...

    I picked this up at the local Wal-Mart after reading online that it had been released early. I've been following this online for some time, and just had to buy the film.

    Wow...

    I guess the thing that really struck me was the editing, or lack thereof. Time and again, characters (usually The Narrator and whoever he is with) are shown walking...and walking...and walking. I am not an editor, but I do know that you can cut between someone leaving point A to show them arriving at point B. There is no need to show almost the entire journey! Wow...

    I actually ended up feeling somewhat sorry for the actors involved in this. They seem to have been given no direction as to what to do during scenes other than to look scared or look happy, depending on what action was to be added at a later date.

    Wow...

    Why it was decided to do almost all the effects using CG is beyond me. Even ILM still employs miniatures sometimes. One of the most distracting uses of green screen in this film is the constant rushing about of (according to the end credits) the same group of people representing the citizenry of different towns and cities, including London. At times these folk are coming and going with no regard as to the angle of the shot or the distance they are from the camera. In one shot in London, there appear to be at least two men over six feet tall walking just behind the narrator's brother (played by star Anthony Piana without his distracting mustache). Not since GETTYSBURG have I seen such a fake piece of facial hair.

    Wow...

    Why Timothy Hines talked up this film the way he did is beyond me. It is a turkey, plain and simple. On the plus side (at least for me) it has provided some of the most genuine laugh-out-loud bits of hilarity I have seen in quite a while.
    2ColinPotterHatesWalking

    Like Lord of the Rings - only with more walking. A LOT more walking. And then some.

    I must admit I burst out laughing when I saw one reviewer compare this to LOTR. Well yes, if you exclude the dwarfs, the cast of thousands, the great special effects, the big battles, the strong characterization, the decent plot, the good acting, the classy direction and everything else. Which leaves you with the walking. And boy, does this film do walking! If Mr Piano had his way, this would probably be an uninterrupted three hours of hardcore walking through the Wisconsin countryside, but every 40 minutes or so these pesky Martians pop up for a few seconds to interrupt him before he goes for another bit of a ramble. You've never seen so much walking in a movie. If this really had a $20m budget, most of it must have gone on Mr Piano's shoes, because he had to get through plenty of pairs with all the walking he does. Which explains why there's no money left for decent effects, a decent video camera or proper actors. Honestly, it's like watching some bizarre fetish video for people with a thing about going for long walks in period costumes. Even on fast-forward, this is a looonnnggg walk.

    As for the sci-fi stuff, I think it was a mistake to put Martians in the film: they only get in the way of the walking, which is clearly much more interesting to the director than the story.

    I wonder how much Mr Piano charges to walk dogs?
    1reverend_darkshadow

    Stick to the 1953 version, or wait for Spielbergs rendition

    I am currently sitting here, forcing myself to finish this. I figure I blew 6 bux on the VHS, might as well suffer for it. I remember about 4 or 5 years ago doing a search on the internet for "War of the Worlds" cause of the rumors of the Spielberg movie at the time, and I missed the old TV series from the early 90's. The website make it out that this was a multi-million dollar budget rendition of the classic book. It was going to be a "perfect translation". Perfect CRAP is more in tune with this film.

    First off, the video on this movie was glitched! It looked as if I was watching the Full Motion Video from an old mid-90's PC or Playstation CD-Rom video game. Sadly enough, the color quality was similar. The acting made Shatners classic "dramatic pause" look damn near Shakespearean in quality. The CG rendering of various scenes was horrendous, and green screen sequences were worse than those seen in old Dukes of Hazardd scenes.

    Secondly, it is slow and terribly drawn out. I sat thru 45 minutes of the video (no promo's at the beginning) before the cylinder actually Opened to reveal the first alien. After that, the alien was a terribly constructed CG squid. I am now an hour into it and the most of the alien weaponry I have seen is a spinning silver disk (crappy down even) attached to a mechanical arm. The dramatic scenes are murdered with overly done instrumental's. The last thing on that, for an alien invasion in the turn of the century 1900's NO ONE is concerned for their life. It's like they have no concept. Even though media was slow, word of mouth spreads fast and people would have known. The "illusion" of day and night was shoddy at best. Simply changing the color around the people to purple, blue or green does not signify NIGHT TIME. Perhaps some lighting and actual night time shoots would have given a MUCH better illusion. THere is a lot of wasted sequences throughout the film of just watching the "hero" gallop around or walk down silly roads. Get on with the film. I know how people get around, you do NOT need to be so in-depth.

    Now, finally an hour and 5 minutes into the film and they show the alien machines. Mighty Morphin Power Rangers had better looking effects. Even the skeletons of vaporized humans looked as if animated by a freshman high school computer app class student. The animations do NOT match up to the scenery at all.

    In closing folks, if you want "The War of the Worlds", do one of four things. 1) Watch the 1953 original, 2) watch the early 90's TV series, 3) wait for Spielberg's rendition to be released shortly, OR 4) Read the frikkin book (something we all probably did in elementary English class). AVOID THIS MOVIE. IT IS A WASTE OF YOUR MONEY.
    1castricv

    This may indeed be the worst movie ever created

    Normally when I write a review for a movie online, it is for one of three reasons. Either, I have found something exceptionally lacking in a film that otherwise would have been excellent, I feel that the public's perception of a film before viewing it is inaccurate for a number of reasons, or I believe that the purpose or message of a film needs to be clarified or explained with the help of other reviewers. While all of these reasons may appear to be somewhat negative, I find that writing a review that lavishes nothing but praise and statements such as, "This is one of the best films of all time!", does nothing to enlighten a potential viewer on its merits and downsides, nor does it often give reasoning as to why a movie is so good, which should be the point of the review in the first place. With that being said, War of the Worlds is nothing more than a hurried, incompetent attempt at a money grab; piggy-backing its loathsome carcass on the multi-million dollar advertising campaign of the film of the same name directed by Steven Spielberg. Many people will buy this DVD in anticipation of the summer blockbuster and many more poor souls will buy it looking for more material on the same subject. This movie is not even "so bad" that it becomes funny or endearing, rather the audience will be so unbelievably disappointed as to reach the point of anger. Now with most of the insults out of the way, allow me to give some arguments as a warning to those more fortunate than I.

    Judging from the cover and the lack of any publicity for this film (I found it as SAM's Club for 8 bucks), I assumed that the cast would be no-names and that the special effects would be nothing too spectacular. Check. This is not a big deal for me, as I find a large budget and an over-reliance on big name stars and SE can diminish an otherwise decent movie. I also did not expect to be blown away by great dialog or a moving score. Check again. What I did hope for was an actual serious attempt at a classic theme and a few alien/battle scenes.

    Now, as per IMDb's policy any spoilers must be announced in advance, no matter how small, so here is fair warning. The movie opens with a lot of inane small-talk, followed by a trip to an observatory to look at a red dot. Seriously, it is a pictures of a red dot in a tube. It is very hard to describe every little issue in depth, but by the end of the first ten minutes, the combination of shaky camera-work, spliced scenes, and a LOT of walking begin to frustrate the viewer. However, the costuming is surprisingly not bad and the hope that the pods will reveal something mysterious keeps you going. The next 30 minutes basically go as follows: one of the main characters walks to one of the pods, he looks at the pods and talks to another main character about looking at the pod and it may be hot. They both walk back to town. These walks aren't two seconds or added so that dialog may be exchanged. They are twenty seconds or more and are there simply to add filler to an already bloated three hour movie. In a particularly grueling scene, the main character is shown looking at a pod, then he is shown pacing and panting, then he looks at the pod, then he takes a one minute walk through a field to town, then comes in to town and walks into a building, then he has a cup of coffee and says "Thank you Mary" to a random maid that serves him coffee, then he puts down the coffee and walks out the building, then he walks a minutes through the field and back to the pod. I apologize for the extreme run-on sentence, but it is perhaps the best way to summarize this entire film. Characters speak way too long about mundane things, they walk a lot, they send other people to walk, the camera fluctuates between high speed and slow speed, but for no dramatic effect, simply the camera man is a sophomore at Tech somewhere. The editing is mind-bogglingly bad. People actions make little sense. For instance, when the professor goes to a farmer's house and says that he needs the farmer to give him a ride to town, the farmer stutters and paces around. When the professor says that there is a pod and that men might be trapped inside, the farmer locks him in a shed only to see the professor grab a pitchfork and open the weak shed a second later. Nothing of any consequence of course comes from this entire scene, as the professor runs into the main character a moment later so they can begin their afternoon walk. The entire film feels as if someone at one point had a good idea about making a film, but absolutely no idea how to put that in motion. I have seen better high school video productions. Finally, the special effects are laughable and do nothing to advance the story. I get the feeling that the director really wanted this film to become somewhat of a cult classic of campy garbage. However, it is so awful in technical aspects, and in sheer common sense that it only makes people mad. Avoid this film at all costs.
    1procopius-2

    Neal hit the nail on the head , this is horrendous.

    Finally i thought someone is going to do justice to H.G. Wells's classic , not another version set in the wrong locale or era , but one based firmly on the book . Well it definitely follows the book pretty closely , and that is the only plus to this mess.

    This is 180 Min's (yes 3 hours) long , the book is only around 150 pages .

    If Timothy Hines had the nerve to come on here and say "if you can do any better ..." i would say "yes , i could" and i have never used a video camera or been to any sort or drama school in my life.

    I paid good money to get this crap over to the UK from the USA , do not make the same mistake as me .

    More like this

    Invasion
    3.2
    Invasion
    La nouvelle guerre des mondes
    6.5
    La nouvelle guerre des mondes
    H.G. Wells and the War of the Worlds
    4.9
    H.G. Wells and the War of the Worlds
    War of the Worlds: Goliath
    5.4
    War of the Worlds: Goliath
    War of the Worlds: Final Invasion
    2.1
    War of the Worlds: Final Invasion
    La Guerre des mondes
    7.0
    La Guerre des mondes
    La guerra de los mundos. La verdadera historia
    6.2
    La guerra de los mundos. La verdadera historia
    La guerre des mondes
    5.2
    La guerre des mondes
    War of the Worlds
    War of the Worlds
    War of the Worlds
    5.9
    War of the Worlds
    War of the Worlds: The Attack
    3.2
    War of the Worlds: The Attack
    War of the Servers
    7.9
    War of the Servers

    Storyline

    Edit

    Did you know

    Edit
    • Trivia
      According to the website owned by one of the the providers of the horses used in the film, the portion of the production involving their horses was shot on a horse ranch outside of Seattle. Other horses and carriages were shot at other ranches with large green-screen setups over eight weeks.
    • Goofs
      After the narrator flees the pit after the Martians' first attack, the train that passes in the background is a late 20th century Americal diesel model rather than a British steam locomotive.
    • Crazy credits
      The Copyright date is given as "MMDCCLVIII", which is the year 2758.
    • Alternate versions
      In response to the criticisms over the 3-hour running time, a Director's Cut released that excises approximately 45 minutes of the original version.
    • Connections
      Referenced in DVD/Lazerdisc/VHS collection 2016 (2016)

    Top picks

    Sign in to rate and Watchlist for personalized recommendations
    Sign in

    FAQ

    • I thought this was supposed to star Michael Caine, Eric Stoltz and Charlize Theron?
    • Where can I see clips?
    • Where can I buy or rent The Classic War Of The Worlds?

    Details

    Edit
    • Release date
      • December 19, 2007 (France)
    • Country of origin
      • United States
    • Official site
      • Pendragon Pictures
    • Language
      • English
    • Also known as
      • H.G. Wells' 'The War of the Worlds'
    • Filming locations
      • Seattle, Washington, USA
    • Production company
      • Pendragon Pictures
    • See more company credits at IMDbPro

    Tech specs

    Edit
    • Runtime
      2 hours 59 minutes
    • Color
      • Color
    • Aspect ratio
      • 1.78 : 1

    Contribute to this page

    Suggest an edit or add missing content
    • IMDb Answers: Help fill gaps in our data
    • Learn more about contributing
    Edit page

    More to explore

    Recently viewed

    Please enable browser cookies to use this feature. Learn more.
    Get the IMDb App
    Sign in for more accessSign in for more access
    Follow IMDb on social
    Get the IMDb App
    For Android and iOS
    Get the IMDb App
    • Help
    • Site Index
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • License IMDb Data
    • Press Room
    • Advertising
    • Jobs
    • Conditions of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, an Amazon company

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.