War of the Worlds

My final impression is not bad at all. Spielberg is too good of a director to make a forgettable film. He incorporated something into his film that was missing in his previous works - tension and darkness. The tranquility and childlike playfulness of E.T. were forgotten, and Spielberg made his War of the Worlds as a monumental disaster film, which is additionally likable because it is shot from the perspective of an ordinary outsider who is not trying to save the world, but simply trying to survive quite normally. Sometimes even at the expense of others. Several scenes are shot breathtakingly. Spielberg is very good at depicting the destruction of the city, the sinking of the ship, and apocalyptic scenes of fleeing crowds, and he uses all those aspects here. The basement scene with the mirror is even in my top ten and with its sophistication, it ranks among the highlights of the genre. Cruise is good, but he is outdone by the excellent Dakota Fanning as a current top child star. Tim Robbins also played his mentally disturbed man with ease, and the other actors are not important for anything else but future corpses. What deprived the film of a fifth star and a place among the best films is the unfortunate happy ending, which may be taken from the book, but does not suit the overall tone of the film. At the same time, the length of the film is also a problem, which in this case could have been 20 minutes longer because, after a very good start, the ending feels somewhat deprived. Visually, it is a remarkable film, characterized by the gloomy red of the alien organisms and the unsettling sounds of alien machines creating a suitably chilling atmosphere for most of the film. Overall impression: 80%. (12/04/2007)

Well, no. Upon closer inspection, it definitely wasn't what I expected, and there are plenty of things that traditionally bother me about Spielberg - the melodrama, which is sometimes unnecessary, the unbelievable pathos, and scenes that are dragged out without having any effect on me. Actually, I didn't even feel the tension anymore. Well, it almost seems like I want to start a club called "I Hate Spielberg," but this film still belongs to those that I can tolerate from him. (12/10/2015)

No other film has been able to portray the sheer terror of confronting an unknown alien enemy like War of the Worlds. A nightmare with superb editing and glorious sound design, whose overwhelming aura of hopelessness and the defencelessness of the characters in a terrible situation is unpredictable and makes it a strong candidate for the best blockbuster of its decade. The pace is thrilling and some of the scenes are chilling not only because of their virtuoso audiovisuals, but also because of their strong humane subtext (the scene of the car being attacked by a mad mob is the film's most moving moment), which makes even more disappointing the slightly unfinished ending, when the level of horror and depression, culminating in the sequence with Tim Robbins, begins to stagnate and is replaced by the mandatory, but nonetheless annoying, family pathos. I don't agree with the general hate of the hysterical Dakota, which on the contrary is very important to Spielberg's cunning intent to exhaust and terrify audiences of all ages, but on the other hand, it's true that there’s no other film that will make guys be so eager to never have children and appreciate the subtle allure of condoms. If this was Steven's intention, then I'd throw in a fifth star. 85% (11/08/2017)

Spielberg's version of War of the Worlds is a great counterpoint to the tradition of the disaster films. It is a film unusually turned in on itself, which mostly despises the monumentality of battles and the pathos of heroism. It focuses on three small, insignificant points that are desperately tossing in the wild tide of war, and they have no time left for any heroism, phrases, or nationalism. The actors' portrayals of the three points is famous – the chemistry of the family trio is especially dramatized by the tiny Dakota Fanning, whose life is worth much more, from the point of view of the film's narrator, than some Statue of Liberty, the White House and other hitherto indispensable elements of the genre. Tom Cruise doesn't surprise me anymore – I know he's one of the best, and Ray Ferrier just confirms it. Steven Spielberg uses the wonderfully functioning magic of the characters and holds them close to the body through Janusz Kaminský's phenomenal camera. The result is an intense and unusually intimate spectacle, into which the luster and glory of the great battles of mankind reaches only in the form of vague messages. John Williams' unusually introverted soundtrack and, of course, the magnificent effects, which are among the best ever, complete the dense atmosphere of War of the Worlds. The most impressive moments are scenes with hints of the destruction of mankind – the rain of clothes, hundreds dead in the river... Spielberg has become the ultimate leader of contemporary spectacular science fiction with this film. His films have a soul, they have an engaging visual, they have spark. And unfortunately, they have broken endings. In War of the Worlds, the problem is not in the idea, but the fact that the cliché, which had been successfully avoided until then, strikes like a bolt of lightning at the end. Too bad. A weaker 5*. (07/02/2005)

Mediocre in almost all respects. Except from a few individual scenes (the plane, the port, the train) and nice sound, this is nothing but a random onslaught of scenes, mundane actors, uninspiring music and a pleasantly “well-worn" look. If you’re looking for an intelligent, different slant on alien invasion, Signs is a better choice. This certainly isn’t bad or boring - Spielberg is too good and experienced a filmmaker to allow that, but I can’t help thinking that here we get his routine work and nothing more. Unfortunately he found support neither in the actors or in the screenplay. ♫ OST score: 3/5 (07/02/2005)