User Score
6.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1258 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. DanA.
    Jul 2, 2005
    0
    Absolutely terrible! This movie is an insult to the viewer as it seeks to sell two hours of special effect spectacular but delivers no content. There is almost no story line of any acceptable depth, and all characters are as annoying as hell. There is little explanation for what happens and only a 30 second voice to let you know that the [OMITTED] prevail. Nothing made sense in the movie: Absolutely terrible! This movie is an insult to the viewer as it seeks to sell two hours of special effect spectacular but delivers no content. There is almost no story line of any acceptable depth, and all characters are as annoying as hell. There is little explanation for what happens and only a 30 second voice to let you know that the [OMITTED] prevail. Nothing made sense in the movie: why the aliens came, how the hell they arrived...., why there were bloody vegetations all over the earth, and why they were out there to kill. Finally, the end scene was designed to make you hate the movie if all the previous scenes were not enough.....And what the hell was up with the Tom's son anyway? Here this from me and don't waste your time and money. Expand
  2. 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!
  3. KeithY
    Nov 29, 2005
    3
    I agree with another's remarks, but she was pretty harsh. This movie deserves at least a three. It's funny to read all the half-baked critics who just want their name seen next to Spielberg and Cruise for once. The acting was so bad, I found myself annoyed at how stupid the alien was that it couldn't just squash Tom Thumb in the first 5 minutes. The scenes in the cellar I agree with another's remarks, but she was pretty harsh. This movie deserves at least a three. It's funny to read all the half-baked critics who just want their name seen next to Spielberg and Cruise for once. The acting was so bad, I found myself annoyed at how stupid the alien was that it couldn't just squash Tom Thumb in the first 5 minutes. The scenes in the cellar were absolutely laughable, these Spielberg's tripods were dumb and dumber. I really wanted to like this movie, honest! Starts off quite well, but it went all downhill after about 20 minutes into the movie - Did Spielberg go on vacation and let someone else take over after the first few minutes? Things I hated about this movie 1) Severe plot holes - Usually I don't let a plot hole or two ruin the movie, but this was ridiculous. Plot holes throughout meant that the story just didn't make sense and wasn't believable at all 2) The main characters - Very unlikeable. The audience couldn't care less if they lived or died. The acting was okay, for what they were given to work with. I still have faith in your acting abilities, Tom Cruise. I know you'll do better in your next movie. 3) The pacing in the film is extremely uneven 4) The ending! Very uninspiring and a total let-down. It's as if the director suddenly got bored and didn't care that he was slacking off, thinking hoping that the start of the film will at least get it good reviews. All in all, don't bother with this movie. But if you're still curious and hoping that all the bad reviews were wrong, get it on DVD. It's a renter at best! Expand
  4. David
    Jun 30, 2005
    1
    I give a one for the incredible special effects. But the acting and directing, sorry Mr. Spielberg, was absolutely lame. There is nothing in the movie except for to see Tom run. See Dakota scream. See his son have the typical teenage communication problems with his divorced father; albeit the world be damned. There is no plot, just a feeling of hopelessness and derpression. And the ending I give a one for the incredible special effects. But the acting and directing, sorry Mr. Spielberg, was absolutely lame. There is nothing in the movie except for to see Tom run. See Dakota scream. See his son have the typical teenage communication problems with his divorced father; albeit the world be damned. There is no plot, just a feeling of hopelessness and derpression. And the ending which is true to the original superior 1953 variety is so lame that the audience was booing. I have never been at a movie where the audience actually boo's at the end. It is completely ludicrous. And if that wasn't enough I could swear that was Gene Barry in a one second non-speaking cameo at the end of the film. And I thought he was dead? After watching this crap he probably wishes he was. This is two hours of non stop destruction without explanation or why we failed in defense of our planet. I could understand if we weren't in the twenty-first century when this takes place but with our fifty year education about UFO's there had to be some reference that we are not alone in this Universe? There isn't a decent line of dialogue in the entire movie. Suspenseful it was but without any type of a plot whatsoever. If you like to see things blow up and Mr. Spielberg's vision of an alien which is no different than what we have seen in many other movies including the far superior Independence Day then you will enjoy this. I left the theater completely empty as the movie was simply awful. Expand
  5. Phil
    Dec 20, 2005
    3
    This movie had so much potential and just did not deliver. The holes in the plot were large and frequent. The main charecters were annoying and at times I wanted them to die. The special effects were good but could not rescue this flop.
  6. JessJ.
    Jun 28, 2005
    0
    This was dumb. I perfereed the original.
  7. 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 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
  8. Sep 12, 2010
    3
    this movie i must say is very unsuccessful in my eyes for starters not providing an entertaining story i thought was even boring in some parts. the acting from the cast is the only thing that saves it in my opinion
  9. Nov 24, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. OK...team up Tom Cruise, Steven Spielberg, and one of the greater science fiction writers' best story...like the saying in "Crazy Like a Fox": "What could possibly happen?". As it turns out, not too much. Cruise running around like a maniac would not be too bad...IF it'd happened following the 'invasion'. However, it seems like that's the way the character normally acts. Dakota Fanning's claim-to-fame seems to be her ability to remember one line of dialog: "SHRIEK!". 'Sir' Spielberg places this film in the modern day, which might have worked. However, in this case, it didn't. In his re-imagining of the invasion, it turns out the aliens have been here all along (Spoiler...naw...). The so-called effects just seem too Michael Bay-ish, with the only item that I enjoyed being the 'harvesting' tripod. I will mention that the ending was great...it meant this tripe was finally over. Expand
  10. Apr 26, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. That is the first one in my "black list" os worst movies ever.
    I hate when a history force too much to give a good end without any reason.

    The movie dont have a start, a middle and an end, have nothing. Every behavior from humans and aliens are so stupid. The script has so bizarre errors. Like someone recording a PEM with a cam, or Tom Cruise leting off the city in a car with ALL cars stoped in the streets, how?

    When i saw the end, i just ask "why"? The perspect of view was amazing, but all the rest was disastrous.
    Expand
  11. DudleyR.
    Jun 30, 2005
    3
    The movie was like my name in that it was a DUD. Lots of running without much else. The dialogue was terrible and the storyline nonexistent. Spielberg crossed the line with many social and moral issues. This movie is definitely not suited for children under ten. This is a case of taking a great classic in the orginal and adding nothing to it. It is a regurgitation but without the appeal The movie was like my name in that it was a DUD. Lots of running without much else. The dialogue was terrible and the storyline nonexistent. Spielberg crossed the line with many social and moral issues. This movie is definitely not suited for children under ten. This is a case of taking a great classic in the orginal and adding nothing to it. It is a regurgitation but without the appeal of its predecessor. There is no explanation for anything as the pods were hidden beneath the earth many millions of years ago. Somehow the aliens managed to bury the pods without anyone knowing but when they return they can't deal with our atmosphere? Preposterous. And what was with that fertilizer nonsense? Just terrible in every sense. Very disappointing. Expand
  12. MaryC.
    Jul 6, 2005
    0
    God take me now! It is unbelievably dull and unrealistic.
  13. GregH.
    Jul 9, 2005
    0
    It was a waste of my time. For a film with a hundred million dollar budget, stevie comes up with this crap???? Don't pay $8 to torture yourself... it is pure rubbish.
  14. JoanW.
    Jul 9, 2005
    0
    This is not a bad movie. It is a terrible one. The novel was written in what? 1898? But if stevie can change the location, and add in a dysfunctional family, why can't he make some sense out of it. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING make sense in this film! I hate it!
  15. LifeCoach
    Oct 14, 2005
    1
    I liked the lightning and weather effects, but ALL the crowd scenes were terrible. It was a first date movie with someone I didn't last more than a month with. And, I am tempted to blame this waste of money and time and energy and online time to write this review. I want to have a subtitle to this movie: "Spielberg and Cruise, The Betrayal."
  16. 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?
  17. [Anonymous]
    Jun 30, 2005
    4
    The movie had a really nice look to it and that was about it. Tom Cruise's acting was exactly the same as it is in every other movie. Spielberg seemed to just rip off all of his old movies, Jurassic Park, Jaws, Minority Report. In fact just combining if you combined Minority Report and Jurassic Park, that would be enough. There were way too many scenes that simply dragged on for far The movie had a really nice look to it and that was about it. Tom Cruise's acting was exactly the same as it is in every other movie. Spielberg seemed to just rip off all of his old movies, Jurassic Park, Jaws, Minority Report. In fact just combining if you combined Minority Report and Jurassic Park, that would be enough. There were way too many scenes that simply dragged on for far too long. Too much just waiting around and nothing happening. The pacing of the movie was far to slow. Even the action scenes, although they looked wonderful, didn't seem too engaging. Expand
  18. KellieP.
    Jun 30, 2005
    0
    No heart at all. No purpose. I sat wondering what exactly was the point?
  19. djd
    Jun 30, 2005
    3
    Tom Cruise has hit a new low; his arrogance cuts through all the bells and whistles. Amazing, dark images-wonderfully restrained score by JW-flacid plotting-and worst Sci-Fi ending ever!
  20. LeonardoU.
    Jun 30, 2005
    3
    Just an action packed movie. Weak plot and he tried to do this clever plot twist like m night shamala that really didn't work out in his favor, I think. Well made but not well thought out. I would prefer to see a lot of other movies again that are out over this one. I like noise but this movie did give me a migraine.
  21. RenaudA.
    Jun 30, 2005
    4
    I'm sorry you all, but the level of this film is very low.... The good point at it are a couple of good scenes like the one with the airplane and the boat, but please, why do ETs must always be like that? Awful, big, like monsters, attacking... It's too clichee.... And there are a lot of mistakes! How can the guy film what's happening if no electronical device works! And I'm sorry you all, but the level of this film is very low.... The good point at it are a couple of good scenes like the one with the airplane and the boat, but please, why do ETs must always be like that? Awful, big, like monsters, attacking... It's too clichee.... And there are a lot of mistakes! How can the guy film what's happening if no electronical device works! And why does only Tom Cruise has a working car? I'm sorry, but I don't recognize this film as a real Spielber's one. Expand
  22. RicoF.
    Jun 30, 2005
    0
    Don't believe the hype. This movie is lousy.
  23. derekb.
    Jun 30, 2005
    2
    The amazing story of how a group of people you aren't supposed to like survive an inept invasion by cute, fragile aliens. Long boring stretches are mixed oddly with bits that might still excite folks that read the first print of the novel with the same name. Nothing makes any sense and the last quarter of movie is unforgivable. Topical cultural analogs add nothing, and might be The amazing story of how a group of people you aren't supposed to like survive an inept invasion by cute, fragile aliens. Long boring stretches are mixed oddly with bits that might still excite folks that read the first print of the novel with the same name. Nothing makes any sense and the last quarter of movie is unforgivable. Topical cultural analogs add nothing, and might be insulting. At least the movie stopped abruptly. It was germs. Expand
  24. AlexM
    Jun 30, 2005
    0
    What on God's green earth did i just see!?!? This load of tripe looked great and that was it. Where was the story?? Remind me again why Tim Robbins won that oscar?? More importantly, where was that war?!?! I paid money to see a war not Cruise & Co. running around the east coast! Are you kidding?? When do birds hover around something gigantic that moves and makes noise? How did Cruise What on God's green earth did i just see!?!? This load of tripe looked great and that was it. Where was the story?? Remind me again why Tim Robbins won that oscar?? More importantly, where was that war?!?! I paid money to see a war not Cruise & Co. running around the east coast! Are you kidding?? When do birds hover around something gigantic that moves and makes noise? How did Cruise come up with that conclusion so quick?? Without a doubt, one of Spielberg's & Cruise's worst movies ever. I'll stick with ID4 -dumb but at least it entertained and thrilled. Expand
  25. CharlesG.
    Jun 30, 2005
    1
    Run for your life away from the theater that is before they steal your hard earned dollars. Much hype and little else. Suspenseful yes, but without any plot. The ending is not to be believed. Sucked.
  26. TomC.
    Jul 1, 2005
    0
    I may not have liked this movie because I don't know the history of psychiatry. Why is Tom Cruise so awful? Please make him stop. Free Katie!
  27. Solidus
    Jul 11, 2005
    3
    Cacophonous, hollow monstrosity that wants to have it both ways in familiar pompous, heavy-handed Spielberg style: entertaining Z-grade destruction and gripping family drama. It fails spectacularly on either count. Say what you want about ID4, but at least that superior invasion movie had a modicum of sense not to take itself THIS ludicrously solemn. "Daddy, was it the TERRORISTS?" MOOOOO!
  28. Droog
    Jul 1, 2005
    4
    It boggles my mind when I see the superlative reviews being bestowed upon this movie by the LA Times, Entertainment Weekly, and others because War of the Worlds underachieves like no other movie I've seen in the past few months. In what is basically a B movie with an A movie budget, War of the Worlds delivers a threadbare plot of aliens hellbent on vaporizing everything on earth. It boggles my mind when I see the superlative reviews being bestowed upon this movie by the LA Times, Entertainment Weekly, and others because War of the Worlds underachieves like no other movie I've seen in the past few months. In what is basically a B movie with an A movie budget, War of the Worlds delivers a threadbare plot of aliens hellbent on vaporizing everything on earth. Granted, this is straight out of HG Wells original story. But in the absence of any compelling rationale for the alien attack, the burden of carrying the momentum of this film falls on Cruise, Dakota Fanning, and Justin Chatwin. Ugh. Three one-dimensional characters do *not* create three-dimensional characterization! Cruise's flawed hero spends 3/4 of the movie running around like a buffoon, incapable of speech. Dakota Fanning overacts and screams so much that within the first thirty minutes I wish she would be vaporized. Justin Chatwin's caricature of a misunderstood, angsty teen is incredibly annoying. In essence, the family subplot fails miserably. And while Speilberg does a fine job directing the CGI sequences, the utter simplicity of the original tale falls flat when reinterpreted in the present because it fails to acknowledge the increased sophistication of the 21st Century masses. People in this movie seem incapable of rationale thought. Aliens are killing humans? Try running away instead of perpetually gawking at them! Aliens are following large herds of people? Hmm ... maybe we ought to hide in back roads and basements instead of gathering like idiots at the pier! The fact is that people are not stupid. Spielberg's failure to acknowledge our basic intelligence dooms this movie to being another dumb action flick when it could have been so much more. Expand
  29. NancyR.
    Jul 10, 2005
    1
    The movie is plain out terrible. Case closed. It is not a War of The Worlds, it is not even a War as the title suggests. It simply portrays a dysfunctional family against the back drop of an invasion from another planet that was million of years in the making. To begin with the entire family led by an inept Tom Cruise who is completely miscast is annoying. Nothing makes any sense as one The movie is plain out terrible. Case closed. It is not a War of The Worlds, it is not even a War as the title suggests. It simply portrays a dysfunctional family against the back drop of an invasion from another planet that was million of years in the making. To begin with the entire family led by an inept Tom Cruise who is completely miscast is annoying. Nothing makes any sense as one minute all power is stopped including wrist watches as that idea was stolen from the Day The Earth Stood Still. But in the next breath a camcorder is working to demonstrate one of the faceless victims being disintergrated. Mr. Cruise has the only working car and highways to drive it on in NJ. As for the war aspect, these super intelligent creatures who are barbaric and have been watching us for a million years forgot to check if they could breath our air? I don't think so. Even dating back 100 years to WW I and WW II everyone is trained with gas masks. Are we to believe that these super aliens have no filtration system whatsoever on their Tripods nor did they ever check to see if they could breathe our air during the million years they have been here? It is too stupid to even be considered a possiblity. And if there is a WAR OF THE WORLDS how about some insight into how we are going to fight them? In the 1953 original version Gene Barry who has a all too brief cameo at the end of this version is hell bent on trying to find an answer. Unfortunately he could not which is why the original worked so well. But for Spielberg to set this in 2005 and not explain away a basic concern for all nations now a days vis a vis Sadaam and IRAQ with his supposed weapons of Mass Destruction and biological warfare is ludicrous. One minute the aliens are completely unstoppable and in the next they are the stupidest creatures in the galaxy? I don't think that if we traveled to Mars that after studing them for all these years that our astronauts and scientists would be unaware of Mar's atsmosphere. Do you? As for the storyline of Tom rediscovering his children it is preposterous. There was nothing to even remotely suggest why he left his children in the first place, and secondly, there is nothing to like about his children as they were both spoiled rotten brats who should have been vaporized to give us a better story. All in all this movie is disjointed from the beginning to the end. The special effects are good but by the first hour there are so many that no one seems to care one bit. We keep waiting for an actual War to start but it is never forthcoming. And that celler scene is horrible. And the ending is possibly the lamest of all time. Did Spielberg run out of film? If so, it should have happened in the first fifteen minutes and spared the audience the pain of watching this crap. Expand
  30. JoeR.
    Jul 1, 2005
    0
    Tom Cruise should go back to jumping up and down on Oprah's couch. This movie is horrible.
  31. NickH.
    Jul 2, 2005
    4
    Stay home, read the book (it was written in 1898), and then watch the original movie (made in 1953 I believe). It's a much more rewarding experience than seeing this new, louder, more annoying "film." My biggest problem is Speilberg didn't try with this movie like he did with Jaws, the effects and acting are all sub-par. Further more, Dakota Fanning (the daughter) steals the Stay home, read the book (it was written in 1898), and then watch the original movie (made in 1953 I believe). It's a much more rewarding experience than seeing this new, louder, more annoying "film." My biggest problem is Speilberg didn't try with this movie like he did with Jaws, the effects and acting are all sub-par. Further more, Dakota Fanning (the daughter) steals the film when Tom Cruise is the hero. This doesn't bode well. And on a final note, people who complain about the aliens not being able to scan our air for bacteria and then create antidotes, look when it was written. Give Wells all the credit he deserves for thinking this up in the 1890s! It doesn't work well in todays settings because of the fact that now we know we CAN scan the air for bacteria dangerous to us. Not a good movie, anyways. Cruise, watch your ass or you may go the way of Costner. Expand
  32. KaR
    Jul 2, 2005
    1
    In this days... great f/x doesn't justify a bad movie like this one. The first thing to do before an invasion is recognising the place, so, how can a group of aliens with that technology fail in a basic strategic point like that one?????
  33. ChrisH.
    Jul 2, 2005
    3
    Great special effects surrounded by totally unbelievable invasion concept, boring stupid kids, and a main character with no sense of where he is or where he is going. The original 50's flick was a better story even with it's car tail-light raygun.
  34. DavidK.
    Jul 2, 2005
    2
    Everyone is mean. You almost want to root against humanity. Sure, the special effects are unreal, but so are all the characters.
  35. SteveS
    Jul 26, 2005
    0
    Saw it last week, people were laughing, stupied, stupied, stupied movie. No story, no plot. Was going to ask for our money back but the wife told me not to. While leaving one of the movie employees was asking "how did you like your movie?" The guy behind us stated "It sucked".
  36. AnthonyV.
    Jul 3, 2005
    1
    War of the Worlds was one of the worst movies I've seen in years. Dakota Fanning's performance was the best part of the film and unfortunately was totally not believable. Most 10-year-olds don't act like they're 47. As for the rest of the film, the story was terrible, there were more holes in it than a golf course, everything about the movie was clichéd, Tom War of the Worlds was one of the worst movies I've seen in years. Dakota Fanning's performance was the best part of the film and unfortunately was totally not believable. Most 10-year-olds don't act like they're 47. As for the rest of the film, the story was terrible, there were more holes in it than a golf course, everything about the movie was clichéd, Tom Cruise was despicable, Tim Robbins was misused, the special effects did nothing new, the movie made humanity out to be a bunch of desperate and untrustworthy sloths, and the ending was the most sudden and most contrived Hollywood ending I've ever seen. I actually walked out of the theatre angry. Spielberg has made not only his worst film but one of the worst films of 2005. Expand
  37. HeidiW.
    Jul 3, 2005
    0
    Garbage In - Garbage Out. This was so bad that I could fill up an encylopedia with everything that is wrong with this movie. You can start with a completely miscast Tom Cruise. That is until you read who put up the money for this farce and there is none other than Tom Cruise with Steven Spielberg in partnership. He sleepwalks his way through this drek while carrying an 88-year old Dakota Garbage In - Garbage Out. This was so bad that I could fill up an encylopedia with everything that is wrong with this movie. You can start with a completely miscast Tom Cruise. That is until you read who put up the money for this farce and there is none other than Tom Cruise with Steven Spielberg in partnership. He sleepwalks his way through this drek while carrying an 88-year old Dakota Fanning who is really ten. As for the rest of the story, sorry but there isn't any to tell. Totally contrived flick without much of anything except for the worst ending of a movie in recent motion picture history. This is a disgrace to all who participated in it. The only saving grace was the narration by the great Morgan Freeman. I bet he was glad he wasn't seen and hopes that no one even recognizes his voice. To be associated with this garbage is a major strike on one's career. Avoid at all costs. Expand
  38. CherylS.
    Jul 3, 2005
    4
    A string of flashy set pieces held together with nothing at all - please take the trouble to tell a real story next time you charge us $9.50 to sit through one of your overblown spectacles, Speilberg.
  39. WalterEgo
    Jul 4, 2005
    0
    A WARNING FOR THE PEOPLE OF EARTH! What's worse: an honorable death at the hands (claws?) of superior-intellect Martians...or two hours trapped with Tom Cruise? Choose carefully, foolish mortals with $9 in your pocket and nothing better to do. MARTIAN COMMUNICATION: END
  40. TomA.
    Jul 4, 2005
    0
    [***SPOILERS***] Let's see the audience actually booed at the end of the flick as that is how bad a movie this is. When the bodies float down stream which I think is supposed to be a scary moment, the audience giggles. So much for the suspense. As for the ending there are no words to describe the last scene. Let's see the City of Boston has been totally destroyed and is without [***SPOILERS***] Let's see the audience actually booed at the end of the flick as that is how bad a movie this is. When the bodies float down stream which I think is supposed to be a scary moment, the audience giggles. So much for the suspense. As for the ending there are no words to describe the last scene. Let's see the City of Boston has been totally destroyed and is without power. But there's Tom in the center of town walking up to a beautiful brownstone, and meeting him at the door is his beautiful ex-wife, her parents (Gene Barry) in his Sunday best with the only light on in the entire City. I mean why should his inlaws seek cover like every other person on the planet. Why should his exwife return to NJ to try and find her children as Tom is doing by bringing them to her Boston? If anyone wants to make sense of this irrational junk then please by all means explain it away. But the real reason Tom travels to a MAJOR city where the aliens are anhilating everything in sight is because he has to drop the kids off so that he can go to Scientolgoy Bible Study class with Katie Holmes. After watching Tom in this crap and how he interacts with kids, Katie the smartest move you could ever make is to run for your life. I would rather be captured by an alien, disintergrated with a ray gun and used as fertilizer for those beautiful red blood roots that were everywhere, except of course, for the beautful little brownstone at Tom's house. Talk about the worst movie of the year folks, this is it. And I would like to commend Metacritic for giving this film a rating of 7.2. There are more 0's, 1's, 2's, 3's, 4's and 5's then there are 10's but somehow the average is 7.2. That's about as easy to explain as what Steven Spielberg was thinking when he made this crap. If HG Wells was alive today he would probably kill himself after watching this terrible terrible movie. The last narration by Morgan Freeman should have said...In the end there was still TOM. I think I want to puke. Expand
  41. JoeB.
    Jul 6, 2005
    0
    What an sucky show! It left me cheated.
  42. AmyL.
    Jul 6, 2005
    0
    Does injustice to H.G Wells novel... Wells will roll in his grave! The novel is meant to be sad and realistic, not absurbingly up up the rainbow happy.
  43. MikeW.
    Jul 6, 2005
    0
    It was a big waste of time.
  44. BruceL.
    Jul 7, 2005
    0
    I left after the 1st hour, it was truely horrible! Save your money!
  45. vermind.
    Jul 8, 2005
    4
    What a missed opportunity that was. It could have been such a good film, all the elements were there, they just got put together in a lousy way. At the beginning I quite enjoyed it, but it seemed to fall apart around the scene where Cruise and family lost their car to the mob. After that I found myself yawning a lot. And another thing about that scene, how come out of a crowd of about What a missed opportunity that was. It could have been such a good film, all the elements were there, they just got put together in a lousy way. At the beginning I quite enjoyed it, but it seemed to fall apart around the scene where Cruise and family lost their car to the mob. After that I found myself yawning a lot. And another thing about that scene, how come out of a crowd of about three hundred Americans, only two of them had guns? In the most war like nation on earth they Expand
  46. TyroneA.
    Jul 9, 2005
    0
    Just saw this monstrosity of garbage. Not believable and certainly not enjoyable. The movie abruptly ends with the lamest of endings I have ever seen. I just felt cheated.
  47. AlbertH.
    Jul 9, 2005
    0
    I saw this movie last night. The theater was far from full so I knew right away that the naysayers on Metacritic must be right before even a single frame was shown. 20 minutes later when everything had stopped working even your Timex, I realized that Spielberg had lost him mind as the videocamcorder worked to show the alien, pants were flying around after people were disintegrated, and I saw this movie last night. The theater was far from full so I knew right away that the naysayers on Metacritic must be right before even a single frame was shown. 20 minutes later when everything had stopped working even your Timex, I realized that Spielberg had lost him mind as the videocamcorder worked to show the alien, pants were flying around after people were disintegrated, and Tom found the only working car in New Jersey. Worse yet with every other car on the highway stalled, somehow, there was always a lane for Tom to drive through and around at about 50 MPH. Has Spielberg ever seen the New Jersey Turnpike or the Garden State Parkway at rush hour or the roads that are parallel to these Highways and Parkways? Simply preposterous. And it gets worse. Do you really think that mano-to-mano that the diminutive five feet five inch pipsqueak Tom Cruise could even hurt, let alone kill, Tim Robbins who is is six feet four inches? As for those kids, 30 mintues into the film they became a total distraction. The non story took away from the overall movie. Nothing made any sense and you cared nothing for any of the characters. People were booing and walking out of the theater. As for Larry K and his perfect ten, all I can say is either he smoked some heavy weed or sniffed some glue before entering the theater because he certainly did not see the same movie we all saw. It is awful and that ending... Expand
  48. Z.Weber
    Jul 9, 2005
    4
    The movie wasn't believable. I understand the book was written many years ago, but come on! The worst was when Robbie runs into the alien gathering then everything blows up and he is perfectly fine. And when they are trapped in the house and the aliens send in hundreds of probes, there must have been at least one other house intact. The most clever thing in the movie was the ending.
  49. Heba
    Aug 1, 2005
    1
    What were they all thinking??!!Shame on them!!!
  50. EddieO.
    Aug 20, 2005
    0
    Horrendous in every sense of the word. There was no War just a moronic Tom Cruise running toward the danger with two brats in tow. Nothing made sense and every scene is ripped off from another Spielberg movie. And did he run out of film because that ending was so lame. The 1953 George Pal origninal movie was so superior to this that Spielberg should be ashamed. CGI which isn't even Horrendous in every sense of the word. There was no War just a moronic Tom Cruise running toward the danger with two brats in tow. Nothing made sense and every scene is ripped off from another Spielberg movie. And did he run out of film because that ending was so lame. The 1953 George Pal origninal movie was so superior to this that Spielberg should be ashamed. CGI which isn't even real does qualify for a movie to be good. Spielberg throws so much of that crap at the viewer that it dulls your sense after about 30 minutes. And we feel nothing for these characters at all. As for the son the less said the better. Avoid at all costs. Perhaps it is time for Spielberg to retire? Expand
  51. Dweeble
    Aug 3, 2005
    0
    Aggravating in every sense of the word. So stupid that it is an insult on the intelligence of the viewer. For Mick and others to praise this garbage only encourages other Hollywood producers to keep churning out dreck like this. The movie was awful and that would be an understatement. I can't believe that Spielberg could even associate his name with this swill. He should be ashamed. Aggravating in every sense of the word. So stupid that it is an insult on the intelligence of the viewer. For Mick and others to praise this garbage only encourages other Hollywood producers to keep churning out dreck like this. The movie was awful and that would be an understatement. I can't believe that Spielberg could even associate his name with this swill. He should be ashamed. A sci fi B movie is campy. But this is an attack on the senses. The ending is a complete farce. Avoid. Expand
  52. DrakeV.
    Aug 30, 2005
    0
    Joel is correct in attacking the workmanship of this poor effort by Spielberg and Cruise as it makes no sense and is laughable from beginning until the bitter end. But Joel may be the most prosaic person ever to write on this board. To attack Spielberg for other efforts that were truly heads and tails above the best of its generation is grossly unfair. War is simply bombastic in that it Joel is correct in attacking the workmanship of this poor effort by Spielberg and Cruise as it makes no sense and is laughable from beginning until the bitter end. But Joel may be the most prosaic person ever to write on this board. To attack Spielberg for other efforts that were truly heads and tails above the best of its generation is grossly unfair. War is simply bombastic in that it tries to attack the senses without plausable explanation. It fails on every level imaginable. Expand
  53. Fusion
    Aug 5, 2005
    0
    So Fission tell us how do you really feel? I couldn't agree with you more that this was too dumb to even be believed. You would have had to have a lobotomy or had your brains checked in at the door to even remotely believe the lack of credibility in this sorry excuse for a motion picture. As for Tom Cruise his career crashed and burned in this stupid flick. Katie and him deserve each So Fission tell us how do you really feel? I couldn't agree with you more that this was too dumb to even be believed. You would have had to have a lobotomy or had your brains checked in at the door to even remotely believe the lack of credibility in this sorry excuse for a motion picture. As for Tom Cruise his career crashed and burned in this stupid flick. Katie and him deserve each other. As for Spielberg I can't imagine what he was thinking in making this illogical and annoying movie. The aliens were just a backdrop for his dysfunctional Cruise family who I only wished was vaporized in the first fifteen minutes. The rest of this crapola was worse than a cartoon. And that ending was the lamest I have ever seen. Did he finally run out of film or had to go to the bathroom to purge himself? Avoid at all costs. Expand
  54. PatC.
    Feb 10, 2006
    4
    Good special effects, but once again Tom Cruise plays a character with the depth of personality of a potato. Whether this movie is about humanity's best or worst tendencies under stress, it is painful to contemplate.
  55. Sidiot
    Nov 10, 2005
    0
    Too bad to be believed. It falls off a cliff early on and into an abyss.
  56. Someonewhocares
    Oct 2, 2005
    1
    The horror......the Razzie-worthy horror. Crappity crap crap, all of it. Acting, cinematography, FX, script, characterisation, logic, bookends, you name it. Fugly and unprofessional as sin. Spielberg and his lousy leading man need to go away ASAP if all the reaction they can elicit with their sad craptitude is not one shred of unintentional amusement, but instead bore me to death with The horror......the Razzie-worthy horror. Crappity crap crap, all of it. Acting, cinematography, FX, script, characterisation, logic, bookends, you name it. Fugly and unprofessional as sin. Spielberg and his lousy leading man need to go away ASAP if all the reaction they can elicit with their sad craptitude is not one shred of unintentional amusement, but instead bore me to death with their bumbling indifference to quality. I know lots of videogames more mature and entertaining than this trailer trash - so why do the ravers even bother? I'd think a non-event even more effortlessly mechanical, empty, contrived and idiotic than Revenge of the Sith(!) is hardly worth talking about in the first place, let alone gushing over. Expand
  57. AliceK.
    Oct 6, 2005
    3
    [***SPOILERS***] Not a patch on The Terminal or Catch Me If You Can. I don't blame Steven Speilberg, more the writers who did the script. It is totally unintesting espcially after some of the great versions that have been done in the past. The only excellent scene was the bit where the young girl goes off into the forest and gets to the river and sees the bodies flkowing down the[***SPOILERS***] Not a patch on The Terminal or Catch Me If You Can. I don't blame Steven Speilberg, more the writers who did the script. It is totally unintesting espcially after some of the great versions that have been done in the past. The only excellent scene was the bit where the young girl goes off into the forest and gets to the river and sees the bodies flkowing down the river. That was excellent thought. Expand
  58. pato.
    Jun 29, 2005
    4
    Bad acting, bad script.
  59. OldBigot
    Jun 29, 2005
    0
    Worthless trash, ruined a perfect novel I enjoyed as a kid.
  60. Lance
    Jun 30, 2005
    0
    If you thought the scientology crap with the Tom & Katie show in tabloids was bad, just wait until you get a load of this? Lovable Dakota Fanning screams in horror enough times that you only wish an alien will use her as fertilizer. Tom Cruise is miscast as a NJ dock worker. His son is a typical teenager who listens to no one. There's no story except for watching Tom panic, squirm If you thought the scientology crap with the Tom & Katie show in tabloids was bad, just wait until you get a load of this? Lovable Dakota Fanning screams in horror enough times that you only wish an alien will use her as fertilizer. Tom Cruise is miscast as a NJ dock worker. His son is a typical teenager who listens to no one. There's no story except for watching Tom panic, squirm and run helter skelter without a plan of action. Steven Spielberg fails miserably unless it was his master plan to make us all feel helpless? And the one character willing to stand up to the aliens is dispensed in a chilling Pvt. Ryan manner which is unsuitable for small children. All in all, it is a plundering relentless attack on the senses with a stupid ending. The movie will be forgotten ten minutes after you've left the theater. Expand
  61. LeroyT.
    Jun 30, 2005
    2
    It is sacreligious to say anything bad about the great Spielberg. I recognize he has made some tremendously popular movies and is one of the best of our generation. Having said that it does not bemoan the fact that when he makes a terribly bad movie he should receive a free pass because of his previous contributions. War of The Worlds is horrible. I wish I could use another adjective to It is sacreligious to say anything bad about the great Spielberg. I recognize he has made some tremendously popular movies and is one of the best of our generation. Having said that it does not bemoan the fact that when he makes a terribly bad movie he should receive a free pass because of his previous contributions. War of The Worlds is horrible. I wish I could use another adjective to describe it, but horrible is the proper word. From the moment the film began I held out high hope for it. I had even rented the original made back in 1953 starrring Gene Barry who makes a cameo appearance at the end of this version but you had better look quickly and not blink. This movie is about fear, hopelessness, and even cold blooded murder to protect our loved ones from harms way. There are the usual social issues connected with divorce and abandoment feelings by the children. Despite this there is no real story here just people panicking and running hopelessly from one place to another. Why our planet is picked for extermination is never explained even thought Spielberg does provide us with a glimpse of what he believes an alien actually looks like. If you saw Independence Day then the alien is almost exactly the same, except for the fact, that this movie can't hold a candle to Independence Day. The special effects are good but there are so many disasters that after an hour or so it dulls your senses. The ending is too bizarre to be described. Without ruining the ending it is so ludicrous and implausable that you feel cheated. Overall this is a bad movie and there is no getting around it. If you must see it, wait until it comes out on video. Expand
  62. MarkH.
    Jun 30, 2005
    3
    One of the worst endings I have ever seen. There were a million ways to work the original ending in without making it appear like an afterthought. They chose none of them.
  63. PamG.
    Jun 30, 2005
    0
    Why did they invade? what was their purpose in sucking the blood? why were they so clunky if they were so sophisticated? why didn't we care about the protagonist? why, why, why?
  64. Lucsdf
    Jun 30, 2005
    4
    Spielberg is dead! If you want to see a good remake Peter Jackson is da man!
  65. BenitaR.
    Jun 30, 2005
    0
    Awful without any real acting, directing or a plot. There's no story here just fear and running away with special effects drowning out everything else. At one point, little Dakota Fanning is suppossed to be horrified at what she sees on the river? The audience is laughing out loud. Not the desired effect that the great director wanted. I almost puked at that lame ending. Steven, what Awful without any real acting, directing or a plot. There's no story here just fear and running away with special effects drowning out everything else. At one point, little Dakota Fanning is suppossed to be horrified at what she sees on the river? The audience is laughing out loud. Not the desired effect that the great director wanted. I almost puked at that lame ending. Steven, what were you thinking? Expand
  66. RogerB.
    Jun 30, 2005
    1
    CGI was spectacular. The rest of the movie sucked. So many holes it almost looked like swiss cheese. I heard catcalls at the end of the movie it was so bad. Saw the original and this one can't hold a candle to it. Gene Barry was on screen for a few seconds without saying anything. What a pity? Box office bonanza for certain but other than that a very poor effort.
  67. CoreyO.
    Jun 30, 2005
    4
    Highly ineffective, largely disappointing and nearly completely pointless, this film was not very good. O and why and hte aliens have to look like the ones from Independence Day?
  68. MeganH.
    Jul 11, 2005
    1
    I suppose you could consider this movie to be one of the
  69. IanP.
    Jul 1, 2005
    4
    What we have is the movie version of the original alien invasion story. Unfortunately we've seen this story told in better movies already. Independence Day was a better action movie, and Signs was a better drama. WOTW tries to be both and fails on both accounts. Although the movie does have some fantastic over-the-top action special effects scenes, that just can't make up for a What we have is the movie version of the original alien invasion story. Unfortunately we've seen this story told in better movies already. Independence Day was a better action movie, and Signs was a better drama. WOTW tries to be both and fails on both accounts. Although the movie does have some fantastic over-the-top action special effects scenes, that just can't make up for a plot where nothing makes much sense, and we're left with too many questions. Tim Robbins gives probably the best performace. Tom Cruise shows that he has very little emotional range. Dakota Fanning is under-used, as she spends the whole movie just crying and screaming. Overall, it was fun, but underwhelming. Do yourself a favor, go rent ID4, Signs, and Close Encounters and you'll have a better time. Expand
  70. CamelT.
    Jul 11, 2005
    4
    First half good, second half lame. The story has so many holes, hollywood should be embarassed.
  71. TJ
    Jul 11, 2005
    0
    [***SPOILERS***] Without a doubt the worst film of the year. Overhyped, overacted, poorly directed. Made no sense watching it, lost interest after thirty minutes and watched as the audience actually laughed and then booed at the end. And some of you are giving this movie a ten? Are you guys on drugs? There was no story. There was NO war. And the dysfunctional Cruise family with his[***SPOILERS***] Without a doubt the worst film of the year. Overhyped, overacted, poorly directed. Made no sense watching it, lost interest after thirty minutes and watched as the audience actually laughed and then booed at the end. And some of you are giving this movie a ten? Are you guys on drugs? There was no story. There was NO war. And the dysfunctional Cruise family with his carrying the ten year old, soon to be eighty, annoying Dakota Fanning around was ludicrous. And the stupid endings with first the aliens done in by being unable to breathe the air we already knew from the original. Spielberg you shot this in the Year 2005. Everyone is aware of biological warfare except of course for these superior moronic aliens who as you said have been watching us and knew everything about us for one million years. So how come they didn't know they were unable to breathe our air? It is like if we jumped into the ocean, which I wish I could have during the movie, somehow I know that I can't breathe underwater? And that last scene when first Tom had to tell our inept Army that the birds are sitting on the Tripod and it might be a good idea to just shoot the damn thing down followed by his entire family leaving the light on in the middle of a destroyed Boston in their Sunday best when the film abruptly ends was just too much. The audience was booing and throwing popcorn at the scene. Some walked out of theater with bags on their head for effect. And you idiots gave this film a ten? You guys are drunk. Expand
  72. AnthonyC.
    Jul 11, 2005
    0
    Worst movie of the year. Too stupid to discuss.
  73. LouiseD.
    Jul 11, 2005
    0
    Tom & Katie deserve each other. Tom's star was disintergrated with possibly the most idiotic film of the century. It was totally laughable and insulted its audience. All of you are giving this trash high marks obviously checked your brains in at the door. Ludicrous.
  74. OttoK.
    Jul 1, 2005
    0
    [***SPOILER***] Easily the worst movie of the year. The aliens have millions of years worth of technology and they still haven't invented antibiotics. If they weren't so stupid I'd be on their side, but by the end of the first attack, I just wanted everyone to die. The main characters didn't even attempt to act, and Tom Cruise kills the guy who saves his life. His [***SPOILER***] Easily the worst movie of the year. The aliens have millions of years worth of technology and they still haven't invented antibiotics. If they weren't so stupid I'd be on their side, but by the end of the first attack, I just wanted everyone to die. The main characters didn't even attempt to act, and Tom Cruise kills the guy who saves his life. His children would have been better as red mist. It tries so hard to be PG13. Turning the people into ash was a bad solution to the ratings problem, but the death ray should at least destroy their clothes. Flying pants don't convey much pathos. And don't even get me started on the effects of an EMP on a magnetic tape. If you haven't watched this movie yet, save your money. If you have, accept my condolences. Collapse
  75. JesseS.
    Jul 10, 2005
    0
    [***SPOILERS***] TOP 10 FLAWS WITH WAR OF THE WORLDS: (10) there is no "war"...the movie should either be called "Invasion Earth" or "Speilberg Steals Money From My Wallet"; (9) every car in NY is immediately rendered useless by the EMP, but somehow there is a lane that allows Maverick to drive 60 MPH down the middle (what, was everyone pulled over at the time?); (8) Maverick works as a[***SPOILERS***] TOP 10 FLAWS WITH WAR OF THE WORLDS: (10) there is no "war"...the movie should either be called "Invasion Earth" or "Speilberg Steals Money From My Wallet"; (9) every car in NY is immediately rendered useless by the EMP, but somehow there is a lane that allows Maverick to drive 60 MPH down the middle (what, was everyone pulled over at the time?); (8) Maverick works as a construction worker (still trying to figure out how that ties into the plot), yet he is the only person in the tri-state area who figures out how to make a car start; (7) if the aliens are trying to steal human blood to cultivate their habitat, why are they vaporizing every human in sight, leaving no blood? (6) what benefit was there for the aliens to pre-store the tri-pod machines in the ground one million years before the invasion? they had to be brought there at some point anyway, why not just take over earth in the first place (this is the biggest flaw in the film probably)? or bring them later? didn't they think maybe they would be able to advance their technology in the million years? (5) were there spaceships in this invasion or not? I certainly didn't see any, but somehow the aliens got to earth and planes were shot out of the sky; (4) Dakota Fanning looks like a 9 year-old, but acts like a 53 year-old (how, by the way, is this "great acting" as people are saying...I thought the purpose of acting was to appear realistic, not 44 years older than the character you are portraying); (3) the tri-pods are ridiculously inefficient -- they vaporize humans one-by-one, instead of using some sort of WMD approach, and snatch and grab humans individually for their blood; (2) somehow a family can live casually in their home in boston, while in the rest of the world you're not safe in a corner in a basement; (1) the aliens mastered intergalactic travel, while we can't send a man to mars, yet they forgot to bring along a microscope to realize that earth has frickin bacteria. Expand
  76. TyM.
    Jul 1, 2005
    2
    A big problem with this film is that Tom Cruise is just plain annoying. Plus, Spielberg's attempt to bring family dynamics into the plot is also annoying - the kids are constantly irritating and disobedient even where it's against their own self interest to act that way. I mean, I know teenagers are rebellious sometimes, but it just didn't fit ... other than fitting the A big problem with this film is that Tom Cruise is just plain annoying. Plus, Spielberg's attempt to bring family dynamics into the plot is also annoying - the kids are constantly irritating and disobedient even where it's against their own self interest to act that way. I mean, I know teenagers are rebellious sometimes, but it just didn't fit ... other than fitting the needs of the plot. And speaking of the plot, there were was an idiot plot element which stuck out like a sore thumb: The aliens have supposedly been studying us for years, and ... they buried their giant tripod death ray vehicles under our soil millennia ago, before the land was substantially occupied. OK, so ... didn't they discover all those millennia ago - when they visited here to bury the machines - didn't they discover then that they couldn't hack our bacteria and viruses and stuff? I mean, that seems pretty basic. And if they've been studying us all that time, didn't they learn anything at all? Basic biology and junk like that? And ... what were they waiting for??? If they could come in and bury the damn things then, why wait around to attack? Annnd ... if those machines have been sitting buried under our soil for thousands of years, doncha imagine someone, somewhere would have dug one up, if only by accident? Especially since they're even buried right under city streets and such ... So many questions ... maybe they'll have to make a sequel to answer them. Please God no. Spielberg has lost his fastball, of that I'm convinced. The effects were all pretty good, the movie looked pretty good, but the basics of plot and storytelling just didn't click. He used to be good at that stuff - great, even ... remember Jaws? Not anymore. War of the Worlds is as empty and brain dead as a Tom Cruise Scientology meeting. Expand
  77. JohnnyS.
    Jul 13, 2005
    0
    The title is so misleading... I came in wanting to see a WAR, not about a family of losers.
  78. MW
    Jul 13, 2005
    1
    A real dissapointment. Didn't care if any of the characters lived or died. Major plot holes. Biggest cop-out ending ever. 1 for some the special effects. Tom was awful, Dakota (who was brilliant in Man on Fire) was poor. The proof of what the public think of this will be shown by how many DVD's it sells. I won't be buying it.
  79. AndyC.
    Jul 14, 2005
    3
    Some jaw dropping action sequences, but the movie suffers a great deal from up-and-down pacing, gaping plot holes and Dakota Fanning's constant screaming.
  80. ReynoldS.
    Jul 1, 2005
    0
    [***SPOILERS***] Sucked pure and simple with possibly the most ridiculous ending ever. I am not talking about God's littlest creatures ever. Where did Robbie show up from before Tom the Scientologist. I thought he wanted to join the Army to fight the aliens? I guess he changed his mind when they told him to get a haircut. Simply preposterous. And what was that Family all dressed in[***SPOILERS***] Sucked pure and simple with possibly the most ridiculous ending ever. I am not talking about God's littlest creatures ever. Where did Robbie show up from before Tom the Scientologist. I thought he wanted to join the Army to fight the aliens? I guess he changed his mind when they told him to get a haircut. Simply preposterous. And what was that Family all dressed in their Sunday best greeting them at the door as if nothing was going on? All of the world was destroyed except for their little pristine house with full electric power in the middle of a deserted Boston? You have to be nuts not to see the obvious. This movie is ludicrous. Expand
  81. JasonS.
    Jul 15, 2005
    3
    Tried to be too many things and ended up being nothing memorable.
  82. LolaR.
    Jul 16, 2005
    0
    Horrendous disembodied film that makes you leave the theater angry with a feeling of being cheated. No story with bad acting and a very annoying dysfunctional family as the center piece. One of Mr. Spielberg's less than stellar works in his long and otherwise illustrious career. I would not recommend this film to my worst enemy as it is that bad.
  83. HB
    Jul 17, 2005
    1
    Utter, utter, utter chuff. A swindle & a waste of time.
  84. StevenT.
    Jul 2, 2005
    0
    Just because we're in the age of Being able to purchase pirated movies or simply downloading them off the net, doesn't give directors the right to make bad movies. about the movie: not even worth my time.
  85. JerryP.
    Jul 2, 2005
    1
    There is no logic to this movie. The aliens would have antibiotics. They would not want to eat human flesh, they'd have their own food. Special effects do not make up for no logic plot or character development.
  86. daved.
    Jul 21, 2005
    3
    I can't believe how high most critics scored this. its fairly entertaining in the same way pyromania is. cruise sucks in pretty much everything bar Magnolia, and no change here. Throw in some of the worst logjc ever, some stupid mistakes such as the deaf guy reacting to a sound when someone says 'did you hear that', and the biggest cop out ending involving a family who from I can't believe how high most critics scored this. its fairly entertaining in the same way pyromania is. cruise sucks in pretty much everything bar Magnolia, and no change here. Throw in some of the worst logjc ever, some stupid mistakes such as the deaf guy reacting to a sound when someone says 'did you hear that', and the biggest cop out ending involving a family who from the looks of things didnt notice the aliens. The daughter is also incredibly annoying, and Spielberg tries to add some depth im some really dubious shots of cruise and his son. Photography is nice however, but that hardly saves this mess. Expand
  87. Reggie
    Jul 20, 2005
    0
    Place me in the RED column. How can this have a rating above 5? It's all RED man. Worst movie of the year. Too stupid a story to even discuss. Avoid.
  88. MattM.
    Jul 2, 2005
    2
    Steven Spielberg
  89. BrianY.
    Jul 2, 2005
    3
    Not a good movie. Spielberg usually gives us much better. Silly and insulting to film fans. NO audience response in the crowded theater I was in...wait till video, I wish I did.
  90. WackoJacko
    Jul 2, 2005
    0
    [***SPOILER***] I am an idiot. Repeat after me. I am an idiot. And that is what you will be if you waste your time and money on this crapola. I am still trying to figure out why Tom, his son, and the annoying screaming Dakota Fanning weren't vaporized along with Spielberg in the first scene? That is how stupid this movie is. All you see is Tom running around a lot without a purpose,[***SPOILER***] I am an idiot. Repeat after me. I am an idiot. And that is what you will be if you waste your time and money on this crapola. I am still trying to figure out why Tom, his son, and the annoying screaming Dakota Fanning weren't vaporized along with Spielberg in the first scene? That is how stupid this movie is. All you see is Tom running around a lot without a purpose, without eating, and with the usual problems parents have with their kids. Am I the only one who thought Robbie his teenage son looked older than Tom? And the plot? Oh I forgot there isn't one. Nothing is explained. The aliens have planned this for a million years, but there is no insight, and Spielberg forgot to remind them to take along some simple antibiotics. The aliens have taken out all of our defense technology but somehow after visiting our planet for a million years forgot the Penicillin? C'mon give me a break. And what was up with Tom? Is he going to be tried for murder? Of course not, he's now a bonafide hero in Spielberg's world. And what was up with his divorced family smiling approvingly at the end of the movie? If you didn't want to commit suicide by then, Spielberg's ending is so lame that you will. Here is the most hyped movie of the summer, a remake of Gene Barry's classic from 1953, and in the space of thirty minutes you soon realize that you've been taken for a ride. And speaking of the classic, Gene Barry returns in a cameo role. Yes, he is still alive, but if you blink, you'll miss him at the end of the movie as he is on screen for exactly three seconds in a NON SPEAKING part. Talk about Chutzpah this is it. Without a doubt one of the worst movies ever made. The actors are all annoying, there isn't any plot, and the ending is too preposterous for a five-year old to even believe. The audience I saw it with actually booed at the end of the movie. Attrocious job by all involved. Katie Holmes run for your life. Expand
  91. AudreyW.
    Jul 2, 2005
    1
    Moronic movie with bad acting, directing and screenplay. And what was that awful copout ending about? It was almost as Steven Spielberg said I tortured you for two hours, but if I didn't leave a bad taste in your mouth, let me really insult you further. It reminded me of Darth Vader smiling down from heaven after being the most hated evil person, but was forgiven for his one good deed. Ugh!
  92. Iggy
    Jul 26, 2005
    0
    War of The Imbociles is more like it. I can't figure out who was stupider the aliens or Tom Cruise and his family of misfits. By the way, Tom did not kill Tim Robbins. After seeing the work product, he probably committed suicide. Movie made no sense and was made for idiots. Spielberg has to be laughing that he is now as famous as PT Barnum. What were PT's words about a sucker? War of The Imbociles is more like it. I can't figure out who was stupider the aliens or Tom Cruise and his family of misfits. By the way, Tom did not kill Tim Robbins. After seeing the work product, he probably committed suicide. Movie made no sense and was made for idiots. Spielberg has to be laughing that he is now as famous as PT Barnum. What were PT's words about a sucker? See this movie and you are it. Expand
  93. AlP.
    Jul 2, 2005
    3
    The worst film i've seen all year. The worst film of Spielberg's career (I think?). I wanted to leave the theatre after the first 30 mins, and didn't in hopes of a rewarding ending. Nope. War of the Worlds is solely a 2 hour tech demo with Tom Cruise and that little girl screaming non stop. Jesus what an incredibly annoying and bad flick.
  94. Alli
    Jul 3, 2005
    2
    A complete joke.
  95. LarryD.
    Jul 3, 2005
    0
    Saw this highly aniticipated movie yesterday afternoon in a theater that was half full. Warning Will Robinson, danger, run for your life. And instead of heeding the warning signs, like a moron, I sat there and watched Tom running the wrong way toward a major city like Boston. It never dawned on Tom that his exwife might be dead, or that he was running into more trouble, or that if his ex Saw this highly aniticipated movie yesterday afternoon in a theater that was half full. Warning Will Robinson, danger, run for your life. And instead of heeding the warning signs, like a moron, I sat there and watched Tom running the wrong way toward a major city like Boston. It never dawned on Tom that his exwife might be dead, or that he was running into more trouble, or that if his ex was alive that she would be making her way back to NJ to save her kids. Instead what we get is the annoying paranoid Dakota Fanning screaming throughout the movie, no kidding, while Tom carries her everywhere he goes. Do we really carry ten year old children around in an emergencey when they car run faster than us? The aliens planned this attack for a million years, had technology much more capable than ours, but we are led to believe that they are soulless creatures that are here to anhilate us for absolutely no reason. Now if there is a reason, which of course, there would have to be, Steven Spielberg thought nothing of letting us in on why, or why our combined Armed Forces were unable to anticipate an attack. We also were given no insight about our strategy except for people panicking helter skelter. I guess Area 51 does not exist and we had no idea that there was anyone else alive in the entire Universe except for us. The special effects were stunning but without a story of sorts except for stupidity after thirty minutes you don't give a damn anymore. You keep waiting, praying for a story, any story, but one is never forthcoming. And the ending is the lamest. The entire City of Boston is destroyed except of course for Tom and finding his family who are having Sunday dinner dressed up with the only light on in a City devoid of electric power. I really believe that this movie is so incoherent that Spielberg made it to annoy and aggrivate the public. This has to be the Razzberry of the year. No one should be this put upon by the BS hype associated with this mess. Keep away unless you want to be totally taken. Expand
  96. EirikS.
    Jul 3, 2005
    0
    If there indeed are aliens aware of our existence, we might be facing an imminent attack as a result of them having wasted their time watching this pompous excuse of a movie.
  97. HansH.
    Jul 4, 2005
    2
    Have any of the makers actually read the storybook of the real War of the Worlds? HG Wells would roll over in his grave. Spielberg took a great classic story (obviousely without really understanding it), wrapped it around his favourite actor and relocates it to - you guessed it - todays America. Do you really have to Americanise every good story that was written in European history?? And Have any of the makers actually read the storybook of the real War of the Worlds? HG Wells would roll over in his grave. Spielberg took a great classic story (obviousely without really understanding it), wrapped it around his favourite actor and relocates it to - you guessed it - todays America. Do you really have to Americanise every good story that was written in European history?? And what's even worse - the film is lacking half of the story's backbone which is actually not only horror and massacre but PASSION: The passion for survival and chivalry..where is Beths plea for the good in mankind, where are the artillery man's impossible visions of a brave new world, where is the heroic sacrifice of the Thunderchild coming to the rescue of the steamship? All this had for some unknown reason have to be replaced by the passion of a loving father to his kids. Nice but...not HG Wells?!?And why is it not playing around 1900 as it was intended to...that would have been a real masterpiece. Instead, we had to watch a confusing attempt to transform a story to what it wasn't meant to be...a kind of "Independence Day - Episode one". Good job they didn't let Spielberg do Lord of the Rings as he would probably have placed it in todays Colorado with Tom Cruise as Frodo, riding around in a Hummer chased by his evil mother in law in a Apache Chopper... What an abuse of one of the ancestors of Sci-Fi, what a waste of money. Jeff Wayne's musical version of the story, written in the 70s, is still number one and we are sadly still to wait for a decent film version of it. Expand
  98. JanetS.
    Jul 4, 2005
    0
    I read the reviews by the public and had to make a choice whether to believe the ten's, those of you who loved it, or the RED zero's, those that hated it. After seeing this disjointed film with an open mind, all I can say that any of you who gave this film a ten need to schedule a lobotomy immediately. It is so bad, sans the special effects that lose their meaning without a I read the reviews by the public and had to make a choice whether to believe the ten's, those of you who loved it, or the RED zero's, those that hated it. After seeing this disjointed film with an open mind, all I can say that any of you who gave this film a ten need to schedule a lobotomy immediately. It is so bad, sans the special effects that lose their meaning without a plot, that the audience laughs at death (spoilers omitted) and groans when the movie is over (spoilers omitted). The ending is the lamest and you care absolutely nothing for the characters as they just scream, cry and run around for two hours when the entire movie ends as if it has fallen off of a cliff. Quite possibly the most overrated movie in history. It is a complete and utter DUD that should be avoided like the plague. Expand
  99. ElizabethD.
    Jul 4, 2005
    0
    So bad a movie that a score of 0 is an injustice as it is too high. In a single word: AWFUL.
  100. KathrynH.
    Jul 4, 2005
    3
    I loved the beginning of the movie, from there it goes downhill. They could of done a much better job on the alien creatures, (since we know so much more about how they look now). Tom Crews acting wasn't that great. He just had to run & hug his kids thru the entire movie. With the special effects (which was the entire movie), blasting out debris all over the place. His wife was a I loved the beginning of the movie, from there it goes downhill. They could of done a much better job on the alien creatures, (since we know so much more about how they look now). Tom Crews acting wasn't that great. He just had to run & hug his kids thru the entire movie. With the special effects (which was the entire movie), blasting out debris all over the place. His wife was a horrible actress, his son was pretty bad. Daughter was probley better then anyone, as far as acting goes. Even better then Tom Crews. Very disappointed in this movie, glad I went to the matinee. Expand
Metascore
73

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.