War of the Worlds Remake Already Shot Overseas 472
AlphaJoe writes "In regards to remaking War of the Worlds, Steven Spielberg has apparently been beaten to the punch by an English rival, director Timothy Hines, as being reported by SF Crowsnest. Principal photography has already been completed, and a Spring 2005 release date is anticipated. The English version is staying true to the original story, which was set in the late 1800's, where as Spielburg's version will be drastically modified to a more modern version. Hines feels there will be room for both films to exist, as they will be drastically different in story and scope."
Of course it will be drastically different/modern (Score:3, Funny)
But will it have JarJar?
Re:Of course it will be drastically different/mode (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, and it'll be shooting a walkie-talkie.
Re:Of course it will be drastically different/mode (Score:3, Interesting)
In all seriousness though, I find myself more excited about this version than the Hollywood version. I hope the Peter Jackson philosophy continues to trickle through movie making.
Re:Of course it will be drastically different/mode (Score:3, Insightful)
Which philosophy is that?
The one where the director makes large changes to the story and characters, creating plot holes and needlesly destorying the way in which key characters work? The one where the director fucks up the editing and pacing so much that they have to delete an important encounter from the film for timing reasons? The one where the editor re-writes the story in a major way because he feels like it?
PJ's appr
Re:Of course it will be drastically different/mode (Score:5, Insightful)
Peter Jackson may not have put together a 100% accurate tribute to LOTR but he treated it a lot gentler than any other Hollywood director would have. For God's sake man, what could a hack like Joel Schumacher have done to it!!! Imagine some Hollywood deal maker trying to get Chris Rock a bit part as a wisecracking Orc or something "So it will resonate better with the urban youth". Sweet jumping baby Christ, some people don't know when they got it good.
Re:Of course it will be drastically different/mode (Score:3, Interesting)
Indeed, and you'd probably be safe to say "never." The Hollywood rule of thumb is that one page of screenplay equals one minute of screen time. (Oddly, this rule holds regardless of whether it's for dialog, action, or description.) Add this to the fact that screenplays have far fewer words on a page than the average novel, and it's easy to see that all but the shortest novels are too long for page-by-page adaptation. With Lord of the Rings, we'r
Re:Of course it will be drastically different/mode (Score:5, Interesting)
What hollywood has been about in the past is taking something with a built in audience, just like LoTR, and putting out something that was crap because it already had a built in audience. Rick "f'n" Berman is a prime example of this with his Trek offerings. Instead Peter Jackson kept a reverence for the books in his movies that I truly do think came through. Because of that, more people read the books than they otherwise would have, and the legacy of Tolkien was strengthened. That is the philosophy that I support.
Re:Of course it will be drastically different/mode (Score:5, Informative)
Ok people, repeat after me:
Spielberg != Lucas
Spielberg != Lucas
Spielberg != Lucas
ET phone home jokes are probably called for, but JarJar? WTF? We're supposed to be geeks, sticklers for trivial facts. I mean, Lucas and Spielberg don't even look alike.
[insert relevant joke] Maybe the martians will be velocoraptors with Unix computers [insert relevant joke]
But will they do the radio broadcast again? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:But will they do the radio broadcast again? (Score:5, Informative)
My first Mod Parent Up! posting (Score:4, Funny)
1938 - War of the worlds (Fake news broadcast)
1950's - Game shows (Fake game shows)
1990's - Milli Vanilli (Fake singing)
Re:My first Mod Parent Up! posting (Score:3, Insightful)
2004 - Gulf War2 (Fill in your own)
fluidity of time (Score:3, Informative)
Re:fluidity of time (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. Someone really should have told the iraqis.
Re:fluidity of time (Score:3, Insightful)
i was under the impression we still had troops there regularly battling "insurgents" or whatever theyre being called
Correct. What the US called a war is over. The occupation is ongoing and what you are referring to is what other people outside the US call resistance, perhaps even a revolution since Iraq has an interim government. If they are indeed fighting themselves it could possibly be referred to as a civil conflict. Only when the entire history can be observed in whole from the future it will perhap
Re:My first Mod Parent Up! posting (Score:5, Interesting)
Around the early 90's, Malaysia had about 3 radio stations that broadcasted in English. The more predominate one was the government owned Radio 4. It is an unformatted station and the DJs basically had the freedom to do whatever they wanted, as long as they were within the tolerances of censorship law.
Radio 4's morning show (morning till about noon) was hosted by a DJ named Patrick Teoh, whose morning show usually consisted of a talk show where he would highlight social issues and current events. He brought up issues like the horrible traffic situation, dirty public toilets and as much as he could, criticism of the follies of those in power.
So, about a week before April Fools day, Patrick was called upon by a friend of his, a Creative Director at an advertising agency. The agency wanted to do a little stunt for April Fools day and a plan was hatched.
Rather a duck was hatched. It was agreed that on April Fools day, Patrick would start his show as normal, and as the topic of the day, he would highlight the (fictional) case of an advertising agency abusing ducks. The Story was that an advertising agency, in making an advertisement featuring dancing ducks, got the ducks to dance by placing them on hot plates and filming them as their feet were burned and jumped.
As expected, the radio station's switch board lit up like a Christmas tree, with callers angrily criticising the Ad agency for their cruelty towards animals and along the way, angry words were said, along with demands for more details and the identity of the company.
As was the plan, about halfway through the show, a (fictional) lady secretary form the Ad Agency was to call the station and she was to tell a (again fictional) sob story about how she felt so guilty that her company was doing this and how the Creative Director for whom she worked was a really cruel man and he was keeping teh ducks in a back room at the office. Along the way she let it slip that the Creative Director was a foreigner.
After the call, again came a new torrent of callers. This time, instead about being about the ducks, the nature of the called suddenly turned nationalistic, with things like "How dare these foreigners come to our country and do this to our ducks?" being said and people were demanding that the Creative Director be sacked and booted out of the country.
Next on the script was a call from a fictional animal rights group, it called itself GNAP, which if you said out loud sounds exactly like the word for 'duck' in a local dialect, the first clue that the whole thing was an April Fools joke. So the group voiced its objections and vowed action. (Satire on the many real life NGO's who are mainly talk and little action)
A few more calls later was the finale, where the Managing Director of the Ad Agency was to call. In his call he would make a public apology on the company's behalf, explaining that the Creative Director acted on his own and the end of the call was a dramatic firing of the Creative Director, with "... wherever you are, if you are hearing this, consider this yourself fired and come over and pack up your things"
Now, even though the Ad Agency was real, the Creative Director was indeed the person named, the story about the ducks, the secretary's admission, the animal rights group and the dramatic closing were pure fiction. It was to be announced later that the who thing was just a April Fools prank.
Now, what wasn't expected that while all this was going on, the real life SPCA was listening in and alarm bells went off. In the heat of the moment, without proper investigation, a police report was lodged against the Ad Agency for cruelty to the ducks. Just after the drama ended on radio, a team of policemen along with the SPCA raided the premises of the Ad Agency.
It was of course explained to the raiding party that the whole thing was a joke, but with all the outrage, the secretary's emotional admission and the dramatic firing of the Creati
Re:But will they do the radio broadcast again? (Score:2, Interesting)
Richard Burton narrates (great voice) and at least one member of the Moody Blues) Justin Hayward wrote and performed [some/all?] of the music.
The music is great, the story is excellent... a timeless classic, in my book. Well worth the listen.
Re:But will they do the radio broadcast again? (Score:4, Interesting)
I concur.
I recently bought a copy of Jeff Wayne's rock opera, War of the Worlds, on eBay (no $$$ to RIAA). I had heard it before on the radio, in bits and pieces, and always wanted to listen to it in its entirety. It's really good, and does a good job of following the original story. I wish there were more works like this, that blend a book-on-CD with a musical recording.
The Americanized movie in the sixties was good for its time. With Hollywood creativity in a slump and remakes all the rage, I figured a War of the Worlds remake was coming soon. I hoped it wouldn't be a Spielberg movie. I liked some earlier Spielberg movies, but none lately. AI was a great topic for a movie. I think it's a fascinating subject, yet I was only barely able to sit through the entire movie. It totally missed the mark.
So I'm glad there is a UK remake that stays true to the author's intent. That's the one I'll see. Unfortunately, the Schpeelberg crapola version will be the one making the money. It's the bane of engineers... marketing is much more important than the product.
Oh well, at least it can't be as bad as what Hollywood did to Starship Troopers. Can it?
Re:But will they do the radio broadcast again? (Score:5, Funny)
Currently, everything on the radio has the "talk radio host righteous indignation" tone of voice instead.
"We are being invaded by a left-wing alien force from the planet Mars! I'm telling you people, I'm right about this!"
It's time for... (Score:5, Funny)
LOL (Score:4, Insightful)
READ: Hines knows that he will be 0wn3d by Steven Spielberg and he is leaving himself wiggle room.
Re:LOL (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, it sounded smug. Like he just knows that Spielberg won't be able to leave a good thing alone until he ruins it, like most remakes come out to be.
Take this line for example:
where as Spielburg's version will be drastically modified to a more modern version
I read this as: Spielburg's film will include every big name he can sign on, spend more on Special effects than the GP of most small countries, and get his plot from "Rent-a-plot", with a catch at the end for sequels. And let us not forget the merchandising rights. A cute fuzzy alien teddy bear will probably save the world in Spielburgs version.
Hines to Speilberg (Score:3, Funny)
OWNED!
Re:Hines to Speilberg (Score:3, Funny)
Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember the Rocky series. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and will keep going till Sly Stone is 95 years old and can't do it anymore.
It's called milking a cash cow.
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:2)
He's got a wonderful new fresh idea he's working on though that's sure to be better than anything he's done before.
Now he's The Contender.
Good god what are they thinking?
I'd have rathered they DID stick with tacking on to the Rocky series, it'd be easier to ignore.
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:3, Insightful)
The best films I've seen recently have all underperformed next to dross like 'The Day Before Yesterday' (or whatever it's called) and similar banal movies. Look at 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind', it got fantastic reviews, was an incredible achievement but just didn't perform as well as some big explosions and pretty effects. Similarly 'Spirited Away'.
Hollywood does what
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:3, Funny)
Well, for one of the two versions, they actuall;y want to make a film of the book. That sounds like a reasonable thing to do to me. In addition, If they just make one without having to throw bones t the religious loons (which shouldbe possible with a British production) that will be one up on the older film.
The Spielberg one will be just the usual mindless drivel with kids who make your skin crawl until you start screaming `eat them' to the monsters, so any connectio
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:3, Insightful)
So we're going to have one film that is close to the original book, and thus be a film of the book. This will probably mean that there will be issues of course, maybe portray the actions as something that happened and was covered up or something
And another one which will be a horrible tacky Am
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:2, Insightful)
The original Unix was a classic OS, beloved by many (including me). Why remake it? Why remake 234 versions? They're out of ideas, folks. This is why we get craptacular stuff. They must not have an original bone/idea left.
The original pickup truck was a classic vehicle
The or
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:3, Interesting)
Because it was a bastardization of a book and he's making a true-to-the-original adaptation instead.
As for Spielberg, he want money, and remakes of sci-fi with better SFX makes perfect sense to me. I keep hearing about a possible remake of Logan's Run and I would LOVE to see a version of that story that is filmed competantly.
As for WotW, I just hope he mentions the number of observed launches on Mars and the number of s
Re:Hollywood is truly out of ideas (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't comment on this one, because I've never seen the original WOTW. However, I've listened to the original radio broadcast, which, even by today's standards
Two to choose from... (Score:5, Funny)
--#voxlator
Re:Two to choose from... (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, despite dozens of disclaimers, panicked people still called the stations to ask if it was for real.
Re:Two to choose from... (Score:2)
Very overblown (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, the commonly-believed story that there was mass panic was really a newspaper-fueled fantasy. The number of people who actually were scared enough to go ape-shit was quite small. You can read more about the overhyped-hysteria here [aol.com] -- go down halfway on the page until you get to "Book Excerpts, by Prof. David L. Miller".
By the way, the rest of that page has a lot of interesting material on the War of the Worlds broadcast, if you are interested.
GMD
Re:Two to choose from... (Score:2)
It wasn't a series, it was a one-time thing.
Which makes it even more remarkable that people actually bought it because weeks go by in the span of the broadcast (the character mentions the martians landed weeks ago at some point, the same guy who was covering the landing lives minutes before in the same show).
In Spielburg's version... (Score:5, Funny)
Nah, they just club us with their walkie-talkies (Score:4, Funny)
The Earth ends up winning when we subject the aliens to 24 hour round the clock election coverage
i think there is a place for both movies (Score:3, Insightful)
spielberg will probably make yet another blockbuster.
and that other dude will do a great movie without the overused hollywood cliches...
Yay authenticity! (Score:4, Interesting)
It's about stealing a brand-name (Score:4, Informative)
I don't understand why we even bother making movies from books if we are going to change the stories completely.
Oh, come on! That's an easy one! Two words: name recognition. Making a movie is an expensive proposition and is always risky. By co-opting a well-known name and slapping it on their product, the studios already have a built-in market. They can save money on promotion and marketing as well. We saw this a few years ago when Tri-Star took the internationally-known brand-name of Godzilla and slapped it on the front of a movie in which the monster bore little to no resemblance to the real deal.
Never underestimate the power of a brand-name. Remember when we were kids and you just *had* to have Pac-Man on your home console? The fact that the home versions really, really sucked didn't matter all that much? Remember how you were more happy to have a 3rd-rate version of Pac-Man rather than a 1st-rate version of, say, Mousetrap or some other Pac-Man-like maze game? That's what I'm talking about here. So it is with movies as well.
GMD
Re:It's about stealing a brand-name (Score:3, Insightful)
Changing the story completely (Score:2)
But I have one counter example: Overdrawn at the Memory Bank.
I first saw this as a low-budget PBS movie starring Raol Julia. Sometime later, I came across the short story by John Varley. It seemed to me that the short s
Welles (Score:2)
Re:Yay authenticity! (Score:2)
Re:Yay authenticity! (Score:5, Insightful)
Culture isn't a static thing, it must grow and evolve to survive. You have to take the good with the bad. Sometimes changes can bear surprising improvements.
Of course, the problem nowadays is that normally only a very small handful of people are allowed to participate in this, as our cultural works have ceased falling into the public domain.
Peter Jackson was one of the lucky few permitted to license LotR, for example.
There's quite a lot of debate over whether or not he did a good job (I think he did, on balance) -- but wouldn't it be great if the cultural field were open to competition there, as between Spielburg and Hines?
That healthy competition of interpretations is only possible with WotW because it is in the public domain.
For real cultural development, once a work has been established in the popular consciousness for a few decades, artists at large need to be able to build on it.
That used to be how things worked throughout the entirety of human history, until the inhumanly long copyright regimes adopted in the 20th century.
Now free cultural development on top of existing works (like LotR) is impossible until the release of those works (and in most cases the works themselves) has already passed from living memory.
Re:Yay authenticity! (Score:3, Funny)
"I think such "remixes" are vital for culture. [
Yeah! Like Greedo shooting first! Oh... wait...
Already done? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Already done? (Score:2)
Not really... (Score:2)
Hasn't War of the Worlds already been remade about 50,000 times? Independence Day? Signs? Heck, even the old 'V' mini-series was basically the same story.
I'm not sure what you mean by "basically the same story". You mean they all featured mankind trying to repel an alien invasion? Because that's where the similiarites stop. Indepedence Day follows the trials and tribulations of the heros who are going to stop the bad guys. Signs is a focused study on how one family reacts to the threat. "V" examined
Re:Already done? (Score:3, Insightful)
Then there are movies with similar plot and resolution, and countless references (Buckaroo Banzai), homages, some direct like Pinky & The Brain's "Battle for the Plant" and mo
Re:Already done? (Score:3, Insightful)
VERY basically.
I take it you've never read the book, because aside from an alien invasion, there isn't much similar between these and WotW.
Its more of an archetype comparison than a direct comparison. Like all love stories are "Boy meets girl", but they are not all basically the same story as Romeo and Juliet.
And by the way, "V"
What? Just like... (Score:5, Insightful)
Volcano and Dante's Peak?
You know the battle is lost when multiple movie makers are RE-making the same movie at the same time.
Re:What? Just like... (Score:2)
Spielberg's special effects will certainly make it quite the blockbuster. Can Spielberg do "class"? Based on some of his recent efforts (Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List), I think maybe he can!
Re:What? Just like... (Score:2)
It is fortunate that the underlying technology is now so old... '-)
Re:What? Just like... (Score:5, Interesting)
Volcano and Dante's Peak?
You know the battle is lost when multiple movie makers are RE-making the same movie at the same time.
Look into it deeper, and you will find that every year the same basic plot is made into at least 3 major studio movies.
There was the year of comets, the year of volcanos, the year of alien invasions (Independance Day, Mars Attacks), the year of virtual realities (Matrix, 13th Floor, Existanz), this year was Superheroes I believe, a couple years ago it was haunted houses.
Its a definate pattern that has been repeating yearly for as long as I remember.
Its as though one studio starts making a film, and the others rush into production with a basic description "comets will destroy the earth, a team with spaceships try to stop it", "haunted house", "alien invasion", "airplane crashes", "superhero", etc.
Re:What? Just like... (Score:3, Interesting)
It has nothing to do with one studio finding out that another one has been greenlighted, then rushing to copy it; it's just a matter of probabilities. Of the thousands of screenplays and pitched ideas that studios buy each year, there's a significant change that there will be at least two that are on the same basic idea.
The last thing a
RUN! (Score:5, Funny)
Which one will Mel Brooks choose (Score:3, Funny)
Everybody's happy (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Everybody's happy (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't stand people who demean others, just because they aren't FREAKING pretentious. The Artsy Fartsy crowd is just as bad as the Nascar Crowd.
Re:Everybody's happy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Everybody's happy (Score:3, Interesting)
Next, being literate is not simply mere. Literate doesn't just mean being able to read and write. In fact, literate usually means well read, or well learned.
The implication is that people who are educated will like one, while those who are not educated will like the othe
Re:Everybody's happy (Score:3, Insightful)
The drivers aren't some dumb guy sitting behind a stearing wheel either. That is mearly your OPINION. I think most of the Artsy Fartsy crowd is illiterate in math and sciences. Sure, they may know art, literature and all the pretty shinies (debatable looking at what they consider "art").
The fact is, that they are pretentious, thinking that what they know is
It's about time (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It's about time (Score:2)
Worse, are the movies set in England, with US actors (The Importance of Being Earnest, Vanity Fair, etc.)
I kind of liked the original version (Score:5, Insightful)
It is probably the quintessential sci-fi movie: the professor and the "cute girl" trying to survive a terrible horror, the place of faith and science, and then the classic ending - with a bit on the usefulness (or, uselessness) of atomic energy.
I need to get the DVD of that and show it to my kids. I don't think this is nostalgia talking (I hate nostalgia the way some people hate liver), but some of the sci-fi movies of the 60's-70's had more style, or at least made more sense and prompted deeper questions.
Look at "The Time Machine". The original left you wondering "You know, if I was going to rebuild civilization, what three books would you take?" I remember having discussions with people over this issue, the sheer philosophy and rational behind such a decision.
The modern version? You wondered how the hell those guys grew brains out of their spines, and how Weena learned English. Yeah. Lots of thought put in there.
Re:I kind of liked the original version (Score:4, Informative)
George Pal also made When Worlds Collide and several other big budget (for the time) science fiction films. He really was the Spielberg/Lucas of that time.
Re:I kind of liked the original version (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, they'll love that!
Dad: "Kids, get in here! We're watching a movie."
Bro: "Not again!"
Dad: "This is a great Sci-Fi classic. I loved it when I was your age."
Sis: "I hate these movies!"
Mom: "Honey, just let them play on their own."
Independence Day (Score:5, Interesting)
Hasn't that been done by Emmerich already? If you take a look at the plot of ID4:
- Aliens attack earth
- Their weapons are far superior
- Our weapons cannot hurt them really
- A virus kills them
It has a very close resemblence to the book War of the Worlds, the difference is that it is set in modern times.
Re:Independence Day (Score:2)
Re:Independence Day (Score:2, Interesting)
The original movie had a B-49 Flying Wing deliver a nuclear weapon against the invaders, and ID4 had a B-2 stealth bomber (essentialy a flying wing) deliver one.
Re:Independence Day (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Independence Day (Score:3, Funny)
Possible because WOTWorlds is in the public domain (Score:5, Informative)
In comparison, H.G. Wells died in 1946. If Wells had lived under current US copyright law (life+70), WotW would not be public domain until 2016.
Re:Possible because WOTWorlds is in the public dom (Score:4, Interesting)
From Yahoo! News:I emailed that to Lessig, and he was at a loss to explain it at the time.
Re:Possible because WOTWorlds is in the public dom (Score:4, Interesting)
Still in copyright in the UK (Score:3, Informative)
So Wells' books are still in copyright in the UK, and have never left it. I wonder quite who Pendragon films got the rights from?
Amazing no one posted the site... (Score:5, Informative)
There are some stills. But only of the actors. Nothing on how the war machines look yet. Or the thunderchild.
Should check out the Chrome trailer [pendragonpictures.com], pretty interesting.
The backstory to this would be a good 1984 (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.pendragonpictures.com/CRMtrlr1.
Now, apparently, today in 2004, they are announcing a release date of 2005.
Chrome - back then finished and ready to hit cinemas in 2003 still has not emerged yet - here in 2004.
Apparently they searched high and wide for acting talent (wantint to cast unknowns) and auditioned over a thousand people, only to decide to carry on with a lead actor from Chrome.
Is this some sort of joke? Anyone got an inside scoop?
Don't forget to see the original first... (Score:2)
CVB
Re:Don't forget to see the original first... (Score:3, Interesting)
No Big Deal (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's take "I, Robot" for example. It didn't really capture the complexities of Asimov's short stories, but for what it was, it was an alright flick. It was a summer action flick with some parallels to the themes in Asimov's book, particularly the end. Yeh, it was obvious, dumbed down, and action-packed; bu
I have always wanted to see (Score:3, Interesting)
lots of faith (Score:3, Interesting)
That's a very calm reaction to someone who's work will inevitably be compared to Spielburg's. It sounds like he has a lot of faith in his project, I hope it turns out as good as he seems to think it will be. I'd much rather see a remake that's faithful to the story than a hollywood bastardization.
Differences in the versions (Score:3, Funny)
1. lead actor: Someone that can act! vs. Ashton Kutcher
2. lead actress: Someone that can act vs. Kelly Osbourne
3. Special effects budget: 406 pounds vs. 406 million dollars
4. Days in advance for ticket line: 1 vs. 45
5. Amount of spinoff merchandise: 0.003 vs. 15 million tons (landfill volume to be occupied when the 10-year old boys turn 11 and have to have the next toy in line)
6. Awards won at Cannes: 46 vs. 0
7. People fooled by the broadcast: all in attendance (because it's that good) vs. only the way-too-young kids that parents continue to drag to movies (because what other reason would they have to scream through your $9.50?)
If the Bono copyright extension act applied... (Score:3, Informative)
Wells died in 1946 so "War of the Worlds", published in 1898 wouldn't enter the public domain until 2021. That's a whopping 123 years of copyright protection.
And we could look forward to Sherlock Holmes finally entering the public domain sometime next year.
-dameron
-----
DailyHaiku.com [dailyhaiku.com], saying more in 17 syllables than Big Media says all day.
Looking on the positive side (Score:3, Interesting)
War of the Worlds, Star Wars... (Score:3, Funny)
A rant about remakes and book based movies (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, sometimes remakes or book based movies are okay. This is because the director puts his artistic interpretation on the books that's based on art, not money.
The Thomas Crown affair was an interesting remake. It put a great spin on a classic movie, and that spin was based on good movie making, not making a movie for the masses that would turn a quick buck. Both the old and new version of the movie stand on their own as good movies in my opinion.
Another example is Harry Potter. Many of you zealous slashdotters don't like HP, but I like it as nice escapist and imaginative reading. It's just fun. Now the movies turn a tidy profit so it's not to say that there isn't money involved, but the books practically read like a screenplay, so taking the book to the movies and showing everything off is not a bad thing, because a director's artistic interpretation is not going to alter the feel of plot dramatically or change it to anything drastically different than what J.K. initially created. It's further cool to see J.K.'s world visually as well as to read about it.
Hollywood types create screenplays based off of kneejerk reactions of what will make money, not the quality of the work. "Hey, that Bradbury story was cool, but let's turn it into a thriller to attract more people. Who cares if it changes the theme, we need to make shitloads of money."
I'm so sick of bad remakes and the like. I'd rather have Hines take the story and attempt to stay true to the story and flop miserably, than Spielberg make a copy and turn it into a blockbuster action ride that has no deeper meaning and makes a mockery of a great classic Sci-fi story.
Re:A rant about remakes and book based movies (Score:3, Funny)
No no, I really get into the works of Lovecraft too.... Oh, that's not the HP you're talking about is it? My Bad.
I guess I was much to far in the concept of great writers/stories that have fallen pray to bad adaptations.
Overseas...? (Score:5, Informative)
In a global medium, "overseas" is a silly thing to say.
Re:[note to editors] spelling mistake (Score:2)
Re:the name (Score:2)
It would just serve to diffrentiate this version of War of the Worlds from all the other version of War of the Worlds.
T.
Re:I'd say That the fellows at Pendragon were beat (Score:2)
Here's another link [war-of-the-worlds.org] with an episode guide [war-of-the-worlds.org]
Who can forget the greeting of the Advocacy: TO LIFE IMMORTAL!
To keep the budget down they just created one video of the aliens in alien shaped spacesuits standing around in a circle and wobbling about a bit, and the script would be dubbed over at a later date.
"Not-A-Word Police" make an arrest! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Poor H.G. Wells (Score:3, Informative)
Possibly the problem is that Hollywood is American, and has never understood the Victorians at all. Even at the time they didn't understand them, or like them. 1837 wasn't very long after 1812, let us not forget. Even in Well's time they remembered the War of 1812 the way we remember WWI.