"Close Encounters of the Deadly Kind"
by Scott Mantz

"War of the Worlds"
Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning, Tim Robbins
Directed by Steven Spielberg

E.T. go home!  Tim Robbins, Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning fight to stay alive in "War of the Worlds"

No one would have believed that in the early years of the 21st Century, the very first alien invasion story ever written was being considered keenly and closely for a Hollywood summer blockbuster by two of the most successful filmmakers on the planet.  But when both Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg found a hole in their normally busy schedules late last year, they studied the notion of updating H.G. Wells’ classic 1898 novel “The War of the Worlds” for the big screen with envious eyes.  And quickly, they drew their plans.

Those plans included shooting a reported $135 million, special effects-heavy event film with thousands of extras in only 72 days in order to meet a looming summer 2005 release date.  While that may seem like a daunting task, it’s par for the course for a pro like Spielberg, whose mammoth productions include the likes of “Saving Private Ryan,” “Jurassic Park” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark” (and whose 21 films have grossed over $6 billion worldwide).  It’s also a homecoming of sorts for Spielberg, who pretty much created the summer blockbuster 30 years ago with “Jaws” and who returns to the genre that gave him two of his seminal hits – 1977’s “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” and 1982’s “E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial.”

But this time around, things are a little different.  You won’t find any cute and cuddly aliens with a fetish for Reece’s Pieces, and you won’t find another majestic, idealistic depiction of humanity’s first contact with alien life.  What you will find is a very dark, scary, violent and sometimes disturbing film where the menacing aliens zap human beings into oblivion.  And nobody can stop them, not even Tom Cruise.

On the surface, the prospect of reuniting Spielberg and Cruise again after their successful collaboration on 2002’s edgy “Minority Report” may seem like a sure thing, but “War of the Worlds” is a mixed bag of a movie that’s ultimately at war with itself.  It goes without saying that the visual effects are out of this world, but the film takes itself way too seriously and is too grounded in reality for an alien invasion flick.  As a result, moviegoers expecting a fun, popcorn-minded summer blockbuster over the long Fourth of July holiday weekend are in for a rude awakening with a very intense close encounter that’s more like “Independence Day” meets “Signs” by way of “Saving Private Ryan.”

Cruise plays Ray Ferrier, a divorced dad who works on the docks of the New Jersey waterfront.  He cares more about fast cars than his kids, which becomes painfully obvious when his ex-wife (Miranda Otto) reluctantly drops off their teenage son Robbie (Justin Chatwin) and young daughter Rachel (Dakota Fanning) for a rare weekend visit.  Within moments of their arrival, a towering three-legged war machine emerges from deep within the earth and begins to incinerate everything in sight.  What started off as an ordinary day has suddenly turned into a horrifying attack on the human race by aliens from outer space, and Ray realizes that he has to grow up fast if he is going to save his family.

Spielberg’s “War of the Worlds” may be set in modern times, but it still contains many elements that are more faithful to Wells’ original novel than the excellent 1953 film version produced by George Pal (which, it should be noted, holds up very well).  Instead of the hovering flying saucers that have since become parodied in invasion films like Tim Burton’s “Mars Attacks!,” the invaders here set out to exterminate humanity by way of enormous walking Tripods.  If people are lucky enough to survive the initial attack, then they are captured and used as fertilizer for the twisted red weed that has been growing all over the planet.  And when Ray finds temporary refuge in the basement of a dilapidated farmhouse, he encounters a deranged survivor who turns out to be just as dangerous as the aliens.

There are some interesting differences, starting with the fact that the invading aliens are not Martians (though where they are from and their reasons for attacking are never revealed), and they come down from the sky through lightning bolts instead of meteors.  But where Wells’ original story was seen as a subtle attack on British colonialism and the film version was a subtle allegory against the Cold War, Spielberg’s version is far more obvious – perhaps too obvious – in its intentions to recall the aftermath of 9/11.  When Ray returns home after the first attack, he is covered with ash, much like the survivors who escaped from Ground Zero.  Before realizing the nature of the attackers, Ray is asked by one of his kids if terrorists are responsible.  And when Ray and his family try to flee the city, they pass by scores of flyers posted by people looking for their loved ones.

Do images like these leave a lasting impression?  Absolutely.  Does that make for rousing summer entertainment?  Not exactly.  Science fiction has always been at its most effective when it covers topics that are socially relevant, and of course, 9/11 is still extremely relevant.  But the screenplay – written by David Koepp, who previously adapted Spielberg’s “Jurassic Park” and “The Lost World” – hits too close to home and practically beats you over the head with its manipulations.  In addition, the family bonding moments feel too forced and contrived in an effort to make you care about the characters.  And while showing everything from Ray’s point of view may help avoid typical alien invasion cliches like military generals mapping out battle plans and the destruction of famous landmarks, there are times when the film too closely resembles M. Night Shyamalan’s similar approach in “Signs.”

But despite these flaws, nobody knows how to make a great-looking, well-produced film like Steven Spielberg.  Like “Close Encounters” and “E.T.,” he tells a universal story from a very personal point of view, and he taps into his darker side for some scary, more intense scenes that stand alongside the best of anything he’s ever done.  There’s also no doubt that he brings out the best in Tom Cruise, who effectively plays against type as a deadbeat dad who’s not in control and yells at his kids, but also takes some surprisingly desperate measures to protect them.  And since Spielberg has a knack for bringing out the best in kids, it’s not surprising that Justin Chatwin and the always-impressive Dakota Fanning put in fine performances.  But perhaps the strongest role goes to Oscar-winner Tim Robbins, who’s quite creepy as the lone survivor hiding out in the farmhouse basement with Cruise.

In the end, “War of the Worlds” is a mostly fascinating film that’s periodically frustrating.  It’s a good movie with moments of greatness.  It’s a serious film posing as a summer blockbuster.  It’s a movie that’s to be admired more than actually enjoyed.  It’s the kind of movie that will keep you on the edge of your seat, but you won’t exactly rush out to tell your friends to see it.  As a result, Spielberg’s latest close encounter may certainly reach for the stars, but there are times when it doesn’t come close enough.

Back to Scott's New Movie Reviews

Review Archives