Skip to main content

Thinking About War of the Worlds

Until the debacle known as Munich, I would have declared Steven Spielberg a national treasure. I know that many people dislike his sentimental endings, and I agree, for the most part. Yet his cinematic skills can't be denied. Do you feel blatantly manipulated by his films? Well, sure, and that's a measure of their success.

Earlier in the same year he vomited out Munich, Spielberg released War of the Worlds, and I've been thinking about it recently. No particular reason, other than that I miss the master at his best, and WotW is often Spielberg at his very, very best. One of the first things Spielberg does very well is choose his approach to the film at hand. With E.T., for instance, he commanded that the camera would never be more than Elliot's eye-level above the ground. Thus, we're always looking up at adults and the things around Elliot and E.T. It's a subtle thing, to be sure, but once you realize it you revel in the genius.

With WotW he opted for a documentary approach. His camera is relentless in its clinging to Ray (Tom Cruise). If Ray isn't there, you don't get to see it. The most brilliant moment of this is when the tripod rises up from beneath the intersection, just before all hell breaks loose. The effects work here is genius. The tripod is shown not so much directly but in reflections. You get to see the amazed expressions of people watching this thing just stand there.

Yet Spielberg eschews that trendy shaky cam shooting style that is polluting so many films today. He firmly and clearly tracks the action and neatly keeps the effects firmly in the background. You are running for horror and like Ray you're almost afraid to look over his shoulder to see what's happening.

In order to get the little boy in Close Encounters of the Third Kind to react properly to alien visitors in his kitchen, Spielberg had someone dress up as a dancing bear. You watch the kid stare at this dancing thing (the bear, of course, is off-screen), and then his face lights up in pure joy. Spielberg got that reaction by having the person in the bear costume take off the bear head, revealing one of the kid's close on-set friends.

With that in mind, I keep wondering what Spielberg did to have Rachel (Dakota Fanning) react in such horror to what is coming up behind the van. You know the moment I'm talking about. Ray is arguing with Manny the mechanic, telling him to get into the van or he'll die. The camera tracks in from behind the van, zooms in on Rachel as she turns around. Some orange light is dancing off her face and she transforms from peaceful kid to child in full-on whimpering panic.

Spielberg's WotW is full of moments like that.

Reputedly, there is a sequence involving tripods destroying a neighborhood that I wish had survived the editing process. Apparently it was 100% completed, with visuals, sound, music and all. I was disappointed that it wasn't at least included as a deleted scene on the DVD. Much of film shows that Spielberg was playing with himself, seeing how fact he could crank out a masterpiece. A little more thought might have left that sequence in the film, or improved something that was only near-great.

What survived, however, is brilliant. My stand-out favorite moment is when Robbie demands to join with the military in an utterly futile "last stand". When Ray and Robbie stand and stare at each other there is a gulf between them that is tangible. Certainly there are aspects to the moment that feel contrived, but I accepted it anyway. And moments later, when Ray has Rachel and that fireball rises up from over the hill, followed by a flaming thing that is as unstoppable as gravity...well, that sequence is a lesson in bravura filmmaking.

Some have complained about the deus ex machina ending, but you can't blame Spielberg for sticking to the book. Do these critics make the same complaint about the book, or about George Pal's marvelous 1953 film? Just wondering.

In the final analysis, Spielberg's WotW is not flawless but its power overwhelms its problems. I am an enormous fan of Pal's film, but I like Spielberg's for different reasons. Pal focused on man's futile attempts to make a stand against the invader, contrasting man's humanity with the Martian's implacable brutality. Spielberg opted for a much more intimate film, viewing an invasion from the point of view of a father desperate to keep his children alive. His drive is to unload the kids on their mom, to rid himself of the responsibility he has shunned his entire life, and by extraordinary circumstances he is forced to grow.

Now excuse me, I think I'll crank up the DTS and watch War of the Worlds again.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home. Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes . In Batman Begins , I blamed Katie Holmes . Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal , who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film,...
1 comment
Read more

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...
Post a Comment
Read more

We pause now for a minor rant…

“My car has a flat tire.” “You should buy a new car.” Every time I hear President Obama and other Democrats talking about “health care reform,” that’s what the conversation sounds like. A health care crisis is declared and the only solution is to replace the entire system. At most, around 15% of the American population is without health care insurance. Ignoring the fact that for most of them, this is a matter of choice, it also means that 85% are insured. And of that 85%, something like 70+% like their current coverage and don’t want the government to touch it. So for the vast majority, the current system works and works great. Yet, because of the minority for whom it allegedly does not...toss it all, start again. Admittedly, regardless of insurance coverage, it all costs too much, but again, the only accepted approach to controlling costs are to throw out everything and turn it all over to the government. Tactics that are proposed to address specific cost issues are not consid...
Post a Comment
Read more