War of the Worlds

[Dan Gurden]

I am up for a new Kong, especially if it can wash the 1970's travesty taste out of my brain.

Not only that, but the ship in King Kong, has a great name. Good linaege.

Yes, its the Venture!

Its a shame that it puts off the Hobbit, as I will admit that I would have preferred a little more Middle Earth goodness from PJ. ButI guess we all have to wait until the legal rights has been sorted...

[Aldaron]

I used to be very anti-Tom Cruise myself, actually, but a couple of movies have started to move me away from that.

Minority Report and The Last Samurai have got me thinking that maybe ol' Tom has started to mature a bit in the last few years, because I couldn't fault him in either of those films.

I'd much prefer them to have kept it in Victorian England, but I'm still going to go and see it, because I've liked the last couple of TC films, and it just looks like fun!

[Tricky]

I think the new WotW could be a good movie; Speilberg is pretty good at making a movie that will appeal to just about everyone.
And his stars are people that appeal to the masses.

And with the current hype over Tom's mid life crisis....i mean relationship with Katie Holmes, it's getting tons of free press, and that's a big part of the equation these days.

I'll probably see it. I will most likely find it entertaining.

And do you think the guys on the message boards in the 50's complained that the George Pal version took place in contemporary America rather than Victorian England?

[REG]

Its a shame that it puts off the Hobbit, as I will admit that I would have preferred a little more Middle Earth goodness from PJ. ButI guess we all have to wait until the legal rights has been sorted...

Well, PJ has to make money to pay the bills and support his family. He just can't sit on his arse outside the "boxing ring" while two film companies are duking things out.

Maybe, I'll watch Spielberg's version of WOTW. It's just not high on my must-see list, is all.

[Dan Gurden]

And do you think the guys on the message boards in the 50's complained that the George Pal version took place in contemporary America rather than Victorian England?

Thats an odd question, after all we are now referring to the 1950's a time when the media machine was not as prevalant as it is today, where the knowledge of a new cinema release came in press releases and reviews, but very little of the 2-year run up articles in specialist magazines...

Where there were new message boards for fans to discuss, disect and comment the content and structure.

And at a time when HG Wells was a fairly unknown auther on that side of the pond, although it could be directly compared with the Orson Welles radio play that caused all the panic. (Come to think of it, thats a version I would like to hear!)

So for the teenage drive in market it was aimed at it fell squarely on target. Problem is, it aged rapidly. So in conclusion, no. I do not believe that George Pal's version hit quite the controversy that this had, but had it been released now (with updated budget, FX and celebrity, it would have, hell, technically this is exactly what we are talking about with Speilbergs version... )