> JKS:
>
> Saw The War of the Worlds last night. Mostly
> disappointing, Tom Cruise
> wandering around looking stunned, some cool special
> effects...
>
> ===========================
>
>
>
> I didn't mind the wandering around so much since
> this mirrors the
> journey Wells' protagonist made through the blasted
> wreckage of a once
> mighty Imperial Britain.
>
> But I agree the film was disappointing. Not so much
> for the plot holes
> (though those are very large...for example, why
> stage war machines on
> Earth eons ago and only deploy them when your
> adversaries -- humans --
> are sufficiently advanced to make their use
> necessary? -- why didn't
> you, Mr. world grabbing alien, just take the planet
> when we were
> scattered nomads without atomics?)
Well, obviously, because if they had taken over in the Pleistocene theye would not have gotten to trash New York. They had to wait until the right oment. Maybe they forgey about immune deficiencies, but they had a sense of the dramatic . . .
b
>
> Senor Spielbergo, concerned, according to
> interviews, that our
> extensive, real-life explorations of Mars rendered
> it an unconvincing
> site for an advanced civilization (but it's fantasy
> Steve, those of us
> up on the Mars missions could have suspended
> disbelief if you handled
> your stuff with verve and as for everyone else, they
> just wouldn't care)
> decided to make the invaders some unnamed, vaguely
> motivated aliens from
> who knows where.
>
> This robbed the story of its heart.
Right. Like anyone was paying attention to what was happening in our Mars explorations. He was worried about _plausibility_?!
>
____________________________________________________ Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com