HiI have seen last night at the theaters the new fantastic film by Steven Spielberg "War of the Worlds" What a movie!!!The only thing I noticed, it was not in Widescreen version. Has anyone seen the movie and what format was it? I was really surprised to see Spielberg not using the widescreen for this blockbuster.Stelios

I'm not going to spend any money on another piece of Scientology propaganda (meaning anything featuring Tom Cruise made after he joined that cult).Having read the book and loved the musical I doubt it can be better than either anyway.

>I'm not going to spend any money on another piece of>Scientology propaganda (meaning anything featuring Tom Cruise>made after he joined that cult).>>Having read the book and loved the musical I doubt it can be>better than either anyway.It has nothing to do with Scientology, it has to do with making a good movie out of a well known story. You must see it unbiased.By the way the aspect ratio is 1.85:1 compared to some blockbusters 2.35:1Stelios

Great been looking forward to it.

Hi,I saw the film "the night that America panicked", about the radio broadcast of this play during 1938, when some listeners believed the events being heard on the radio were real. I don't know if the consequences were exaggerated or not, but it is perhaps not so suprising considering public broadcasts were a very new phenomona at that time.Dan

I saw it last night. It was really good until the last 2.5 minutes. Then is got really really bad IMHO (yes I have read the book and seen the original movie).As much as I hate cults (especially Scientology), Mr. Cruise as an actor is fine with me. What he does with his personal life is his business. Just as with anyone else, what they believe in doesn't bother me unless it directly affects me or my family.

I thought Tom Cruise was brilliant in Cocktail, Born on the 4th of July and other films. When some 'reporters' sprayed his face with a water pistol before the London film premiere, i thought that was pathetic... and he rightly called those guys "jerks, total jerks".CheersDan

If it is aired on TV I'll watch it, maybe.But I'm not going to sponsor Scientology in any way by buying something where a good part of the proceeds go to their big contributors (or directly to them).

"I'm not going to spend any money on another piece of Scientology propaganda (meaning anything featuring Tom Cruise made after he joined that cult)."Did you buy oil any time after 9/11? Are you sure none of your money ended up in the pockets of a militant group? Have you bought anything Korean wondering if some of the money was getting funneled into the Unification church? Do you have any products from China, yet have grave concern for human rights there? Placing a litmus test on what we see, buy or do based on the beliefs or practices of those who produce the goods can make for a pretty conflicted life. If one insists on holding the moral high ground, one cannot draw a line in the sand with one individual.I think it in the best interest of everyone that these threads don't get hijacked by people wishing to make moral statements--having said that I have no plans on seeing the movie--I owe my wife a "date" movie and I don't think this movie fits the bill :)-John

Since it's a Spielberg movie it's bound to be cheesy, that man can destroy almost any good script, like Hollywood in general.-

>Since it's a Spielberg movie it's bound to be cheesy, that>man can destroy almost any good script, like Hollywood in>general.>>-

I read somewhere that the aliens in "War of the Worlds", were a metaphor for the British Empire and its inevitable decline from within.Any literary historians out there kind enough to confirm this?:-) CheersDan

Saw the Orginal Movie, not interested in seeing this one.I just don't bother going to Movies Much anymore. There really is not much that interests me.How many more movies will be good that are not simply remakes or sequels of other films.ooohh.. Spielberg... Big deal, he used someone else's script and modified it for current day.Insert Other movie names here...Wow, another remake. What else is new...I choose to pass on this one.Maybe when they start making good original movies I may see something I like, but until then, they can charge the sheepple whatever they like, and they'll just keep coming.I do enjoy reading that overall movie viewings here in the states continue to decline. I wonder why. ;-)As for Cruise, looks like he's gone wacky and now is taking someone else with him. Oh well.Regards,JoeGrab My FREEWARE Voice recognition Profiles here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=58334]Cessna 172 Voice Profile[/a][a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=60740]FSD Avanti Voice Profile[/a].You will need the main FREEWARE Flight Assistant program to use it, get it here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=genutils&DLID=39661]Flight Assistant 2.2[/a]

If memory serves (and it's a long long time ago since I did HG Wells in English Lit) it was a statement about the arrogant superiority of mankind; technology fails where the most humble of creatures saves the day.(could be wrong of course! ...I have a guide to his works somewhere upstairs..)Cheers,Paulhttp://www.strontiumdog.plus.com/conc_capt_ba.jpgConcorde Training Captainwww.BAVirtual.co.uk

Thanks for that Paul., maybe the book was a metaphor for the BE after all:-lol . It's funny, i live in Surrey (where a lot of the play was set) and we 'studied' WOTW at school too. I remember thinking those cheeky monkeys (alien tripods) are storming right through my back garden!CheersDan