![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
He's a witch, burn him!
Tonight, DT sans LJ and I took advantage of Orange Wednesday again and disappeared off to the Vue cinema in North Finchley to watch the latest Tom Cruise vehicle, War of the Worlds.
Interestingly, DT thought it could have been longer, whilst I thought it could have done with tighter editing and brought back closer to the 100 minute mark. In many ways, it's a reasonable update of the story, and the plot is there, easily seen underneath the Spielberg schmaltz. The special effects were impeccable, and Dakota Fanning acted the arse off of Tom Cruise. I guess it's the invisible aliens sucking at his aura that loses it for him, strange little Scientologist jaffa that he is.
I think, however, that I have deduced the problem with the movie, and I am now going to commit science fiction heresy.
As original and forward thinking as it may have been when it was published in 1898, War of the Worlds is essentially a boring and old-fashioned plot line. The pacing is of the Victorian drawing room, and the central premise assumes that an advanced alien culture knows nothing about bacteria. This may have been clever new stuff to a traditional Victorian society, but in the 21st century, any one who has watched a bleach advert knows what the little blighters are like. The story works as a period piece, but really it hasn't aged at all well. This is not to denigrate Wells; standing on the shoulders of giants and all that, but let's be honest, he has been outstripped by the later SF writers such as Asimov and Clarke. And even the earlier parts of their work is beginning to show their age a little now.
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi indeed.
Interestingly, DT thought it could have been longer, whilst I thought it could have done with tighter editing and brought back closer to the 100 minute mark. In many ways, it's a reasonable update of the story, and the plot is there, easily seen underneath the Spielberg schmaltz. The special effects were impeccable, and Dakota Fanning acted the arse off of Tom Cruise. I guess it's the invisible aliens sucking at his aura that loses it for him, strange little Scientologist jaffa that he is.
I think, however, that I have deduced the problem with the movie, and I am now going to commit science fiction heresy.
As original and forward thinking as it may have been when it was published in 1898, War of the Worlds is essentially a boring and old-fashioned plot line. The pacing is of the Victorian drawing room, and the central premise assumes that an advanced alien culture knows nothing about bacteria. This may have been clever new stuff to a traditional Victorian society, but in the 21st century, any one who has watched a bleach advert knows what the little blighters are like. The story works as a period piece, but really it hasn't aged at all well. This is not to denigrate Wells; standing on the shoulders of giants and all that, but let's be honest, he has been outstripped by the later SF writers such as Asimov and Clarke. And even the earlier parts of their work is beginning to show their age a little now.
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi indeed.
Just mho
I must disagree with you. These latter two, especially Clarke, are very poor writers. Their ideas have not dated as badly because they are obviously newer, born of a mindset closer to our own. An idea becomes hackneyed through repetition and WotW is old now, its premis used many times over. But let us not blame the original writer for that:-)he could at least write an interesting sentence, something of which I would never accuse Clarke!
Re: Just mho
I think you're being a bit harsh on Asimov and Clarke, though. Though maybe not much.
Re: Just mho
Asimov, I'll grant ye, on a good day; Clarke? I remember being forced through 'A Fall of Moondust,' at school. I would sooner eat the stuff than read about it again. I will be interested to see how well Gibson dates.
no subject
Oh, and the fire-proof boy without a mark on him.
no subject
Of course with regards to the germ factor - who knows, it could suggest hubris on a massive scale.
no subject
no subject
The old ones are the oldest!
no subject
Thanks to Smith & Jones for the 'original' gag though
no subject
no subject
except to say;
Wells R0x0rs! Asimov Sux0rs! boo ya.
no subject
war of the worms
Of course sci-fi gets outdated, as so much of it talks about technology or concepts that are antiquated within a year or two. I forget which writer talked in terms of 'puters and visiplates, but you see what I mean. In the '50s and '60s, radiation was The Big Invisible Menace, and it's what buggered the Incredible Shrinking Man (a great yarn, by the way), and so it's pretty dated now. You can laugh at plot points and premises in these books and films and be unable to get past them, or you can just sit back and enjoy, though I did have a few beefs with this version of War of the Worlds:
T Cruise (so full of himself that he probably squeaks when he sits down);
Not enough alien-whacking (even two hand grenades up the tripod's bottom didn't have enough of a "YEAH!" factor);
The son turns up at the end completely unmarked.
Give me "Alien" for sheer terror, or "Alien II" for serious whacking any day.
E.E. 'Doc' Smith
'The universe is ending! Pass me my slide rule, Dot.'
I still get flashbacks you know...