Not that Spielberg isn’t perfectly capable of screwing up a movie without any meddling interference, but isn’t meddling interference something he’s pretty much immune to?
I mean, I’m guessing that this will be a Dreamworks film so he’s pretty much the boss, right? Even if he made the film for another studio (does he do that anymore or all his films Dreamworks?), there isn’t a studio exec in the world who could make him do anything he didn’t want.
Now, it’s entirely possible that Spielberg himself will want it to be “an overblown, popcorn CGI fest with big name actors and no plot” but if he decides he wants it to be a plodding, sentimental, faux-spiritual allegory I figure that’s exactly what he’ll make. (for or for but most probably for :rolleyes: )
There will be no romantic interest for Tom Cruise in the movie. This will be to avoid losing either the gay or the female demographic. Most likely, Cruise will have a female costar whom he will save often so both women and gays can swoon over what a great guy he is.
As others have said, the only way I’m actually interested is if it’s faithful to the orginal. They’ve already done a modern remake and it was called Independence day. There was even Mars Attacks(which apparently I’m one of the few people who actually liked that movie). So there’s not much point in remaking it, otherwise.
The concept sounds cool, but like some other fans of the original novel, I will be upset if he really butchers it, mainly because I want to see a modern movie take of this.
Stuff that would be cool to see as a movie-
HMS Thunder Child taking on one of the tripods, receiving a hit from the Martian Heat ray and bursting into flame, but continuing to charge until the flaming hulk of the battleship rams into the tripods, causing this huge tidal wave of steam/boiling water to head towards hapless victims.
That gives me hope, Sky Captain looks to be damned cool, and if it turns out to be cool, then I’ll have no worries about him screwing up Princess of Mars.
For years, I’ve wished somebody would do a faithful version of War of the Worlds, set in C. 1900 Britain. I want to see Martian fighting machines, the Heat Ray, the Black Smoke, the Red Weed, the epic end of the Thunder Child, the deserted London… only problem would be dealing with the end, which is too anticlimactic for modern screenplays.
Sure, it would be cool if the new movie was faithful to the book, but it would also be cool if the lead character was named Dr. Clayton Forrester in a little tribute to both the George Pal version and MST3K (“Push the button, Frank”).
They should keep the same ending, only instead of a biological virus, the humans should make a computer virus and infect the aliens computers with …oh. I see. Never mind. Honestly I never realized until just now that I.D. stole that ending. There’s no way that it can be coincidece right?
Anyway, beyond the fact that the original WotW ending was anticlimactic (which I thought was the best part of the original, that the problem just sort of solved itself without human intervention) its so well known now that it wouldnt have any where near the shock value it did the first time around. As Tim Burton did with Planet of the Apes, they’ll have to come up with another twist ending (err…hopefully there will make sense though, unlike T. Burtons craptastic “ending”).
To clarify, that was from a Saturday Night Live sketch several years ago, with Tony Danza as the host. “Da Brooklyn Academy of Fine Arts’ Production of Da War of da Woilds!” Best bit was at the end, with Nora Dunn as a TV anchorwoman with a big graphic behind her reading “JOIMS!”
or for 
but most probably for :rolleyes: )