War of the Worlds Poster

War of the Worlds (2005)

Adventure | Thriller 
Rayting:   6.5/10 417.8K votes
Country: USA
Language: English
Release date: 29 June 2005

As Earth is invaded by alien tripod fighting machines, one family fights for survival.

Movie Trailer

Where to Watch

  • Buy
  • Buy
  • Subs.
  • Buy

User Reviews

LAKERS34 6 March 2006

My Lord...We go out of our way to hate Tom Cruise because he's fallen in love with a younger, attractive, successful actress and lets the world know about it... We disagree with his religious principals and think he's a nut... We're jealous because he's 40 something, wealthy, and on top of the world... So let's vote this film Worst of 2005...I don't think so...

This is an exciting, scary, action-packed film... Cruise's performance as a dead-beat dad who gets it together was not over the top; had he made this film 10 or 15 years ago it no doubt would have been received very differently. This is Science-Fiction/Horror/Fantasy at its best and an original spin on classic material. Orson Welles would have been proud of this effort; Every important point in his original radio play in 1938 is addressed here and a truly stark film showing Man at the mercy of Martians is what we have. Excellent special effects also! Bravo! I suppose Cruise's upcoming Mission Impossible III will be voted Worst of 2006...

pbubny-1 4 July 2005

Fmovies: "War of the Worlds" is Steven Spielberg's third movie in which extraterrestrials visit Earth, but the first in which their intentions are malevolent. It can't be coincidence that the arrival of the ETs is heralded with eerie lights flashing amid lowering clouds, as in "CE3K." From there, the similarity ends--no light show as friendly aliens come in for a closer look. These creatures (presumably Martians, as in the original H.G. Wells novel) aren't interested in making nice; nor is there any ambiguity about their ultimate objective (as there was for much of "CE3K"). They're here to wipe us off the face of the planet, plain and simple, a point we understand before the movie has played for even half an hour, and the giant walking tripods they deploy are remorselessly efficient. So, too, is the movie--at scaring the hell out of us, notwithstanding some gaping plot holes (what's up with that camcorder, anyway?) and a couple of sequences that are too reminiscent of other movies (particularly "Independence Day" and Spielberg's own "Jurassic Park").

That Spielberg uses imagery alluding to 9/11, the Holocaust, and perhaps the siege of London during World War II is, for me, less an exploitation than a reflection of how seriously he intends the audience to take the on screen mayhem. The atmosphere is heavy with threat, and the depiction of a populace numb with shock amid the devastation is chillingly convincing, despite a few moments of Hollywood cheese. We don't have Will Smith delivering snappy one-liners right after millions are massacred by the invading alien forces, a la "ID4." Nor is there much of a rah-rah, let's-kick-some-alien-ass mood as the outmatched Earthlings try fighting back. Even the ostensible protagonist (a low-key, effective Tom Cruise) crumples at one point under the enormity of what's happening.

I'm not really sure what the posters who complained of insufficient action and FX were talking about. Seems to me the tripods were pretty much a constant presence (if not always in the foreground) from about the 15-minute mark onward. And in fact the "war" of the title is waged from the beginning--it's just not on the level of humans vs. aliens combat that some viewers apparently were expecting.

ccthemovieman-1 10 September 2006

It pays to have low expectations. Hearing nothing but negative remarks about this film, I never saw it until the other day when a friend offered the DVD for a free look. With nothing to lose, and being familiar with the story having seen the 1953 movie several times, I put it on.

Wow, I enjoyed it; the film was very entertaining. The only annoying thing to me was the bratty teenage boy, who needed some discipline and never got it. However, that type of kid seems to be stereotypical of teens among modern filmmakers. Other than him, and his little sister who I put with because it's Dakota Fanning, the film served its purpose beautifully, namely to 'shock and awe.' That it did.

The Martian tripods were awesome, particularly in the long scene when they first appear out of the ground. To really appreciate this film, you have to have a surround system because the sound is fantastic. In fact, earlier with the "lightning strikes," the sound gets attention in a big-way. In other words, special- effects-wise, it isn't just about visuals but the audio as well.

Although the story of the father (Tom Cruise) and his two estranged (is anyone pictured married in films nowadays?) kids is so-so at best, the film is all about the action. That "cute" family situation is just a sub-plot to give us some breaks from the intensity of the invasion.

Anyway, some of the action scenes were jaw-dropping good and, with the normal Spielberg garbage that always comes with the good stuff, too, it's still was a fun two hours. Now, I'll have to get the DVD because I would definitely watch this more than once.

idavem 15 July 2014

War of the Worlds fmovies. Spielberg and company created a wonderful film that's incorporated some of H.G. Wells' original novel, and the 1953 film.

It took me a few viewings to spot some of the clever parts of the film. For example, when Tom Cruise's character shakes the white dust of disintegrated humans out of his hair, it's an homage to the part of the novel in which the hero's hair turns white (from fear).

Cruise's character (Ray, as in ray gun) is introduced to as as a person who operates a crane that lifts up truck trailers. The invaders have similar cranes - their scary, giant tripods - that can walk and lift up humans. And yes, the aliens have ray guns.

Ray's ex-wife admonishes him to make sure her son completes his school assignment by the end of the weekend, which is a paper about the occupation of Algeria by the French. Over the course of the weekend, which is the timeline in which the movie unfolds, Ray's son definitely completes his assignment, learning all about the occupation of earth by an alien force.

And of course, the grandparents glimpsed at the end of the film were the stars of the 1953 film.

I'm sure there's more allusions to the book and the earlier film, and homages to both. What I have picked up makes the movie even more satisfying for me.

Nigel St. Buggering 2 July 2005

What Spielberg, Cruise, and Koepp accomplish here in the first two acts is nothing short of revolutionary. They've made a big-budget summer blockbuster about massive destruction and action that manages to studiously avoid every cliché and expectation of such films. It stays resolutely on the characters' points of view, showing us almost nothing they don't see, even to the point of coming tantalizingly close to a raging battle, then avoiding showing it. It keeps its focus on character instead of spectacle. The "hero" of the piece remains decidedly unheroic, wanting only to escape, and trying to talk others out of fighting back. The purpose of every piece of action is to frighten and disturb rather than thrill, making ingenious use of familiar 9/11 imagery. At the end of the second act, it is hands-down the best alien invasion film ever made, and perhaps one of the best sci-films of all time.

Then something strange happens. The filmmakers lose their nerve, and remember that this is an extremely expensive summer film financed by two studios. Or perhaps it was the fact that it stars Tom Cruise, who up to this point has spent almost two hours doing nothing but run for his life. Suddenly, and tragically, the film changes, violating not only its carefully established tone, but its own internal logic. Suddenly, Cruise begins to act like a hero, and summer action clichés force their way into the story like a worm into an apple. The transition is jarring, and it creates a serious disconnect from the story.

While it's true that Wells' original ending creates a problem for a movie, here they try to remain faithful to it, while still shoehorning moments of triumph into the conclusion. Unfortunately, these moments come off as alternately false, unbelievable, and meaningless, since it isn't mankind that defeats the invaders in the end.

Is it recommendable? Well, I suppose that depends on what kind of viewer you are. If you feel that 75% brilliant material overshadows the 25% that falls apart, then you'll enjoy it. If, however, you're the kind of viewer who feels that the final impression a movie makes is its ultimate stamp on your memory, you may be in for a crushing disappointment. On the other hand, if you're the kind of viewer who just likes the cliché of the boom-boom summer action spectacle, you're likely to be bored and frustrated with the first two acts, and only engage in the end. It is confused about what audience it's trying to reach, and consequently, isn't likely to satisfy any of them.

Similar Movies

6.4
The King's Man

The King's Man 2021

8.2
No Time to Die

No Time to Die 2021

4.2
Prey

Prey 2021

4.1
The Misfits

The Misfits 2021

5.4
Voyagers

Voyagers 2021

5.3
Tar

Tar 2020

4.3
The Bay of Silence

The Bay of Silence 2020

6.8
Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon

Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon 1942


Share Post

Direct Link

Markdown Link (reddit comments)

HTML (website / blogs)

BBCode (message boards & forums)

Watch Movies Online | Privacy Policy
Fmovies.guru provides links to other sites on the internet and doesn't host any files itself.