War of the Worlds: 2006

Tools    





I generally think this should be scripted more closely to the story and emotions of the book, rather than a present day update. It is not about the alien destruction but the people involved...hopefully if Steven Spielberg does direct, he doesn't make another ID4!!!

For all those who have read the book, or seem the 1950's film...how do you think the remake/adaptation should be filmed or scripted. This is a topic close to me, it being on of my favourite books and/or musicals. I actually though no one would plan such a movie any time soon, to my dismay they did, I had first dibs...I guess no one heard.

Discuss...
__________________
The only man who can decode the Complex Tapestry of Femanine Emotion!



Anything to add to this discussion? I'm not trying to make anybody chat about this movie. It's a great story by the way! Don't you all agree?

I love the mood and feel it gives you. Survival, love, loyalty, hope, despair, honour...all these are apart, making up the beauty of life and the portray of the human race.



I don't get it.why are you so ****ed up Silver Bullet, I bet at least 90% of your posts are stupid little comments like that.



Actually, unless one of them has been scrapped totally, there are supposed to be two remakes of War of the Worlds in the works…. One by Spielberg/Cruise and one by Pendragon Pictures… we had an earlier discussion of the latter HERE
__________________
You never know what is enough, until you know what is more than enough.
~William Blake ~

AiSv Nv wa do hi ya do...
(Walk in Peace)




Originally Posted by Caitlyn
Actually, unless one of them has been scrapped totally, there are supposed to be two remakes of War of the Worlds in the works…. One by Spielberg/Cruise and one by Pendragon Pictures… we had an earlier discussion of the latter HERE
I think it's stupid to make another one. The original came out at the right time and had the right feel. That sort of thing can't be duplicated and what could Hollywood possibly do to make the movie better? Nothing, really except inject it with steroid special FX. Other than that, a remake would have nothing to offer seeing as how the original was a big studio production anyway. Personally I think it's a big mistake. Almost as stupid as remaking Dawn of The Dead was. I think Remakes themselves are most of the time stupid. Thoughts?



Lets put a smile on that block
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
I think it's stupid to make another one. The original came out at the right time and had the right feel. That sort of thing can't be duplicated and what could Hollywood possibly do to make the movie better? Nothing, really except inject it with steroid special FX. Other than that, a remake would have nothing to offer seeing as how the original was a big studio production anyway. Personally I think it's a big mistake. Almost as stupid as remaking Dawn of The Dead was. I think Remakes themselves are most of the time stupid. Thoughts?
The original film your reffering to actually didnt have a lot to do with the book. So A remake that would be faithful to H G Well's story would be much more entertaining than the original and a great reason to do a remake. Lets hope they do stick to it.
__________________
Pumpkins scream in the DEAD of night!



Quite so but not necessarily. I'm sure we've all scene the re-adaptation of Stephen King's "The Shining". What a let down that was. Well, not really. I wasn't expecting it to be better, closer to the book or not. I stand by my opinion that it would be stupid. As the dyke said, "I hope it won't be another ID4." It really could be though. If they do follow the book however which was a great book to say the least, I don't think it would work as well because the scope is way too large. I think it worked better to bounce the phenomenon off of regular town's folk. I think that was part of the adaptive genius of the film. True, they also changed the spaceships too but that's just hollyowwd reaching for the stars again and even though the original legs of the spaceships would've been creepy, it just wouldn't have held as much water. And remember, it doesn't always make sense to write the story just like the book. I'll admit it though that a lot of times that they don't is just silly.
__________________
"You need people like me..."



The book was small town too. Are you sure you've read it?
__________________
"Today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."



Lets put a smile on that block
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
Quite so but not necessarily. I'm sure we've all scene the re-adaptation of Stephen King's "The Shining". What a let down that was. Well, not really. I wasn't expecting it to be better, closer to the book or not. I stand by my opinion that it would be stupid. As the dyke said, "I hope it won't be another ID4." It really could be though. If they do follow the book however which was a great book to say the least, I don't think it would work as well because the scope is way too large. I think it worked better to bounce the phenomenon off of regular town's folk. I think that was part of the adaptive genius of the film. True, they also changed the spaceships too but that's just hollyowwd reaching for the stars again and even though the original legs of the spaceships would've been creepy, it just wouldn't have held as much water. And remember, it doesn't always make sense to write the story just like the book. I'll admit it though that a lot of times that they don't is just silly.
You contradict your self a few times here. The book was based on town folk, more so than the film. Why do you think the original spaceships in the film wouldnt have worked?



Was it really? I've never actually read the book but I was certain it had a more glbal approach than the movie did because of the time it was made. So I was completely wrong about that, but if I was wrong, I don't understand what all the fuss is about. As for the leg question, Would it make sense to have aliens that had the technologic advancement to put together an army and wage war on another planet to still be using legs? I think they'd be a little past the invention of the wheel ha ha ha! HOllywood must've thought so too. It would've made it too cheesey for it to have wheels so they went with magnetism. I think it worked out great.



Lets put a smile on that block
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
Was it really? I've never actually read the book but I was certain it had a more glbal approach than the movie did because of the time it was made.
For someone so interested in the film and the story im suprised you havnt read the book. i would reccommend it, trust me its a million times better than the film and makes much more sense.



The book was written at the latter end of the 19th century. It was set in a small England town and when the big cities only had cannons. H.G. Welles wrote a story that worked for it's time, but when Hollywood decided to make it into a movie, they butchered it completely. They made it American, modern, and changed nearly all of the entire story.

Speilberg and Cruise creating a movie that is more faithful to the original story, including the time frame, wouldn't be remaking the 1950's movie. It would be an entirely different movie. There would be hardly an similarity at all, and I for one, am looking forward to it.



See the problem with remaking a movie like this is if you think about it, it can't be done effectively. If it is made with a lot of emphasis on the book, it would be placed so far back in time, nobody will give a damn. Itt'l be far-fetched. Also, since we know the world wasn't taken over by aliens a hundred years ago (ha ha ha) it would turn the movie into a "What if" movie. "What if" can do well as books but rarely do well as movies. Also, who the hell would want to see that anyway. The logical thing to do would be to wait till the memories of Independence day fade away into obscurity and make the war of the worlds as the present but by then our technology would be so advanced, defeating an invading alien race wouldn't be inconcievable! (Like Independence Day). The best thing they should do is remake the original in the same time frame. That would be the most logical thing to do in my opinion. By the way, this sucks because I already posted this before but for some reason, it didn't go through. That's the way I see it Ladies ang Gents. Personally I wish they wouldn't remake it so we could keep calling the original the champion of space invader movies. My two cents.



Lets put a smile on that block
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
See the problem with remaking a movie like this...
But as Slay has already rightly pointed out, it wouldnt be a remake. It would be a faithful adaptation of the book, something totally different from the original that you are talking about.
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
If it is made with a lot of emphasis on the book, it would be placed so far back in time, nobody will give a damn. Itt'l be far-fetched. Also, since we know the world wasn't taken over by aliens a hundred years ago (ha ha ha) it would turn the movie into a "What if" movie. "What if" can do well as books but rarely do well as movies. Also, who the hell would want to see that anyway.
Wha?? So your suggesting that setting the book in the late 19th century would make it incredibly unappealing to a modern day audience? Thats just silly. So what about Sleepy Hollow? Or The Last Samurai? or Cold Mountain? or the hundreds of other films set in a different time frame? And the whole idea for it being a "what if" film, thats normally the type of film that does very well at the box office. What if someone made a theme park with the main attraction as dinosaurs? What if a meteorite hit the atlantic ocean destroying new york? What if the worlds climate suddenly changed pushing the world into a new ice age? Perhaps the fact is you just love the original so much that you cannot see a new different version being successful. but for someone who has such an interest and vast opinion on what a "remake" of the film would be like, i really suggest you read the book, it as though your making your points blindfolded.



Originally Posted by blibblobblib
But as Slay has already rightly pointed out, it wouldnt be a remake. It would be a faithful adaptation of the book, something totally different from the original that you are talking about.

Wha?? So your suggesting that setting the book in the late 19th century would make it incredibly unappealing to a modern day audience? Thats just silly. So what about Sleepy Hollow? Or The Last Samurai? or Cold Mountain? or the hundreds of other films set in a different time frame? And the whole idea for it being a "what if" film, thats normally the type of film that does very well at the box office. What if someone made a theme park with the main attraction as dinosaurs? What if a meteorite hit the atlantic ocean destroying new york? What if the worlds climate suddenly changed pushing the world into a new ice age? Perhaps the fact is you just love the original so much that you cannot see a new different version being successful. but for someone who has such an interest and vast opinion on what a "remake" of the film would be like, i really suggest you read the book, it as though your making your points blindfolded.
You are right about a couple things but not all of them. Yes, I am a little biased but that's only because it unlikely they can do it again. You see, all those movies that you named that took place in the past didn't have a story line such as aliens taking over the world in the 19th century. That plot is pretty rediculous for two reasons. 1, they always make alien movies in either the present and future and 2. we know it didn't happen. As for the "What if" thing I wrote, yeah, i don't know what the hell I was talking about there. I guess I kinda got carried away in the mood. Half of the movies are "What if" movies ha ha ha. All I'm saying is it doesn't look good lucratively, going backwards chronologically.



Lets put a smile on that block
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
You are right about a couple things but not all of them. Yes, I am a little biased but that's only because it unlikely they can do it again. You see, all those movies that you named that took place in the past didn't have a story line such as aliens taking over the world in the 19th century. That plot is pretty rediculous for two reasons. 1, they always make alien movies in either the present and future and 2. we know it didn't happen.
So are you Seriously suggesting that films set in our past have to be 100% historically accurate? There are several ficticious films, stories etc that are set in the past. Thats just stupid.
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
As for the "What if" thing I wrote, yeah, i don't know what the hell I was talking about there. I guess I kinda got carried away in the mood. Half of the movies are "What if" movies ha ha ha. All I'm saying is it doesn't look good lucratively, going backwards chronologically.
I really think your just posting for postings sake. What your saying doesnt even make sense.



I never said anything about the accuracy of the movie. Yes, it would be inacurate if it took place in the 19th century obviously. I'm tired of arguing so I'll conclude my opinion by saying War of the Worlds [in my view] is the kind of story that would do best as a movie or story in the present. Since the world has changed dramatically since it was written and even since the movie, it would be dull to have it take place in the setting it was originally written [in my view] but also won't make the splash it deserves if it took place today because the original movie and story became an international resource for filmakers to rip-off of and borrow ideas. There have been so many movies that mirror it,[ID4, Mars attacks, Total Recall, etc.] I sadly feel the movie would not get the attention it deserved [given it's a great movie] and besides that, I see no reason to risk the money and make a new one anyway. I Believe if a movie is done right the first time, the story should not be subjected to the ill-treatment given in remakes and the slander of it made by people who never saw the original. That's my thought. Nothing more to say.



Lets put a smile on that block
Originally Posted by Krackalackin
I Believe if a movie is done right the first time, the story should not be subjected to the ill-treatment given in remakes and the slander of it made by people who never saw the original. That's my thought. Nothing more to say.
Yes but if you would just take the time and read the book instead of basing your idea's on the terrible adaptation that you have seen, you would realise that the story of War of the Worlds does most definatly deserve a fair adaptation.

But anyway, as were moving on from this endless debate, i cant wait till they release the new one.