HG Wells War of the Worlds on Sci Fi [Text View]

View Full Version : HG Wells War of the Worlds on Sci Fi

PJO1966

01-10-2006, 06:34 PM

I saw a popup ad for this while watching Battlestar Galactica. All I know is that it's from 2005 and stars C. Thomas Howell. Sci-Fi Channel doesn't have any other info except that it's a "faithful adaptation" of the classic novel.

pdhenry

01-10-2006, 06:50 PM

Should be better than last summer's blockbuster, then...

PJO1966

01-10-2006, 06:52 PM

According to imdb, it's also an updated story.

pdhenry

01-10-2006, 07:00 PM

Just scheduled it...

Very little info on scifi.com. It does mention that it's a "chilling update".

jhausmann

01-10-2006, 08:20 PM

Watch it only if you need sleep. I rented it a few months back and every time I started it, I woke up the next day. No effects to speak of, it's a low-budget flick...

gonzotek

01-11-2006, 06:44 AM

No effects to speak of....Except the soporific ones, right?

WinBear

01-11-2006, 08:46 AM

This is the one that is supposed to be set in the 1890s?

PJO1966

01-11-2006, 10:27 AM

This is the one that is supposed to be set in the 1890s?

No, it's set in modern day Washington DC.

sieglinde

01-11-2006, 05:37 PM

No effects? How do you do giant Martian war machines and heat rays without special effects?

atrac

01-12-2006, 01:58 AM

No effects? How do you do giant Martian war machines and heat rays without special effects?

Play it on the radio. ;)

TiVo Steve

01-12-2006, 09:56 AM

It was made for around 10 grand, (OK 100 grand)...the producers couldn't even afford any army helicopters (or M-16's for the soldiers). Hey, the "walkers" are fairly good for such a cheaply made film! A direct-to-dvd rip-off of the Tom Cruise film.
My .02

PJO1966

01-17-2006, 11:03 AM

We lasted about 20 minutes before throwing in the towel. What the HELL happened to C. Thomas Howell? Was he drunk? Was his character supposed to be drunk? He really looked and sounded like the last 20 years were really rough. At least the first 20 minutes were good for some laugh out loud moments.

marrone

01-17-2006, 02:09 PM

Saw it for a few minutes here and there. Horrible.

Dunno how faithful it was supposed to be.

-Mike

jhausmann

01-17-2006, 05:38 PM

Well, the book doesn't put me to sleep ;)

myriadian

01-17-2006, 10:32 PM

i watched this the other day. it was soooooooooooooo bad. the editing made no sense and i never knew what the characters were talking about.

bad bad bad bad bad bad.

M.

dirtypacman

01-18-2006, 07:43 AM

I was almost going to record it but decided to wait on some feedback.. glad I did not waste the disk space.

TiVoStephen

01-20-2006, 12:08 AM

This was supposed to be a disaster movie -- and it was a disaster all right.

Bad acting, bad editing, bad writing*, bad effects -- this movie had it all.

* Their attempts at modernization and the promised "updating" were horrifically misconceived.

Why on earth did they bother? When you're going to do a remake of a film that was already just recently a big budget remake, and you realize you only have a tiny budget, wouldn't you give up and spend your money elsewhere?