Posted on 07/04/2005 8:11:16 AM PDT by manny613
So there I am watching Steven Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" with a bunch of swells at the movie's premiere in New York City. The film is a sci-fi extravaganza where Spielberg takes the basic premise of the 1898 H.G. Wells novel, borrows freely from his previous suspense films "Jaws" and "Jurassic Park," and creates a special effects bonanza that is bound to please a mass audience hungry for thrills and chills.
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
Bill O'R: it takes either a very courageous or a very drunk man to sit and watch the reinforced concrete acting of Tom Cruise for more than thirty seconds. In your case, I expect the latter.
If O'Reilly is right, then War of the Worlds will be a blockbuster.
"Kingdom of Heaven" - bombed, Christians as bad guys
I saw "Alamo" on DVD the other night - dreadful, made Davey Crockett and the whole gang a bunch of brawlin' drunks, with a tiny reference to the constitution of 1824. They did their best to 'demythologize' the cause of Texas freedom... Bombed.
Lots of movies bomb because of lousy scripts, and lots of scripts are lousy because leftwing screenwriters are the only kind of screenwriters hired these days. Products of PC universities and a liberal hollywood ethos, they "dont get it".
Even when a "Passion" becomes a blockbuster, or when G rated movies do better than R, they dont get it.
People need to know OUR SIDE IS A GOOD SIDE. People know there is good and evil in the world, and 'entertainment' is seeing real good triumph over real evil. And it's the truth more or less, so leftwing PC BS in movies is bad for business.
LOL, I'll keep an eye peeled for this part, if I ever see the movie. And I bet Tom's hair is perfect.
When has Tom's hair ever been perfect, It's always a mess.
I watched part of Wizard of Oz last night, there was one line that I wondered how it would be changed in today's films. Auntie Em tells the (future) wicked witch that she can't tell her what she thinks of her because she is a CHRISTIAN. Now we know that line would not be allowed in any of today's movies....
What amazing about the Wizard of Oz is that the tornado comes and the house blows thru the air and slams to the ground. After the house slams on the ground the house is still together, none of the furniture has moved and nothing has falled off the wall. Amazing. I geuss houses were a little sturdier back then. LOL!
If O'Reilly's correct in his depiction of the ending of this film, no wonder Boston Liberal film critics are holding their noses!
1. In the original, the man is trying to get to Leatherhead to rejoin his wife; Cruise is attempting to return his childred to his estranged wife in Boston.
2. The bad guys use Tripods that collect human beings in cages strapped underneath and burn others with heat rays; Exactly as in the movie.
3. In the book the curate nearly exposes them to the martians and has to be stopped, and the artilleryman has delusions of living underground; These two characters are merged in the movie but the circumstances are the same.
4. The red moss is present in the book as the martians try to convert Earth to more hospitable conditions; The red stuff is in the movie too..
5. The military is shown in a positive light in the book as they try valiantly to stop the attack but to no avail, they keep firing to give the people time to escape; same as the movie.
6. The ferry boat scene involved the story-teller's brother in the book; this is now applied to Cruise and the children...
All in all, there is much that H.G. Wells would have approved of, the story has been bought bang up-to-date and the religious overtones are as strong as the original.
I've seen this comment on several of the reviews of this movie. I am not a historian, but I think it can't possibly reflect any more than a knee jerk reaction, certainly no study of history.
The Romans were in North Africa for a long time. They were in Gaul a long time. After a long time, the Moguls were replaced in India by the British. The Mongols in China were assimilated. The Europeans are still here in North America.
What history shows are the conditions needed for a long term occupation. You can be viciously brutal, as were the Moguls in India. You can swamp the natives by volume, and a bit of technology, as the Europeans did in North Africa. You can wipe them out, as the Romans did to Carthage. You can assimilate to the local culture, as did the Mongols in China. You can bully the locals to assimilate to your culture, as do the Muslims & the dhimmi process.
You cannot be even slightly polite, or allow yourself to get out-numbered by equally-armed locals. Else you get India, or Zimbabwe.
In the long run, all civilizations collapse, but that must not be confused with a failed occupation. The Roman occupation of North Africa was replaced by the Arab occupation of North Africa. To suggest that the Roman occupation of Gaul was ever unsuccessful is foolish. Even after Rome fell, the Gauls kept alive the idea of the Holy Roman Empire.
Only if you accept that the term 'occupation' implies the condition 'temporary', does O'Reilly make sense. And then, it's a tautology. It means that you don't want to be there, and they don't want you to be there.
In that case, the occupation of Iraq can always be shown to be a failure, as some will always hate us. But then, by the same logic, the occupation of Western Europe after WWII is also a failure.
However, if history means all of recorded history, and not just the last century, there aren't that many occupations that were intended to be temporary. History tells us that some failed, and some worked.
Yes. A perfect mess.
Bill didn't pay attention to the movie. They didn't WALK all the way from NY to Boston; they had a car until they got to the Hudson River. It isn't that far from NY to Boston, anyway. But mainly, when you're running for your life, you ain't gonna be worried about what you're wearing!
Exactly, and it clearly shows them running from the house in a serious hurry, they only had time to grab a box of food and Ray's gun..
That peanut butter scene was hysterical
This is just more of the same PC ignorance of the details and scope of world history that was exhibited by the absolutely ignorant, and WRONG, PC absurdity, that claims, "violence never solved anything".
Facts, have nothing to do with anything PC.
As I am sure you understand.
Watching that bread slide down the window was hilarious! I want to see it again so I can see Gene Barry and Anne Robinson, the stars of the 1953 movie, in their cameo roles at the end.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.