User Score
6.3 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1089 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. ConnerS
    Jan 4, 2008
    10
    Holy crap this was good! This is like the best movie ever. the acting was phenominal (especially tom and decota) and the effects were so realistic! For those of you who gave it low ratings, you obviously did not understand the sybolism entwind in the plot. To Adam e.- nobody found a tripod because the aliens were smart enough to put them in the ground deep enough so no one would find them, Robbie is a smart kid he figured out something, The aliens didn't notice the desieases because the were arrogent and only focused on wepons, THey store people because they need to spread the blood everywere, not just all at once, who cares if they're nude (YOUR MISSING THE POINT!), the airplane crashed a little bit away and slid into the house, You would scream to if you were being attacked by bloodthirsty aliens, and the clothes show that the aliens are so sofisticatied and interested in our planet, that all they want to do is get rid of us, not anything else! Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. KenW
    Apr 27, 2008
    5
    I must admit that I agree with alot of the other reviews in regaurds to the fact the movie could have been better. I personally do not like Tom Cruise an any way, shape or form, but at least the movie did keep me going. Yes the constant screaming of Dakota Fanning did get on the nerves, but given the point of view of a little girl in a crazy situation, it could be understood. Overall though the movie was definitely worth watching. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. TrevorL
    Jul 31, 2008
    10
    Visceral, vile, repulsive and totally awesome. Alien meets the Nazi death camps. And the creepy sound effects as the tripods processed and disgorged human blood towards the conclusion freaked me out-it was the sound of death.
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  4. JayH
    Oct 5, 2008
    4
    Between my dislike of tom cruise, the poor acting and average special effects this wasn't a very good film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. CollinP
    Nov 13, 2009
    8
    The ending was indeed lame, but taken exactly from the book. You got a problem with the ending, take it up with H.G. Wells. In terms of "disaster" movies, this is as good as they get - Spielberg is a master filmmaker. It has heart, adventure, and terror not seen in normal movies of the same ilk. All in all, a worthy picture.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  6. JS
    Dec 5, 2009
    1
    This is the worst movie I've seen in a very long time. It has no style, no personality. Its sole purpose is just to show a small town get blown to pieces in the first 20 minutes. Every other second of the movie is agonizing! Its not even a movie, its what the "nails on a chalk board" sound is to the visual sense. The actors all spend the whole time screaming at each other in a very melodramatic fashion. Or just screaming in general. I've never seen people scream so much before in my life. If a giant robot is trying to kill me, I'm not going to be like "DAD WHY ARE YOU UPSET ITS ONLY THE END OF THE WORLD!!!! DAD!!! DAD!!! DAD!!! AAAAAAH YOU'RE MAKING ME NERVOUS TRYING TO FLEE FOR YOUR LIFE!!!!!" The characters don't even have lines when they're not screaming or acting stupid. At one point, Tom Cruise's son begs him to let him go watch a battle between the US army and aliens, and Tom has to try and drag him away; to no success. That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen in a movie, and it was totally non-secateurs. No plot. No nothing. When the pretty visual effects stop momentarily, Tom Cruise resorts to throwing peanut butter and breaking the windows of his house to entertain us. I guess they ran out of budget after making all the terrible CGI. Expand
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  7. Amy
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    Does justice to H.G Welles novel. A supreme film that shares parallels between all of Spielberg's classics; Jaws, Close Encounters, E.T and Jurassic Park.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  8. MatthewK.
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    Had Spielberg changed the ending, he'd be damned. But now the ending is too hollywood. He's damned either way. What he's not damned for is creating this mythical, and sure to be classic, hold your breath film that should surely be used in the same sentence as his other classics.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  9. JohnM.
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    The first good film of this year. Must see!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  10. Kyper
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    The movie is good, but deserves a 10 for the acting alone. I've always thought of Cruise as a caricuture. Never impressed me in Magnolia even, but it feels like he is no longer acting, but IS Ray Ferrier.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  11. Ethan
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    It may not be a critics film, but definetely an audience film. The JP-esq hide and seek scene is very thrilling.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  12. JessJ.
    Jun 28, 2005
    0
    This was dumb. I perfereed the original.
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  13. Chelsea
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    The 9/11 undertones and the implications on our pop culture make this movie more than an average summer fair.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  14. RachelH
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    I didn't expect much from the trailers, but indeed, an edge of your seat, frightening and thrilling film. Probably the best we've seen since Jurassic Park.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  15. Nina
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    One of the best Speilberg films! I've never been this frightened since Jaws. Dakota Fanning is a talented young actress. Tom Cruise was very impressive.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  16. Rockinghead
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    Amazing!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  17. andreas"freejay"f.
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    I didn't know the book, I didn't watch the trailers or making of's because I wanted to simply inhale what's coming (I often do that and I really can recomend that!). After a long time I was INSIDE a movie again and as amazed as the protagonists in the film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  18. Steve
    Jun 28, 2005
    9
    This is a terrific SF horror film. There were times when I was gripping my seat, horrified and frightened, especially in the scene at the house in the basement near the beginning. Also, the opening scenes of mayhem and death rays were shocking and coldly relentless. Many great visuals such at the flame train were spectacularly original. A filmgeek's feast.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  19. WilliamG.
    Jun 28, 2005
    10
    Three decades since he practically created the summer blockbuster with JAWS, director Steven Spielberg is back and bigger than ever with WAR OF THE WORLDS, his modern take on H.G. Wells' classic science-fiction novel. Not since 1993's JURASSIC PARK has Spielberg crafted such a relentlessly thrilling motion picture, one so harrowing that it draws more comparison to his work in SCHINDLER'S LIST and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN than his equally-exciting dinosaur smash. Tom Cruise brings the proper gravity to his role as a failing father who is suddenly forced into action by the imminent crisis and is now responsible for the survival of his family amidst the global chaos. Dakota Fanning also helps bring humanity to the tale as the terrified daughter, and Justin Chatwin is satisfactory as her stubborn older brother, who feels compelled to fight back against the invaders. WOTW is a difficult film to discuss without spoiling certain scenes. While there are not many plot points in particular to ruin, it is of more concern not to discuss select nightmarish sequences, or else their impact will be greatly diminished. Comparisons to the events of 9/11 and the Holocaust are inevitable and effective, all without being manipulative. After the initial attack, Fanning's character asks if the terrorists are behind it, and the line rings of sincerity, not a lame joke. Once the stuff hits the fan, misinformation and speculation begin to run rampant, while people place up signs searching for lost family and friends. While the characters make the story compelling, it would be worthless without the top-notch special effects of ILM. They effectively blend into the tale while dropping jaws throughout with each sweeping shot. Spielberg decides to tell the story as the family sees it, leading to reserved shots. The viewer sees the invaders in reflection as opposed to a blatent exposition shot most summer moneymakers would demand. At one point, the family is feet away from cresting a hill, on the other side of which a full-out battle is taking place between humanity and the enemy. Spielberg decides to resist the money shot of the summer and instead pursue the human drama of the situation. WOTW is so fascinating in how realistic it paints its doomsday scenario that it is easier to forgive the weak, if traditional, ending. The problem with the climax is how it differs in tone from the rest of the film. This is a horror story, a tale of survival, and Spielberg spends a good length of time convincing you of that. Overall, WAR OF THE WORLDS is a fascinating thriller and compelling drama that will go down as one of Spielberg's finest works and as one of the best films of the summer, if not the year. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  20. SimonN
    Jun 29, 2005
    6
    The loudest and most visually arresting film I've ever seen, Speilberg's War of the Worlds (as filtered through an American Dream-type narrative) is let down by some of his thinnest plotting to date and characters so ancilliary to the mayhem that they become annoying when the blowing of stuff up ceases for a breath every 10 minutes or so. As such, it's no Jurrassic Park (his best work, a mix of compelling storytelling and incredibly realised visualisation), but is worth the price of admission for the way he imagines Wells' world through a 21st century lense. However, whilst the visual and aural, ear-ringing experience is second-to-none, the story suffers from a Hollywood ending where the world blows up at night but you find your family and live happily ever after in the morning. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  21. PierreS.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Really kool movie!....the FX are awesome!...the aliens are kool too!.....It's nice to see Tom Cruise playing a loser character, and not the nice guy who save the world!....Nobody should miss this movie!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  22. pato.
    Jun 29, 2005
    4
    Bad acting, bad script.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  23. kharagh
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    10/10....Do I have to say anything else?
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  24. TimC.
    Jun 29, 2005
    5
    Not what I expected, had glimpses of greatness, but fell flat. I can see why Cruise has been acting so strange, he may be responsible for the first Spielberg picture to fail that has had this much hype.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  25. kirk
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Fantastic!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  26. OldBigot
    Jun 29, 2005
    0
    Worthless trash, ruined a perfect novel I enjoyed as a kid.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  27. JamesC
    Jun 29, 2005
    5
    5 for the aliens 0 for Mr. Spielberg. Why Mr. Spielberg refuses to grow as a director is beyond me. I felt like I was watching ET. The whole human plot with Tom Cruise is beyond pathetic. Wait until you see the lame-o son storyline! The special effects are great but you almost can't blame the aliens for wanting destroy us. Maybe they wanted to be in a decent movie and just got bored . What a waste of a great book. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  28. AnabelT.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Blows Independence Day Away!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  29. BobW.
    Jun 29, 2005
    0
    A horrible movie with no plot and Tom Cruise running and hiding the entire movie. The worst movie I've seen in years.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  30. MohammedR.
    Jun 29, 2005
    7
    The special effect are good, but nothing to write home about. The action and story keep the viewer'ss attention. But the end is on the anticlimatic side ruining the movie as a whole. Do not make this movie your first choice if you are going to the movie theater.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  31. MarkD.
    Jun 29, 2005
    9
    Flawed only by the constraints of the Wells novel-- these aliens are smart enough to travel a zillion miles and plant the tripods beneath the surface, buit they can't analyze the atmosphere to know it will kill them? Dummies. Dakota Fanning is a national treasure. Do not take young kids. You will pay for therapy for years.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  32. RexS.
    Jun 29, 2005
    6
    SPOILERS: You'll succumb to the visual effects, but it's the astounding denouement when Tom Cruise stands on the shiny hull of a downed Martian ship, as if in human victory, and then peels off his latex head to reveal he is a "Kate Lovin' Monster of Love" seemed ... forced. Nothing wrong with Cruise that a tranquilizer dart filled to the brim with antidepressants wouldn9;t cure. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  33. ErikN.
    Jun 29, 2005
    9
    Another brilliant Steven Spielberg movie. Non-stop tension and action. The best alien invasion movie ever.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  34. BB
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Fantastic entertainment. Worked from the begining to the end. It had the audience attention during the entire movie. Great work from Tom C and Spielberg!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  35. TonyF
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Very enjoybale.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  36. MIke
    Jun 29, 2005
    6
    Overall a very enjoyable movie. Great special effects, but with no story.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  37. KimberlyC.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Amazing, jaw-dropping, creepy, awe-inspiring and breathlessly thrilling.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  38. HS
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Fantastic little thriller!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  39. Mariam
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Extraordinary! Speilberg does justice to my favorite novel.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  40. DonB.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Amazing! I have never been this thrilled in years!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  41. MarkM.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    EDGE OF YOUR SEAT!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  42. EricM.
    Jun 29, 2005
    7
    Spielberg is a genius!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  43. BobbyR.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    One of the best films I've ever seen. Ending was ok, but the thrill, the story and most of all, the acting, rises above everything.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  44. NibalE.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Awesome movie!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  45. Maha
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    There is something so symobloc about that red weed. just beautiful!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  46. Mojo
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Someone give Tom and Oscar.. NOW!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  47. GATSU
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    H.G Welles must be smiling in his grave.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  48. AkhilK
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Quite possiby the best movie of the year! Absolutely fantastic! The feel of terror is real in this one folks. See it now!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  49. TylerC.
    Jun 29, 2005
    9
    Fantastic movie, awesome special effects, great cast, alot more than a summer thriller.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  50. JaredS.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Utterly fasciniating, with some of the best effects you'll ever see!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  51. Greg
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Horrifying... holds on to your guts and doesn't let them go!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  52. Robby
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Ok, I admit it. I cried. There I said it. It is emotional, very emotional.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  53. FrankO
    Jun 29, 2005
    4
    If your sole reason for not watching this movie is so you don't support Tom Cruise and Scientology then you'll have another excuse. The movie just plain sucked!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  54. JoyousMo.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Horrfying, non stop!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  55. WANTEDk
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Terrific, to say the least.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  56. JakeL.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    I remember going to the theater when JAWS came out. Everyone screamed, and jumped out of their seats. 30 years later, the experience is reincarnated.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  57. SarahP.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Biting finger nails, edge of your seat, eyes wide open experience. A blockbuster with a heart! Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning are terrific. Ditto for the special effects.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  58. ChrisG.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    It's better than the 50's version. I don't know why everyone is complaining about the ending, it's very plausible. The scene where Cruise has to choose between his children ripped my heart.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  59. bospehusb.
    Jun 29, 2005
    1
    worst. ending. evar.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  60. GeorgeR.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    An instant classic! One of Speilbergs VERY best.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  61. BrandonG.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Superb! Beautiful imagery. Simply unforgettable. Justin Chatwin is a great actor.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  62. SarahB.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    I will be seeing this again, surely.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  63. KathyT.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Haunting!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  64. luigib.
    Jun 29, 2005
    2
    All 'flash' effects and bad acting. Cruise ruins everything.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  65. AdamW.
    Jun 29, 2005
    8
    Fantastic. leaves much to the imagination in a way that is good. could have used more character development and a final fight though. I thought the ending itself was good enough.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  66. LauraB.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    When Cruise looks atop and sees the world in a shade of crimson, you just sit there in awe. Well done, Steven!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  67. StephS.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Hey Mr. Cruise, you have a new fan!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  68. VineilM.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Simply out of this world.... 10/10.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  69. AmyZ.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    It's a great film, with great effects and great acting. Will be remembered 20 years from now.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  70. APK
    Jun 29, 2005
    9
    I though the frist 50 minutes were some of the best ever put to film in the last few years. The rest, what can you expect we all know how this comes out, didn't you read the book or see the first movie...how else are they going to do it.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  71. DonnaK.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    I didn't have high hopes, but I wasn't disappointed. It's like Jurassic Park and Jaws all over again. Classic Speilberg!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  72. JoeyC.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Great film!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  73. FazilaM.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    When the first tripod comes up, that maybe be the best scene in cinematic History. GREAT film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  74. DavidE.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Be prepared to jump out of your seat!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  75. ChadS.
    Jun 29, 2005
    5
    I like the film about the illegal alien better. Say what you like about "The Terminal" as being terminally mawkish, at least the filmmaker's heart was in it. I also like the film by Spielberg Jr. better, too. Say what you like about "Signs", at least the filmmaker took chances, nutty chances ("Swing, Merrill, swing!") that you might hate, but ought to respect since risk-taking story choices is in short supply these days. Shyamalan's alien couldn't work a doorknob. That's an achilles heel. Spielberg's alien can't smell the presence of three live humans. That's a contrivance. "War of the Worlds" is boring. Seeing droves of people running away from danger is something we've seen too many times before. There's not a world of a difference between this H.G. Wells adaptation and "The Day After Tomorrow." In a nutshell, the narrative of "War of the Worlds" is run, rest, run, let Tim Robbins be creepy, run some more. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  76. HollyC
    Jun 29, 2005
    6
    Definitely a spectacle, though lacking in some areas. It's worth a matinee price on the big screen, but it certainly isn't Spielberg's best--that's for sure. Though exciting & fun nonetheless.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  77. BillyS.
    Jun 29, 2005
    3
    Tom Cruise is the luckiest S.O.B. in the world.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  78. Fantasy
    Jun 29, 2005
    2
    Let me preface my remarks by stating that the original War Of The Worlds starring Gene Barry is one of my favorite movies of all time. Speiberg is an absolute genius at his craft. So it was with great anticipation that I was so much looking forward to this movie. I just came back from a packed theater showing on opening evening. At the end of the movie for one second the grandfather without a speaking part is Gene Barry. When the movie ended there were boo's heard from the audience I kid you not. The last ten minutes of the movie the wheels fall off. As for the dialogue there is very little unless one can appreciate the constant banter between a miscast Tom Cruise and the paranoid Dakota Fanning. There is no explanation why we are under attack other than they want our planet or any attempt to explain how we are to defend ourselves. It is just a constant attack with computer graphics and Tom on the run. The ending is so preposterous (and I am not speaking about how the War is resolved) but rather Tom's family that you feel cheated. The movie just doesn't work. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  79. Cinncinn
    Jun 29, 2005
    1
    The movie was awful and forgotten ten minutes after I left the theater. I am certain that it will prove a success at the box office but is really not even a good made for TV movie. Rent the original.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  80. RR
    Jun 29, 2005
    5
    First hour and a half were great. But someone please tell me, what was up with the ending? It just ended. Kinda like the camera just ran out of batteries.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  81. Dan
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Wow. All I can say.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  82. FredE
    Jun 29, 2005
    0
    I'd say 90% of the movie is total non sense
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  83. EdS
    Jun 29, 2005
    7
    Interesting movie from spielberg. It was a quickly shot movie that seemed like a fun project for him. It almost seemed like a two hour short film. There were not a lot of ideas put forward, but it was a nice variation on an old story.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  84. MarcD
    Jun 29, 2005
    9
    This is THE summer blockbuster. I was glued to the screen the other time. And I haven't felt such a sense of dread while watching a movie in ages. A work of art.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  85. SVGInc.
    Jun 29, 2005
    0
    How can this movie get more than a zero? i'd give it negatives it this rating system had it. was it thrilling? sure. but if you want an ending, forget about it. worse ending ever. it [the ending] will leave you dazed and confused, cursing on the way out. horrible horrible horrible. for those who have seen this movie, i feel your pain, but let me ask you this: where did "robbie" come from?
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  86. LesH.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Excellent film in all the was that matter.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  87. RJSamson
    Jun 29, 2005
    6
    War of the Worlds is a visual spectacle but pointless. The aliens just came and died without much exposition. As a result, it was flat, but still something to watch.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  88. JackieP.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Absoluetly thriling. Some of the best images on film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  89. JoeJ.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Wow...scary sh..
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  90. ScottW
    Jun 29, 2005
    7
    A strong enough story that even an actor like Cruise can't ruin (though he seems to be on quaaludes throughout the movie, barely able to perform). Dakota Fanning acts circles around Cruise and holds the movie together. The special effects aren't bad, and there are some very creepy moments.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  91. DoughP.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    A 10 just for the acting. Dakota and Cruise should be nominated.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  92. coryw.
    Jun 29, 2005
    0
    By far the dumbest film i've seen in a very long time. soooooo far fetched and the ending????? i guess the aliens have a life expectancy of a fruit fly.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  93. AlexE.
    Jun 29, 2005
    6
    Steven Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" is, in the end, a missed opportunity. Here are all the makings of a truly unique summer blockbuster: a visionary director, focus on characters over effects, a palpable sense of dread. But for some reason it just doesn't come together in the end like it should. The movie is worth seeing for its moments of absolute brilliance. For example, the first attack and the ferry scene are masterful sequences that demand to be viewed in a movie theater. There are also many haunting images (a river of corpses, a train in flames, Tom Cruise blindfolding his daughter) that will linger in your mind long after the rest of the movie has vanished, and it will. Because the script is predictable at best, and smothered in cliches at worst. Because the film, in the end, just doesn't know what it wants to be. Halfway through, the characters the film has been following are sort of passed over for a larger sense of danger and panic, and the film just can't recover. The first 40 minutes or so are packed with real dread, and Spielberg succeeds in creating a feeling of disorientation and panic in the viewer that mirrors that of the character, shooting almost all of the attack sequences from street level. Also, a third-act detour into a basement inhabited by Tim Robbins' deranged survivalist holds several eerie thrills and a satisfying, somewhat shocking conclusion, but the sequence degenerates into a subpar retread of the kitchen scene in "Jurassic Park". And by the time the film reaches its borderline-absurd conclusion with little to know explanation given, the audience is likely to feel cheated out of the film that could have been. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  94. JonK.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Uber-cool!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  95. Austin
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    I now know what God did on the 7th day. He did not rest, but he did make this movie and send it into the head of Speilburg.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  96. CH
    Jun 29, 2005
    9
    This movie was awsome. Tom Cruise wasn't some hero and wasn't a genius. It made it seem like what real people would do in these situations. Sometimes he was just retarded, becuase he wouldn't have time to think it through if it where happining. I just thought that made it seem a little more real. Also, the ending is great.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  97. JackH.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    It is unusual for me to gain an emotional response to a movie in anyway I consider to be noteworthy, and it is even more rare for me to be even scared in any sense of the word by a movie beyond a simple jump at a cheap trick. This movie genuinely terrified, not scared, TERRIFIED me. The acting, the pacing, the special effects, and the overall REALNESS of the experience were the best I9;ve seen in movies in YEARS. I honestly can't remember the last time a movie gripped me this much, save perhaps the first time I saw Jurassic Park: in 1st grade! This film certainly ranks with, if not CROWNS, the best achievements of Spielberg and directors in general. It is easily the best movie I have seen all year. Cinderella Man, eat your heart out! Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  98. SiaC.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    One of the most fascinating studies of hopelessness and survival. Speilberg doesn't disappoint. The visual effects are a feast for the eyes. Cruise and Fanning shine.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  99. LukeT.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Very symbolic and beautiful!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  100. NicoleR.
    Jun 29, 2005
    10
    Made me cry ;-)
    • 0 of 0 users said yes

Recommended Products

  1. Born on the Fourth of July Image
  2. Minority Report Image
  3. The Polar Express Image
Metascore

Generally favorable reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 33 out of 40
  2. Negative: 1 out of 40
  1. 70
    In an unfortunate case of star casting, Cruise strains credibility as a hard-edged Jersey dockworker.
  2. Might be too realistic for its own good: The film takes perhaps a little too much glee in its abilities to manufacture mayhem. That being said, the ride is extraordinary.
  3. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    90
    A gritty, intense and supremely accomplished sci-fier.