Why was this shit?

Why was this shit?

I liked it, very Lovecraftian

fuck you

it wasnt

It was great but definitely has this feeling to it where it seems like it could've been better, which makes it seem worse than it actually is. To me, at least.

Not enough dying Jews

Did I miss something, why is this a meme now

...

BBBBRRRRRRRRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMMMMFFFF

Not enough ear shattering fart noises

It loses steam when they run into Tim Robbins and are in the basement forever.

Still a great movie, better than most flicks released these days.

Dakota Fanning made me SICK.

It's a great film, you have shit taste.

I found the tripods very memorable desu.
I was like 12 when i watched it in cinema

Someone kept making Lovecraft threads for like a week straight, now someone keeps posting "lovecraftian" in every thread that they can to force a meme.
Of course this is Sup Forums so it'll probably catch on and be posted in every thread for 2 years straight.

Shall I compare it to a load of crap?
Let me count the ways

What was the point of having Ayys have their machines already on Earth? Was it just for a "twist" that never becomes relevant again?
Why were the Tripods totally invulnerable instead of just "hard to kill"? In the book, Earth could have beaten them off, maybe, if we were better prepared.
Why were the Ayys themselves not grotesque brain sacks with limp tentacles? In the book, it was supposed to show how reliant on technology they've become. That's as relevant now as it was then.
What was the purpose of the little girl constantly screaming? Was the fucking invasion of humanity not high enough stakes that we needed a pure innocent little blonde girl to say what we have to lose?
Why did the son survive his stupid "I want to see tanks and shit exploding" mission? How?
How were the Martians defeated by pathogens if they had probes/machines on Earth of millions of years? In the book, Mars was so sterile and so technologically dominated that they had no living organism that wasn't useful to Martian society.

the shit people usually complain about like the tim robbins section and the son coming back at the end are straight out of the book, so maybe it was too faithful to the source material. as a 9/11 allegory i do think it kind of pussies out at the end, but it's still a good movie.

No thunderchild and despite having lots of work on it the director decided not to include the full battle scene on the hill where the military manages to take one of the walkers down (it's why they advance)

>he son coming back at the end are straight out of the book

With loli fever, amrite?

His kids

It's just an ancient horror your mind can't comprehend

in the book it's the narrator's wife, but the idea is the same: a character we thought was dead has miraculously survived

Here's why Spielberg's movie was shit
It missed the entire point of Wells' novel

The book wasn't about an alien invasion. It was about WW1. But, user, The War of the Worlds was written in the 19th century. Never, ever speak to me again.
Wells was also a history writer and futurist on top of being a sci-fi author.
The War of the Worlds and the Time Machine were both about how he saw the trends of Europe preceding. They were really about industrialization and science run amok.

The goal of science at the time was to control all nature. That was the great ambition. It isn't like today with all that hippy garbage mixed in. Science was the shackles for humanity to place on nature. People wanted nature packed away into tiny little reserves so we could enjoy it at our leisure, and the rest would be paved over for convenience. That's what people were talking about in 1890.
They saw the future full of machines doing every thing for you. A man need never dirty his hands again.

Wells was, obviously, against that. The Martians in the War of the Worlds were those technologists exaggerated. They were just brains mouths and hands, nothing more. They needed machines for everything. And they needed our pity to survive.
In the book, the Martians come down in these great capsules that slowly unscrew. Some people said "Blow them up while we can!" they were ignored. So out flopped the nearly immobile Martians who assembled their heat rays and black smoke projectors and gassed everyone who was indecisive.

Of course at the end the Martians died to the thing they once exterminated: Wild nature.
In the 1890s, living in a sterile world was the goal. After germ theory was finally 100% accepted everyone wanted to destroy all microbes.

A modern of War of the Worlds would be a bunch of gasoline using aliens invading to take our oil and then dying to our clean air.
Spielberg ignored all the social commentary

Fuck you, the book IS Lovecraftian. Humans are basically bugs to the Martians and the threat is still there, we just got lucky.

They fuck up Earth good in the official sequel released last year

There's a big difference between the Narrator's wife and the son.
The Narrator starts out assuming his wife is dead because he sees his house BTFO
He leaves without checking.

The son runs off INTO A FUCKING WARZONE THAT IMMEDIATELY EXPLODES

The characters have no goal and nothing to work towards except survival and their survival is merely a matter of chance because they're utterly powerless against the Martians (see Tom Cruise just happening to not get targeted by the vaporization lasers) until the ridiculous sphincter grenade scene. This is somewhat okay because of cool set pieces until the basement scene, when we lose the excitement of large scale shit hitting the fan and just have fat Tim Robbins to look at. Then the Martians just die, without the characters or humans having to do anything to defeat them. Whee

it was good
did you watch it upside down?

I love that sound so much

Didn't capture the lovecraftian nuance of the novel

My opinion: I didn't give two shits about the main character, so the whole thing annoyed me.

Spielberg attempted to update the story to post-9/11 America. That's why the tripods are buried underground, for instance; to suggest that the threat came from within, right under our noses. This is also why the "I need to see this!" scene with the son is in there, to dramatize the stupid, self-destructive anger and lust for revenge Americans felt at the time.

It's less intellectual than Wells' original work but I think it mostly hangs together thematically. The one thing I dislike is that they kept the martians being killed by microbes, which simply isn't as evocative in 2005.

If Spielbergo wanted to do his 9/11 thing right, he should have had Cruise create a insurgency cell and help the defeat the technologically superior invaders with suicide tactics or something

BRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPP

>If Spielbergo wanted to do his 9/11 thing right, he should have had Cruise create a insurgency cell and help the defeat the technologically superior invaders with suicide tactics or something
yes if he had intented to create a mediocre kino sure

I'm doing my best to make it happen.

The girl screaming the whole movie was fucking awful.

Lost opportunity not to follow the book more closely AND set it in Victorian England.

Instead he made a fucking flick

>my dad once compared me to Dakota Fanning in this movie because I was so annoying

>DEM epic tentacles
>DAT ear shattering fart noice

Is WotW the best lovecraftique kin-o-rama of all time?

Based dad

lots of those threads had more good movies and suggestions than shitposting though. Maybe only 35-48% shitposting

Nice post here

>lust for revenge

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

can't handle the dad bants

Seriously your dad sounds awesome

BBBBBBBBBBRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

it wasn't? it even had some decent throwback's toward the 54 film

I would unironically suck your dad's cock, you fucking faggot

Not meta enough, and too Orwellian

Nothing can ever top the original novel
Alien tripods are much scarier striding across the Victorian countryside

>Maybe only 35-48% shitposting
Keep telling yourself that.

The movie is very blatantly about the War on Iraq, with the Aliens being a stand-in for the US military, and the humans being the people of Iraq. That's why the son goes crazy and tries to fight the Aliens, it's him getting radicalized by the invasion. The many scenes of people escaping is meant to represent the refugee waves created by the invasion. And in the movie the Aliens eventually die out because of the invasion, just like the USA destroyed its own economy.

>Alien tripods are much scarier striding across the Victorian countryside
What would be the modern equivalent?
Giant tripods were scary because they represented crazy ass tech
They didn't even have tanks then

Now, a tripod doesn't strike the same kind of fear. We COULD build a tripod, but we don't want to.
It's not the same level of "holy shit".

>he should have had Cruise create a insurgency cell and help the defeat the technologically superior invaders with suicide tactics or something

That would have been too obvious. Great film makers are more subtle. For example people still don't believe the original Star Wars movies were about the Vietnam war even though it should be obvious.

something more Lovecraftian and giger-esque

snnnnnnnnnnniiiiiiiffffffffffffffffffffffff*ahh*

very lovecraftian

*blocks your path*

Don't set it in modern times
Just adapt the novel properly and faithfully

>. The many scenes of people escaping is meant to represent the refugee waves created by the invasion
That happens in the book too, you stupid fuck. A big chunk concerns the hordes trying to flee London before the martians advance.

>The movie is very blatantly about the War on Iraq, with the Aliens being a stand-in for the US military, and the humans being the people of Iraq.

why is why dakota fanning asks "is it the terrorists?", tom cruise comes back to his house covered in dust like the people at ground zero, and there are missing people posters everywhere like in new york city after 9/11

It was great imo- definitely a lot of room for improvement though. Pic related, my favorite scene

It goes both ways. Spielberg learned to make multiple meta-narratives. One is about the threat of terrorism, the other is about the invasion of Iraq.

lol'd

>the official sequel released last year
What sequel?

>lol'd
What does that mean? "Launched oily loads"? Listen fag, if you're not gonna fill me with cum (mouth or bum) then I don't wanna hear it

>Official sequel
>70 years after the author died

HA! No

It wasn't, it's a pretty good movie actually.

Massacre of Mankind by Stephen Baxter
He also wrote a The Time Machine sequel.
I've haven't read his WotW sequel, but I have read a lot of his other books.
He's pretty good.

Could have been better, I enjoyed the first half of the movie.

I think most people like the movie up until after the Ferry Scene
Then it's all downhill from there

Indeed.

It's the near total futility of human armament in the novel that makes it so compelling. Today we could just nuke the aliens. Plus it's what makes the ending so satisfying: it's the fortunes of our primitive planet that defeats the aliens.

At least I know that before I die they'll eventually make this movie right, given how often things get remade/rebooted.

I remember in the book the narrator saw one of them getting hit by artillery and going down

REMEMBER THUNDERCHILD

Next one should be set during world war 1.

The scene where the walkers awaken is among the greatest horror scenes in film history.

>showing the aliens

Really big mistake

>aliens emerge
>first thing they do is make a braap sound
based ayys

at least they weren't the simon says creatures

Given Wonder Woman's meme success, this could be viable.

A War of the Worlds set before the nuke would be viable.
Anything before 1945.

Are brrrraaaaaaaaaappppsss Lovecraftian?

One of the more proto-lovecraftian cinematic pieces I have seen.

what does that even mean

see

>Why was this shit?
Not enough Cruise running. You'll find that the quality of a film directly correlates to the amount of running Cruise does. That's why it's called Cruising.