Skip to main content

This is not a war any more than there's a war between men and maggots... This is an extermination.

War of the Worlds
(2005)

(SPOILERS) Spielberg’s adaptation of HG Wells’ best-known work struck me as a lazy move at that the time. As slickly made as it undeniably was, it left me resoundingly underwhelmed. Shorn of period accoutrements, the director’s latest SF extravaganza was revealed as a thin, pedestrian wallow in grim-dark. But it seemed to strike a chord, earning a raft of strong critical notices and an appreciative audience response; as a result, it would be the penultimate time the Beard scored a place in the annual worldwide box office Top 10. How does War of the Worlds’ depiction of nationwide devastation carry now, in an environment of strategically advancing global devastation? Still not so hot, or resonant. Although, a deus ex machina of the order envisioned by Wells and unimaginatively transposed by David Koepp and Josh Friedman wouldn’t go amiss in the real world.

This deus ex machina, as narrated by an exclusively paycheque-inspired Morgan Freeman, advises that the Martians, nay plain aliens in this iteration, have no resistance to Earth microbes. Lest you instantly infer that means “viruses”, however, Wells had it that they were “slain by the putrefactive and disease bacteria against which their systems were unprepared”. Quite how these bacteria overran the Martian systems, well… “there are no bacteria in Mars, and directly these invaders arrived, directly they drank and fed, our microscopic allies began to work their overthrow”.

That’s some fairly wild invention there for sure, for if their systems have no bacteria, how then do they function? Further still, if Martian systems function successfully without the need for bacteria, why on earth (or Mars) should bacteria represent an inimical force? It rather suggests they exist in an artificially sterile environment. Maybe they do, in which case they were surely aware of this fact, being the kind of science-and-technology whizzes who could build solar-system-traversing space craft, so were surely rather foolhardy not to test Earth’s atmosphere before arriving. Anyone would think they were as unforgivably stupid as the humans in Alien Covenant.

I suppose then, that you could argue the War of the Worlds resolution is nonsense in the same way the plandemic is nonsense. The difference being that the former provides for a happy ending. A deadly reaction to the environment conveniently does for the Martians, but a magic wand waving away the dark instigators of global euthanasia is far from reach.

Robbie: What is it? Is it terrorists?
Ray: These came from someplace else.
Robbie: What do you mean? Like Europe?
Ray: No, Robbie, not like Europe!

At the time, there was much in the way of 9/11 analogies – no, not in the sense that the Martians didn’t actually land at all – with comparisons made between the machines lying dormant beneath the ground. You know, like sleeper cells. Yeah, it’s desperately weak, isn’t it? When man-child dad Ray (Cruise) attempts to drive his semi-estranged kids Rachel (Dakota Fanning) and Robbie (Justin Chatwin) to safety in the face of disintegrating death rays, Rachel asks “Is it the terrorists?” As was more than evident by this point in his career, it’s the kind of thing that passes for thematic depth with the Berg.

Motivations are generally suspect throughout. It’s easy to forget that most people accepted – and still do accept – the official 9/11 story entirely credulously. Whether that viewpoint extends to the not so great or good of Hollywood is moot, but what isn’t is that, if there’s a buck to be made from it, they’ll make it. Well, barring Eastwood, perhaps not in furnishing us with gung-ho action movies set in Iraq – most handwringing on the War on Terror conspicuously attracted no audiences – but transpose that content to another genre, spruced up with readily-guilt-free-killable aliens, and audiences might swallow the bitter pill (although, in Battle: LA’s case, not so much). In this context, Robbie is desperate to “join up” and give the foreign, I mean alien, devils what for, all common sense deserting him. Ray has to dispose of the coward/collaborator substitute (Tim Robbins’ Neil Young lookalike Ogilvy) so as not to be given away. And our brave lads save us eventually… well, no actually, see above, they don’t need to. But the Berg is fully behind them, just like on Omaha Beach.

War of the Worlds makes for something of a capper to the Berg’s “dark SF” trilogy (after A.I. and Minority Report). All three feature children under threat of predation and encountering – or implied to encounter – considerable suffering, none more so than Rachel here. She’s continually being exposed to death and destruction, almost as if this were some form of MKUltra initiation (at one point, she’s even blindfolded, for her own good). The moral is that maximum trauma brings a family closer together, or imprints them. It certainly does Ray the world of good, outgrowing his petulant ways and earning his children’s respect in the process. Even Robbie survives – bafflingly, but no more so than aliens succumbing to Earth microbes – so all is good.

As much as this is rather distasteful, it’s matched by cinematographer Janusz Kamiński’s dour, desolate conceptualisation of the movie. Such an approach might have worked had the opening been bright, colourful and welcoming, the world turning on its head after the aliens arrive. Unfortunately, however, that’s the way Kamiński shoots everything (hence his being particularly unsuited to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Although, Spielberg himself was unsuited to that one. Along with pretty much everyone else involved).

Kamiński’s has been pretty much the preferred tone of Hollywood movies for the past two decades. There was a time, pre-Schindler’s List and its concomitant “maturity” (read: trying to fill shoes he lacked the intellectual capacity for), that the Berg made movies with interesting and evocative visual palettes. Perhaps the change reflects his outlook, the sense that all those youthful confections, where he’d throw highly inappropriate adult references into kid-populated movies like E.T. and The Goonies, not to mention the various unedifying stories that have circulated over the years, were beginning to catch up with him.

Whatever the reason, at least the similar grim and disaster-struck Cloverfield a few years later had a distinctive take. War of the Worlds only ever feels like reheated leftovers, its modern twist on the Wells formula – a much better TV show had already gone that route in the 1980s – never provoking enough interest to sustain it. There’s no rise and fall to the narrative, no subtlety or nuance to developments; instead, we have little more than a protracted chase/destruction derby. In a sense, Spielberg finally got to make his Dark Skies, but it’s by way of a story that has long-since been inspirationally redundant.

Sure, the Beard summons some virtuoso moments: the use of the mirror in the basement; Ray in an upside-down car, refocussing on Rachel through its broken windscreen. But there’s also much that is rote. Nasty stuff like Martians feeding on humans, or tacky elements like the overtly CGI aliens. Or the crashed plane outside the house, which has amenably left room for Ray to drive away unobstructed. In general, War of the Worlds makes you pine for the glory days of Tim Burton’s patchy Mars Attacks!

It was during the publicity for War of the Worlds that Tom jumped up and down on Oprah’s couch. It seems his behaviour and his staunch convictions had a cumulatively disenchanting effect on the Berg and Mrs the Berg, such that the uncomprehending Tom is now a persona non grata with both. But still making spectacles of himself in other ways, issuing meltdown directives to his M:I crew. Meanwhile, half of Hollywood has been executed or languishes in Guantanamo Bay… Oh yeah, that didn’t happen. Still, I don’t think Spielberg will suddenly be climbing back aboard Indy V. And as for his autobiographical nostalgia vehicle... War of the Worlds finds him actually bothering, despite the material. In Indy IV, only a couple of years, later he couldn’t disguise not giving a toss. It’s been all downhill for him since.



Popular posts from this blog

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 1 (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

Is this supposed to be me? It’s grotesque.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) (SPOILERS) I didn’t hold out much hope for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent being more than moderately tolerable. Not so much because its relatively untested director and his co-writer are mostly known in the TV sphere (and not so much for anything anyone is raving about). Although, it has to be admitted, the finished movie flourishes a degree of digital flatness typical of small-screen productions (it’s fine, but nothing more). Rather, due to the already over-tapped meta-strain of celebs showing they’re good sports about themselves. When Spike Jonze did it with John Malkovich, it was weird and different. By the time we had JCVD , not so much. And both of them are pre-dated by Arnie in Last Action Hero (“ You brought me nothing but pain ” he is told by Jack Slater). Plus, it isn’t as if Tom Gormican and Kevin Etten have much in the way of an angle on Nic; the movie’s basically there to glorify “him”, give or take a few foibles, do

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

Witness (1985) (SPOILERS) Witness saw the advent of a relatively brief period – just over half a decade –during which Harrison Ford was willing to use his star power in an attempt to branch out. The results were mixed, and abruptly concluded when his typically too late to go where Daniel Day Lewis, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro had gone before (with at bare minimum Oscar-nominated results) – but not “ full retard ” – ended in derision with Regarding Henry . He retreated to the world of Tom Clancy, and it’s the point where his cachet began to crumble. There had always been a stolid quality beneath even his more colourful characters, but now it came to the fore. You can see something of that as John Book in Witness – despite his sole Oscar nom, it might be one of Ford’s least interesting performances of the 80s – but it scarcely matters, or that the screenplay (which won) is by turns nostalgic, reactionary, wistful and formulaic, as director Peter Weir, in his Hollywood debu

What’s so bad about being small? You’re not going to be small forever.

Innerspace (1987) There’s no doubt that Innerspace is a flawed movie. Joe Dante finds himself pulling in different directions, his instincts for comic subversion tempered by the need to play the romance plot straight. He tacitly acknowledges this on the DVD commentary for the film, where he notes Pauline Kael’s criticism that he was attempting to make a mainstream movie; and he was. But, as ever with Dante, it never quite turns out that way. Whereas his kids’ movies treat their protagonists earnestly, this doesn’t come so naturally with adults. I’m a bona fide devotee of Innerspace , but I can’t help but be conscious of its problems. For the most part Dante papers over the cracks; the movie hits certain keynotes of standard Hollywood prescription scripting. But his sensibility inevitably suffuses it. That, and human cartoon Martin Short (an ideal “leading man” for the director) ensure what is, at first glance just another “ Steven Spielberg Presents ” sci-fi/fantas

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Get away from my burro!

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) (SPOILERS) The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is beloved by so many of the cinematic firmament’s luminaries – Stanley Kubrick, Sam Raimi, , Paul Thomas Anderson and who knows maybe also WS, Vince Gilligan, Spike Lee, Daniel Day Lewis; Oliver Stone was going to remake it – not to mention those anteriorly influential Stone Roses, that it seems foolhardy to suggest it isn’t quite all that. There’s no faulting the performances – a career best Humphrey Bogart, with director John Huston’s dad Walter stealing the movie from under him – but the greed-is-bad theme is laid on a little thick, just in case you were a bit too dim to get it yourself the first time, and Huston’s direction may be right there were it counts for the dramatics, but it’s a little too relaxed when it comes to showing the seams between Mexican location and studio.

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls… dyin’ time’s here!

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) Time was kind to Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome . As in, it was such a long time since I’d seen the “final chapter” of the trilogy, it had dwindled in my memory to the status of an “alright but not great” sequel. I’d half-expected to have positive things to say along the lines of it being misunderstood, or being able to see what it was trying for but perhaps failing to quite achieve. Instead, I re-discovered a massive turkey that is really a Mad Max movie in name only (appropriately, since Max was an afterthought). This is the kind of picture fans of beloved series tend to loathe; when a favourite character returns but without the qualities or tone that made them adored in the first place (see Indiana Jones in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull , or John McClane in the last two Die Hard s). Thunderdome stinks even more than the methane fuelling Bartertown. I hadn’t been aware of the origins of Thunderdome until recently, mainly because I was