intertribal: (readin about it)
[personal profile] intertribal
When I first watched War of the Worlds - midnight showing (2005) - I wasn't too fond of it. I didn't like that all the main characters somehow miraculously survived, in spite of the world totally going to shit. It's very Hobbesian, which I don't enjoy. I thought the ending was too convenient (obviously I need to write to H. G. Wells about that one).

Watching it again now, after having seen 2012, I feel bad. Because despite having pretty much the same cast of characters (deadbeat dad, older son, younger daughter, ex-wife, ex-wife's new husband - latter two not really involved in War of the Worlds) and the same basic situation (mass destruction), War of the Worlds is a much better movie. It's better-acted, better-written, better-directed. Tom Cruise is a way better actor than John Cusack. Dakota Fanning is a way better actress than, fuck, anybody in 2012. As nauseating as Hobbesian situations are, Roland Emmerich's better-angels-of-our-nature transcendentalism is more annoying and less realistic. If War of the Worlds is a manufactured blockbuster (which it is - Spielberg, after all), then 2012 is as manufactured, as artificial and plastic, as an amusement park ride.

So, sorry, War of the Worlds. I gave you a bad rap. I still think your ending is a pathetic 180-degree emotional cop-out. I completely agree with this review by Rebecca Murray:
Unfortunately the movie’s 117 minutes long and those last 17 minutes are just plain horrible. Spielberg delivers a dark, sinister sci-fi story and then screws the whole thing up with an ending that doesn’t fit. In fact, the ending’s so out of place it almost ruins the whole experience. You’ve got to wonder if the ending that’s included in the theatrical release is the only ending that was shot. It actually feels like an alternate ending that was tacked on when a test audience vetoed what Spielberg really wanted to show us. If this was in fact Spielberg’s first and only choice for the ending, then jeers for not sticking with the tone of the film through its entirety.
But, you know, other than that.

Date: 2009-12-07 03:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] asakiyume.livejournal.com
So, what you're saying is, 2012 is such a bad movie that it makes you reassess another movie that you thought was really bad--favorably.

I'll just nod sagely. I just knew 2012 was going to be bad. (I am queen of handing down judgments without bothering to stir myself to, you know, actually go see movies...)

Date: 2009-12-07 03:48 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] intertribal.livejournal.com
Yeah - and I think I judged W of the W too harshly. I think the end was so disappointing to me that it ruined the whole thing, first time I saw it.

I strongly advise you not waste your time with 2012. It is woeful.

Profile

intertribal: (Default)
intertribal

December 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
34567 89
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 10th, 2025 08:59 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios