| WELCOME TO THE OCCUPATION : Steven Spielberg's 'War of the Worlds' [6/10] |
|
|
| Friday, 08 July 2005 | |
|
Much has been made of Spielberg and company ditching the "The" from their version of H G Wells' 1898 novel The War of the Worlds - but no matter which way you dress it up, the title is something of a misnomer. The events depicted in Wells' book and in the film's script (by David Koepp and Josh Friedman) aren't really a "war" at all - in both instances, mankind finds itself hopelessly and disastrously overmatched by a malevolent alien foe of immense technological superiority. As Koepp and Friedman's characters themselves note, what they're experiencing is more of an "extermination" - an "invasion" ... or an "occupation." Very early on, the main character - New Jersey dock worker Ray Ferrie (Tom Cruise) - is talking with his surly teenage son Robbie. The lad doesn't bother to hide his contempt for Ray, whom he calls by his first-name instead of the more respectful "Dad", and who has never been much of a father-figure either to his son or to his precocious 10-year-old sister Rachel (Dakota Fanning, inevitably). And Robbie has other things on his mind - such as the high-school paper he's working on, the subject being 'the French Occupation of Algeria.' This Algerian tidbit is just the kind of 'throwaway' minor detail scriptwriters are often fond of using to not-so-subtly point their audiences in a particular direction. Just in case we missed the hint, much later on - after the alien onslaught has devastated much of America along with the rest of the world - bedraggled cellar-dwelling survivor Harlan Ogilvy (Tim Robbins) tries to rouse Ray to action with his assertion that "occupations never work!" At this moment Koepp and Friedman - and also, of course, Spielberg - are presumably hoping that the penny will have dropped for at least some of their viewers, who will be pondering the parallels between War of the Worlds and recent events in Afghanistan and Iraq. Though what we are supposed to make of the fact that it's Hollywood's most prominent anti-Bush voice Tim Robbins who comes out with the "occupations" comment, only to be shortly after bludgeoned into (terminal) silence (as an extreme but implicitly reasonable "security" precaution by Cruise/Ferrie) is anyone's guess. In any case, the supposed "parallels" are tenuous at best, although this is arguably quite appropriate: as an early reference in the novel somewhat unsubtly indicates, Welles was inspired by shameful historical events on the other side of the world ("The Tasmanians, in spite of their human likeness, were entirely swept out of existence in a war of extermination waged by European immigrants, in the space of fifty years.") Critics have generally read the book as an allegory for brutal colonialism - and/or that Wells was dramatising contemporary British fears of invasion by hostile powers on the Continent. 107 years on, his book works much better as a blood-thirsty, compulsively believable page-turner than as political (or even psychological) allegory - and this new film version is exactly the same. The 9/11 moments are ticked off with suitable solemnity, though there is an intriguing character-development-arc plot 'spine' in which the self-confessed 'asshole' Ray is inspired to heroism by (among other factors) his son's example - more 'Father's Day' than Independence Day, if you like. Whatever its faults, and no matter how inaccurate title its title, War of the Worlds crucially does pretty much exactly what it says on the marketing 'tin': Spielberg + Cruise = summer blockbuster. There are several terrific set-pieces, the most powerful and memorable being the first, in which an alien tripod bursts up through the ground of a New Jersey suburb (so powerful and memorable, indeed, that it's only in retrospect that you realise the insanely elaborate alien 'plan' makes no logical sense whatsoever). As is often the case when he can get his teeth into a proper thriller (cf Minority Report, whose "Everybody runs" tagline would fit rather well here also) Spielberg is on something approaching top form for much of the running-time. He makes especially crafty use of Dennis Muren's utterly convincing CGI-heavy special-effects work - tantalisingly, we never really get a proper view of anything, as there's so much dust, debris or rain in the way. This being Spielberg, he does have to spoil things slightly with an over-sentimental, too-happy ending. But, compared with recent final-act mis-steps like Catch Me if You Can, A.I. and Minority Report, War of the Worlds scores surprisingly low (or rather high) on the schmaltz-o-meter. The ending is, nevertheless, the most unsatisfying aspect of the whole enterprise - but this is also true of the book, whose startlingly sudden and pat finale Koepp and Friedman scrupulously retain (this after ditching so much of what makes the novel so enduringly effective). After all the sturm und drang endured by the characters and audience, we surely deserve something with rather more oomph than Wells's scientifically accurate but dramatically inexcusable deus ex microbia. Neil Young 7th July, 2005 WAR OF THE WORLDS : [6/10] : USA 2005 : Steven SPIELBERG : 116 mins seen at Cineworld, Sunderland (UK), 2nd July 2005 - public show originally rated 7/10, but downgraded after further reflection, 10th Oct 2005 |
| < Prev |
|---|
