Originally Posted by Astro-Noob

I've read the book, but haven't seen the movie. According to the book, the machines weren't buried, they were actually FIRED BY CANNON from mars. Consider the age of the book, this may have looked plausible to them then. The top of the "shells" unscrewed, the alien's machines began constructing the death rays and tripods, while the aliens squirmed uselessly about (gravity too high for them). Good reading.

Originally Posted by Lonewulf

My main problem with how many BAers (from what I know), have taken shots at Spielberg himself, even insulting him and denoting that he was inadequate in intelligence.

I mean, maybe I'm just taking a few of the comments a little too far, but isn't that taking critical reviewing a little too far, into the range of Ad Hominems? Spielberg has never seemed unintelligent to me; outside of Schindler's List, he just seems unwilling to "Break the Mold", and try something new. Is that really so unforgivable?

If I could, I would change the entire Hollywood industry. I would change the face of every movie produced. I would introduce both realism and extremist surrealism; I would make many movies with the comic-book unrealism of "Sin City" and the gritty real-world realism of "Man on Fire"; but I would make sure that the directors doing them are willing to go out on a limb, and willing to try something completely new; and rely less and less heavily on cliches and stock characters.

But Spielberg is not me. Why should I denote he's stupid for that?

Originally Posted by Lianachan

It's all entirely subjective, of course. He's made some fantastic films over the years - Indiana Jones, Jaws, etc.. - but I personally haven't liked anything he's done for a long time.

Originally Posted by Lonewulf

How does this make him an idiot, though? He makes a movie you don't like, and he's suddenly mentally incapable? Or is the particular insult being used simply a misnomer, meant to say that a person has to make a movie for your personal taste in order to be considered of higher intelligence? I'm not claiming that YOU said it, though I don't knwo if you did or not, just that I remember that people on this forum have, indeed, deemed Spielberg an "idiot" at one time or another.

I mean, jeez.

Originally Posted by Lianachan

I said it's all entirely subjective, of course and I personally haven't liked... If you have to vent, please do so in reply to others who've perhaps earned it more.

Originally Posted by Lianachan

I said it's all entirely subjective, of course and I personally haven't liked... If you have to vent, please do so in reply to others who've perhaps earned it more.

Originally Posted by Lianachan

It's all entirely subjective, of course. He's made some fantastic films over the years - Indiana Jones, Jaws, etc.. - but I personally haven't liked anything he's done for a long time.

Originally Posted by Lonewulf

I know that's what you said. But what you said was in responce to a post I was making against such behavior. I was taking it as a defence. Plus, I think my post came off more harshly than I meant it to. I wasn't actually intending to directly attack you, I was more of meaning "why does that make it right?" to you, not saying, "You said it's right".

Sorry about that.

Originally Posted by Inferno

Tom Cruise won Worst Actor at the Razzies for his performance in WOTW. now the Razzies are just a bit of silly fun, but was Tom really that bad? No, it wasn't a stand out performance, but then again it really couldn't be with the limited character development. He did a competent job - basically playing himself.

Originally Posted by Lord Jubjub

They gave him two nominations in this category:

Most Tiresome Tabloid Targets