Eve Of The War :: View topic - Robbins' hybrid of Curate & Artilleryman

Eve Of The War http://www.focusgaming.co.uk/eveofthewar/

Robbins' hybrid of Curate & Artilleryman http://www.focusgaming.co.uk/eveofthewar/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=713	Page 1 of 1

Author:	gypsywlf [ Sun Jul 03, 2005 12:07 am ]
Post subject:	Robbins' hybrid of Curate & Artilleryman
Just watched the Spielberg WotW. Overall, it was a very impressive modern retelling of Wells' tale. While there were plenty of borrowings from Pal's WotW, Spielberg went back to Wells more than Pal did. There's plenty to comment on, but to keep things brief, I'll just touch on one. I liked how Friedman & Koepp wrote the survivalist character (played by Robbins). He was an interesting mix of Wells' Curate and the Artilleryman on Putney Hill. From the Curate, he got the man-going-loopy quality, but he held onto the Artilleryman's plans to survive and to take to the tunnels of the cities. The Artilleryman is one of me favorite characters from Wells' WotW, so I was glad to see him represented. Pal didn't have him. I especially like the digging of the tunnel in the basement, as being very much Wellsian. Hines didn't include that, nor did Pal. Speaking of Pal, while the probe-in-basement scene was an obvious homage to Pal's WotW (which was itself a modernizing of the probe-in-the -ruined-house) Spielberg did it well. The big camera eye staring at Dakota was sooo much an homage to the eye-on-Sylvia scene. Even with the hero taking an axe to the probe's...um...neck. Even the 'silencing' of the noisy Robbins was very Wellsian. two thumbs up.

Author:	Loz [ Sun Jul 03, 2005 12:24 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Robbins' hybrid of Curate & Artilleryman
gypsywlf wrote: two thumbs up. Shouldn't that be three?

Author:	Lonesome Crow [ Sun Jul 03, 2005 10:37 pm ]
Post subject:
It should be three characters as well, as Robbin's characer was called Ogilvy. I also liked, the fact that Robbin's character used a lot of the Artilleryman's dialogue in the film.

Author:	Loz [ Sun Jul 03, 2005 10:39 pm ]
Post subject:
Me too. I loved that scene.

Author:	Alland [ Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:52 pm ]
Post subject:
H.G. Wells is dead, but is his estate still around? If so, somebody may be looking at a rather nasty lawsuit.

Author:	Lonesome Crow [ Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:03 am ]
Post subject:
Alland wrote: H.G. Wells is dead, but is his estate still around? If so, somebody may be looking at a rather nasty lawsuit. How do you mean?

Author:	gypsywlf [ Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:48 am ]
Post subject:
Lonesome Crow wrote: It should be three characters as well, as Robbin's characer was called Ogilvy.... True, he was named Ogilvy, but as a character, he didn't seem to take up any of Wells' astronomer's bits. I especially liked the odd little scene in which Ray is trying to silently talk Ogilvy out of hacking the probe's long tentacle. While he usually came across as gruff and in-charge, that was a moment of almost child-like uncertainty which really helped keep Spielberg's Ogilvy unstable and anti-heroic. I rather appreciated that subtle twist as being well in keeping with Wells' Artilleryman on Putney Hill.

Author:	Loz [ Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:28 pm ]
Post subject:
Lonesome Crow wrote: Alland wrote: H.G. Wells is dead, but is his estate still around? If so, somebody may be looking at a rather nasty lawsuit. How do you mean? Can't wait for this explanation! Come on alland where are you?????

Author:	gypsywlf [ Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:14 pm ]
Post subject:
Loz wrote: Lonesome Crow wrote: Alland wrote: H.G. Wells is dead, but is his estate still around? If so, somebody may be looking at a rather nasty lawsuit. Can't wait for this explanation! Come on alland where are you????? Not sure why Alland would think there would be a nasty lawsuit now. If the Wells estate disliked Spielberg doing the modern adapation at all, such a suit would have come much sooner, wouldn't it? If securing permission were necessary (and I've read that it wasn't) the estate would have had to have reviewed the screenplay before giving permission. I had read that the Wells estate (his son?) had very much liked George Pal's '53 version. Perhaps simply being a modernized retelling isn't, in itself, a bad thing as far as the estate is concerned? Actually, I thought the Spielberg version was closer to the book than the Pal version, which the estate liked. What would the suit be over?

Author:	Loz [ Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:21 pm ]
Post subject:
Come on Alland we're all waiting with baited breath for an explanation!

Author:	Lonesome Crow [ Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:57 pm ]
Post subject:
gypsywlf wrote: Actually, I thought the Spielberg version was closer to the book than the Pal version. Yes agreed I wanted to say that but thought people would call me a philistine and chase me up a tree and set fire to it.

Author:	gypsywlf [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:13 am ]
Post subject:
Lonesome Crow wrote: gypsywlf wrote: Actually, I thought the Spielberg version was closer to the book than the Pal version. Yes agreed I wanted to say that but thought people would call me a philistine and chase me up a tree and set fire to it. Oh dear. Then I may be in some danger. ':shock:' While I always had a boyish fascination for the Pal swan ships, Spielberg's tripods were much closer to the book. Despite the apparent eagerness to despise, I thought Spielberg did a good job of portraying the tripods as huge, destructive and freightening. While some might prefer the Hines tripods, I found them underwhelming. Maybe with smoother animation, and better lighting, and more acute camera angles, even the Hines models could have portrayed some fear. As it was, their effect was lost -- like if you'd seen the models before film.

Author:	Loz [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:48 pm ]
Post subject:
I much preffer the Parramount Tripods to Pendragon ones. Even if the Pendragon ones had been animated by the same team and cash as Parramounts they just are not as good looking. Big sausage tenticals!!! I quite like the Pendragon Handling Machine though. But we have nothing to compare it with in Parramount movie. I think this movie is a lot closer to the book than 53 film. But obviously Pendragon is closest of all. And if any one tries to chase me up a tree, then they'll find I've got very big teeth.

Author:	oever532 [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:51 pm ]
Post subject:
Loz wrote: And if any one tries to chase me up a tree, then they'll find I've got very big teeth. gulps How many have tried to do that? The people who tried that trick to me are among the ones who were buried recently in a garden in Maastricht, so I'm convinced we have our ways to gat rid of annoying people in our neighbourhood.

Author:	Loz [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:31 pm ]
Post subject:
What would I do without you?

Author:	oever532 [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:54 pm ]
Post subject:
You wouldn't have a 'forum friend' to talk as much with as we do now.

Author:	Loz [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:57 pm ]
Post subject:
$\:D/$

Author:	oever532 [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:59 pm ]
Post subject:
And I second that. I'm having a great time here on this forum! $\:D/$

Author:	Loz [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:17 pm ]
Post subject:
$\:D/$

Author:	oever532 [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:20 pm ]
Post subject:
And I second that too! $\:D/$

Author:	Loz [ Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:38 pm ]
Post subject:
oever532 wrote: And I second that too! $\:D/$ Not to sure about the last two faces

Author:	Lonesome Crow [ Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:26 am ]
Post subject:
Yes a bit worrying

Author:	oever532 [ Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:25 pm ]
Post subject:
Oh well, I just added them for fun...

Author:	Loz [ Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:02 pm ]
Post subject:
I know we're only joking arounde.

Author:	oever532 [ Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:18 pm ]
Post subject:
That's what I thought...

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/